Solving ObamaCare – A New Proposal – Part II


In Part I of this series I discussed a new healthcare proposal known as the Health Care Choices Proposal.

Their policy proposal promises to:

  1. Improve choices and lower costs, while protecting vulnerable Americans
  2. Give flexibility and resources to states to achieve those goals
  3. Ensure people can opt into the private coverage of their choice


In Part I we learned what their proposal promises to achieve. Today we will learn how they propose to make it work.

How Real Reform Works

  • The federal government would provide a fixed amount of funding to each state – Under ObamaCare, the federal government sends billions of dollars to insurance companies to subsidize insurance policy premiums. Under this proposal, Washington would issue grants to states. The initial grants would be based on the amount of ACA spending as of a fixed date. Then, over time, the grant would be based on a state’s number of low-income residents. States would use the money to help vulnerable citizens obtain coverage.
  • Each state would take responsibility for using federal money to make insurance more affordable – States would be enabled to be laboratories of innovative policy and thereby:
    • Reduce premiums – by reinvigorating broken, private health insurance markets that failed under ObamaCare’s one-size-fits-all structure.
    • Individuals and families would choose the coverage that best fits their needs – With a consumer-centric approach, the insurance markets can offer plans to meet individual needs – more freedom of choice.
    • Give low-income people more choices – Instead of being forced onto Medicaid or a narrow ObamaCare network, these people would be empowered to use their government assistance to buy a private health plan of their choice.
    • Protect people with pre-existing conditions without making coverage so costly for the young and healthy – ObamaCare forced the young and healthy to subsidize the older and sicker Americans. By eliminating the ObamaCare regulations that made this necessary, the cost of coverage will come down – and states will have resources to help people with more expensive conditions access coverage without driving up costs for everyone.
    • States would have better incentives to protect the most vulnerable – instead of chasing federal Medicaid expansion dollars to add new enrollees while neglecting those already on the program and in need.
    • Encourage wider coverage – by removing restrictions on insurers’ ability to use innovative approaches.
    • Spend grant money only on health care – The federal government must hold states accountable for spending federal dollars.


Greater Access to HSAs

This proposal would take two key steps to improve HSAs so they can be more flexible, more widely available, and give consumers greater control over how their HSA dollars are spent, including seeing the doctor of their choice.

  • Roughly double HSA contribution limits – from $3,450 per individual and $6,850 per family today.
  • Make more plans HSA-compatible – Today, a policy must have a deductible of at least $1350 (individual) or $2700 (family). This proposal would change the requirement to qualify, so that any plan with an actuarial value less than a specified level (e.g. 70%, 80%) would be HSA-compatible.


Is this new proposal the solution?

It does not promise to fix everything that is wrong with our health sector today. But they believe it is the logical next step in helping our private health sector recover from Washington’s failed approach. It is clear that the top-down big government style of ObamaCare – that would get even worse with single-payer systems – is not the answer.

This approach is to empower consumers to have the choices and control they need to protect themselves and their families. Who do you think should be in control of your healthcare – you or the federal government?

No comments yet. You should be kind and add one!