Health Insurance Reform: Obamacare Vs. Romneycare Mitt Romney is in a bind. As governor of Massachusetts, he enacted healthcare reform. However, he is now seeking the Republican nomination for president in 2012. In a political party where staunch opposition to similar national legislation has become the driving force, Romney is attempting to explain his views.
The "Romneycare" enacted in his state has quite a few similarities to recently passed Obamacare. He has received criticism from both the right and left wing: the latter bash him for supporting such legislation in the first place, while the latter decry him as a hypocrite for his current opinion.
Here are some similarities and differences between the two approaches to health insurance reform:
Both Obamacare and Romneycare involve the private health insurance industry. Neither creates a single-payer system or a government-run public option. Increased regulation of insurance rates is used in an attempt to decrease the number of uninsured. Subsidies and tax credits are provided to low- and middle-income individuals, as well as small businesses, to help cover the cost of insurance. Residents can purchase a
health insurance plan through an exchange, which allows them to band together for lower rates. Both strategies rest on an individual mandate that requires people to either buy health coverage or pay a fine. Each has been criticized for doing too little to control costs.
On the other hand, there are several differences between the two versions of affordable health insurance legislation, which Romney has recently pointed out:
Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare only applies to a single state. That gives it slightly more appeal for conservatives worried about states' rights and the federal government overreaching with its power. Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown has reconciled his previous support for his state's reforms with his opposition to the national law on similar grounds. Romney initially supported a provision, later deleted by the Massachusetts legislature, that would have allowed people to opt out of the health insurance mandate if they signed a bond that demonstrated their ability to cover their health care expenses. The federal legislation includes no such exit valve. Massachusetts did not partially fund their plan with a tax increase, as the federal legislation does. However, they did redirect some Medicaid dollars to the program. National health insurance reform incorporates some cuts to private Medicare Advantage programs, although individual states have no opportunity to do so to begin with. The federal government is given the power to review rate increases, which Romney considers as a step towards price controls. Romney intended healthcare reform to expand access to catastrophic coverage for major conditions, as opposed to more generous coverage. The federal plan sets minimum standards for what must be covered.
No comments:
Post a Comment