Re­peal-and-re­place is com­pli­cated

The Washington Post Sunday - - SUNDAY OPINION -

Kath­leen Parker rec­og­nized the “real­ity” of healthy peo­ple not un­der­stand­ing why they should pay for health in­sur­ance that oth­ers get more ben­e­fit from, but surely this is a prob­lem with ed­u­ca­tion and com­mu­ni­ca­tion, not an in­her­ent weak­ness of the Af­ford­able Care Act [“Don’t re­peal, re­group,” op-ed, July 19].

All in­sur­ance sys­tems are based on spread­ing risk; a large pool of par­tic­i­pants shar­ing risks nec­es­sar­ily in­volves some who get no im­me­di­ate ben­e­fit, some who get ex­ten­sive ben­e­fit and many in be­tween. Be­cause no one can pre­dict the fu­ture, one must par­tic­i­pate be­fore the need arises. This is fun­da­men­tally true not only for health in­sur­ance but also for au­to­mo­bile in­sur­ance, home­own­ers in­sur­ance, li­a­bil­ity in­sur­ance, etc. No in­sur­ance sys­tem can func­tion eco­nom­i­cally if only high-risk peo­ple par­tic­i­pate.

The real prob­lem, at the core, is the high cost of med­i­cal care in the United States, not the ba­sic struc­ture of in­sur­ance. Noth­ing in the Repub­li­can bills thus far deals with this ba­sic is­sue. There are prob­lems with the ACA, but there are also many ben­e­fits. We need real bi­par­ti­san dis­cus­sion aimed at mak­ing im­prove­ments, not more in­flamed rhetoric. Den­nis Chamot, Burke

While the iro­nists

will float that the stupidly ig­nored Repub­li­can fe­male sen­a­tors ef­fec­tively killed Se­nate Ma­jor­ity Leader Mitch McCon­nell’s (R-Ky.) mis­be­got­ten Oba­macare re­peal, Trump loy­al­ists among the cit­i­zenry will note once again that the “es­tab­lish­ment,” such as it is, is both in­ca­pable of and un­de­serv­ing of gov­ern­ing au­thor­ity.

Pres­i­dent Trump, with all of his char­ac­ter flaws and in­elo­quence, was sent to Wash­ing­ton to un­clog the fed­eral sewer. His sup­port­ers do not care about the Af­ford­able Care Act ex­cept as an ex­am­ple of in­com­pe­tent fed­eral over­reach, failed and im­per­vi­ous to cor­rec­tion by a clown­ish leg­is­la­ture.

Mr. Trump’s sup­port­ers re­main per­fectly san­guine that they sent the chaos pres­i­dent to pre­side over the cir­cus that is the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ing class.

Jon Ket­zner, Cum­ber­land

What does re­peal-and-re­place

mean? Ar­guably, be­fore the Trump cam­paign, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s (R-Wis.) pol­icy pro­nounce­ments defined it. The Trump cam­paign changed that.

Re­peal-and-re­place means what can­di­date Don­ald Trump said it meant: cheaper, bet­ter, more com­pre­hen­sive in­sur­ance avail­able to all. Can­di­date Trump did not say cheaper for the fed­eral gov­ern­ment; he said cheaper and bet­ter for reg­u­lar peo­ple. All Pres­i­dent Trump needs to do is give his staff and Cabi­net 20 clips from his rally speeches in which he defined re­peal-and-re­place and or­der that a bill com­port­ing with his vi­sion be drafted im­me­di­ately. He then would be in a po­si­tion to ad­vo­cate for a bill that keeps his prom­ises or to ex­plain why his prom­ises need ad­just­ing. Tom Irvine, Lewes, Del.

Re­gard­ing E.J. Dionne

Jr.’s July 17 op-ed, “His­tory is watch­ing four sen­a­tors”:

What about the 48 other Repub­li­can sen­a­tors? How could any se­na­tor even con­sider vot­ing for a plan that would re­move more than 20 mil­lion peo­ple from health-in­sur­ance rolls? Twenty mil­lion Amer­i­cans? That’s mak­ing Amer­ica great again?

Where’s the plan that adds peo­ple to the rolls of the in­sured?

Wil­liam “Billy” Eric Sahm, Wash­ing­ton

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.