All they have to do is become a Congress critter, since Congress has their gold and silver plated healthcare plans intact, which is a combination of the best free market solutions before Obamacare, community/doctor network exchanges, and the insurance model.

The reason why Congress has solid healthcare is because they pay into some kind of centralized fund, which is used with market forces to increase the efficiency of their doctor networks and care/medical resources.

One of the things I often said about Obamacare is that it is a kind of a consumption law. It is designed to ensure that the peons, meaning you and company, have to pay more for less medical resources. Why? So that the medical resources used to save the lives of Ted Kennedy and Congress, doesn’t go to waste. There’s some rare and valuable stuff that if got spent on everyone, would become harder for Congress to acquire for their healthcare.

The old consumption law in aristocracy was that you couldn’t wear purple or dress like a noble, if you were a merchant or lower class. That reserved the top goods, the rare stuff, for the nobles, and prevented the merchants from competing by upping the bid.

As Obamacare makes medical resources more expensive for JJ and company, it ironically, makes it more cheaper and inexpensive for Congress. After all, aren’t doctors leaving their care and hospitals because of malpractice and other issues? If doctors and nurses could join the payment plans offered by Congress, backed by the open market and centralized funds, they wouldn’t have to worry about Medicare or emergency costs.

Too little too late.”

Sometimes I think you are so rational and above the fray that you would, like many other conservatives, reject solutions because………well, just because they are late or too little or ???

The fact that the replacement plan has been hard to agree on, reflects all the various strains of the GOP. From RINO to hard core TEA Party everyone has a different opinion about what needs to be done. If it was easy, it would have been done years ago.

What we knew and have now confirmed was that the centralized model does not work. Moving toward a more market based plan that provides a safety net for those with pre-existing conditions would work far better than a top down system.

I have experienced single payer medicine – the military model. I can tell you horror stories about how badly that system works. (And the VA is just the most obvious.)

I don’t care that the plan was only formulated in June 2016. I am all for getting rid of Obamacare in anyway possible. My daughter and her partner, because they are self -employed, have to buy Obamacare. They lost their doctors last year. This year they have ONE choice of insurers and their premiums went up another 30% (added to 75% from previous years increases) and their deductibles are $7500. You may get your insurance through your employer or be wealthy enough to self insure, but for people who have no where to turn but Obamacare it is a ruinous. When enough people are affected and become incensed (Unlike you, who seems too cerebral to understand.) we will get change.

Crotch grabs are so much more substantive, you know?

Thank you Trump supporters!

The problem is you point to a proposal only released on June 22 2016.

This is something that the GOP should have been on one page LONG ago.

“Repeal and Replace” was a nice slogan, but “With What?” was always on people’s minds.

Very hard to build support to repeal ACA, as the House GOP have put forward bills on, several times, but not have an answer to the concerns from enough constituents who would make up that support.

Too little too late.

With trump having blown it, ACA will become a wedge issue for dems as the GOP will be d*mned if they do anything to shore it up from complete disaster, and d*mned that they do nothing while a large swath of voters are impacted by that disaster.

Trum loved socialized medicine in 2015, what changed?

Of course they’ll change Obamacare. To Canada, UK, and Cuba’s system, which works “better” in the eyes of so called “non ideologues”.