115th United States Congress

[Byrthnoth]

Our government-medical interactions are really complicated, but I think that it's possible to make a simple argument for nationwide insurance (or single payer) by looking at situations where the government picks up the tab for people who can't pay:
* Hospitals didn't before, don't now, and wouldn't in the future deny people critical procedures. For people who can't pay, these costs are going to be borne by society until we get so callous that we let people die in ERs.
* Noncritical procedures ("well, you have <insert problem here> and you can get by with as it is for the moment, but you'll eventually need expensive surgery") are the procedures that people without insurance opt not to (unless they become critical) get done
* Preventative care and doing noncritical procedures in a timely manner is a lot cheaper than dealing with the eventual catastrophe, particularly when you consider potential disability arising from catastrophe

The only way to rejigger the math so it makes sense to not have everyone insured is to assume a decreased treatment rate for people who don't have insurance. This could either come from an increased mortality rate or people just living with their noncritical disabilities. You don't have to pay for their critical procedures if they're dead or afraid to seek treatment. That isn't the kind of world I want to live in, but that's how it currently works (although quantifiably less-so than before Obamacare). The richest 1% lives more than a decade longer on average than the poorest 5%, and they do so without things like torn menisci.



Putting that aside, though, the CBO report on the previous iteration of AHCA has already been pretty unfavorable (the current one is likely worse) and doesn't even consider these "indirect" costs to society. The CBO report estimates that AHCA would eliminate 1.2 trillion dollars worth of healthcare and return 0.9 trillion dollars worth of rich people's taxes to them, for a net government savings of 323 billion dollars. How much would that savings be, though, if they did actually consider the critical care of the 24 million newly uninsured folk?

I'm not convinced that the current iteration of AHCA would even save the government money.

[kuronosan]

It won't, and people are stupid for thinking it will.

[Tyche]

McCarthy says he has the votes whipped without the undecideds.

[Talint]

[archibaldcrane]

Vote starting in 10 minutes supposedly.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...care-bill.html

[archibaldcrane]

Now expected after 2 PM EST.

[Fiye]

They're not even waiting for the CBO

[archibaldcrane]

Nope, that won't be until next week. It'll be fun seeing the new score, which will be horrible just like the last one (this bill isn't that much different).

[TsingTao]

Of course they aren't waiting for the CBO. This needs to get pushed thru as fast as possible, with as little scrutiny as possible.

[archibaldcrane]

https://twitter.com/SenSanders/statu...41574302380032

[kisada]

im feeling sick

[archibaldcrane]

People are too confident that this won't pass the Senate.

I mean, this exact bill won't, but the idea that SOMETHING won't pass is being too optimistic.

[archibaldcrane]

Vote has begun. Live count here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...care-bill.html

[BerenTebogo]

2 dems voted yes as of right now, lol

[kisada]

...

[Salodin]

1 changed their vote thank god but wtf...

[BerenTebogo]

Looks like they changed their votes, thankfully

Edit: welp

[Salodin]

Anddd it passed. Wow.

[kisada]

Daniel Newhauser‏Verified account @dnewhauser 2m2 minutes ago
216. They got the votes. Cheers in the house chamber. #ahca passes


Jake Sherman‏Verified account @JakeSherman 55s55 seconds ago

Loud singing of "na Nan a na hey hey hey goodbye" in the house chamber. Seems like it came from Dems

[archibaldcrane]

Passed by 2 votes. All of the California Republicans voted for it.

People need to pay for this in 2018.