Will Rand Paul Replace Obamacare?

by JORDAIN CARNEY | TheHill.com  |  published on January 10, 2017

randpaul1

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is pledging to roll out an ObamaCare replacement bill this week as GOP lawmakers rush to nix the healthcare law.

The Kentucky senator argued Monday that the law must be replaced with “real market reforms.”

Paul’s legislation comes as the Senate is expected to pave the way this week to repealing the healthcare law.

Paul is leading a small but growing number of GOP lawmakers concerned about repealing the Affordable Care Act without a replacement plan hashed out.

He added another curveball to the ongoing debate on Friday, saying President-elect Donald Trump agrees with him that the two should be moved together.

  • Tor293

    I think we should be fair with Paul Rand, either he works 100% on replacing Odumbocare or we replace him. No other choice!!

  • FRENCHIE1369

    OK…I GET THE REPEAL PART & 1000% SUPPORT IT. WHAT I DON’T GET IS THE PART ABOUT REPLACING IT. IF WE ARE REJECTING GOV’T RUN HEALTHCARE BECAUSE IT’S AN UNMITIGATED DISASTER, THEN THERE’S LITTLE TO NO SENSE IN REPLACING IT WITH MORE GOV’T RUN HEALTHCARE. SAME DISASTER, SAME SOURCE, MORE GOV’T SPENDING, MORE BUREAUCRACY, MORE CONFUSION, SAME END RESULT. I LIKE RAND, BUT I THINK HE’S BEEN AROUND BIG GOV’T RINO’S TOO LONG & THEY’RE STARTING TO INFECT HIS THINKING. UNLESS THERE’S A NON-MANDATORY FREE MARKET SOLUTION, WITH THE GOV’T OUT OF THE PICTURE ENTIRELY, IT’S DOOMED TO FAILURE. SERIOUSLY, NAME EVEN 1 PROGRAM RUN BY THE GOV’T THAT ISN’T AN ABSOLUTE CLUSTERF*CK THAT COSTS WAY TOO MUCH TO RUN & ISN’T AN ABSOLUTE BUREAUCRATIC NIGHTMARE. YOU CAN’T, BECAUSE IT DOESN’T EXIST !!! TRUMP IS A WORLD CLASS NEGOTIATOR. LET HIM DEAL WITH THE INSURANCE COMPANIES DIRECTLY TO GET US THE BEST POSSIBLE DEAL & CUT CONGRESS OUT OF IT ENTIRELY, BEFORE THEY DESTROY ANYTHING GOOD THAT COMES OUT OF THE DEAL. YOU KNOW THEY WILL….SOMEHOW. IT’S JUST THE NATURE OF THE BEAST…………..

  • missy janie47

    As I understand it, senator Paul espouses not government interference but free market principles. Tort reform. Countrywide insurance purchasing power HSAs, doctor patient relationships. I agree with his approach .

  • snowyriver

    Lets look at our Constitution. Reading (now consider yourself a patriot that just overcame a tyrannical government) You come to article 1, section 8, clause, paragraph 10. Congress shall have the power to define and punish offences against The Law of Nations.. Our Constitution is telling us to read The Law of Nations to see just what power our new Congress has.. So we read The Law of Nations. Pay special attention in book 1, chapter 19, article 212.. After we finish The Law of Nations, we go back to reading the Constitution. Coming to article III, section 1, paragraph 4, we read that no person except a “natural born Citizen” of the United States shall be eligible for the office of president. Didn’t we read what a “natural born Citizen” was in The Law of Nations? Yes — “born on the land with parents as citizens”.. Note parents and citizens are both plural. This destroys all argument that the Constitution does not explain what a “natural born citizen” is.. Here we have a problem, Obama has produced a birth certificate showing born in Hawaii with a father who was a citizen of Kenya. Using this birth certificate, Obama is not eligible because his father is not and never was a citizen of the United States.. Oh sorry that birth certificate has been proven to be false, but there is another birth certificate in the British archives filed there by Kenya showing Obama born in Kenya with a father who was a citizen of Kenya. Now does it sound like Barack Obama is a “natural born Citizen” of the United States? If the answer is NO, he fails on two counts, born out of the states, with a father who was not a citizen of the United States then he is not eligible to be president of the United States, and everything he has done, every rule of law he has signed are NULL and VOID. No matter how many accept him, his being in the white house is wrong.

  • Webb

    So the saga of ObamaCare Continues…
    When A Democratic Controlled Congress decided to interfere in Americans Lives by a Mandate, Tax Penalty, Forcing us to purchase HealthCare by that Mandate. So others could have Insurance by our tax dollars and subsidies without care of Overreach and Cost…
    Repeal Obamacare Entirely…Government does not belong in our Healthcare Decisions, not now, not ever!
    We Endured Not keeping your Doctor, Higher premiums, Higher Deductibles, Higher Drug Cost, along with lies and deceit when this law was enacted…
    Healthcare Is OUR CHOICE NOT GOVERNMENTS…

    • Jim Walters

      I agree Obamacare has to be replaced but if you don’t have something to pick it up you are going to put a lot of people into a quagmire for getting healthcare coverage because those that had existing conditions before they were forced to go on Obamacare will not be able to find coverage that is affordable. So what do you propose to do with people that used to have good insurance but won’t be able to get coverage now since insurance would deny them?

      • Webb

        Jim…
        I hope Republicans will make it possible for pre – existing conditions and illinesses existing with insured under Obamacare now will be covered in new provisions…with affordable care.
        Those that need help financialy, Ok…
        My concern was The Mandate, Forcing purchase of insurance, government should not have the right to force Americans to buy Anything…Never!
        Insurance cards could have been issued to the 30 million needing insurance and assistance…Leaving responsible Americans Alone…

        • Retired

          Every one forgets how many Obama added to Medicaid on top of the ACA , but yet there was no money for people on SS because the formula for figuring cost of living was changed so there would be no increase.

    • Retired

      Try finding a Democrat the read what all was in those 2700 pages. There was a reason the SC ruled it a TAX,plus it was also an extension of IRS welfare.

  • justinwachin

    I’ll look forward to seeing Dr. Paul’s plan. Rand gets it. As a central Kentucky (at least from my location) eye doctor Dr. Paul has the chance to meet real people who have to worry about whether their insurance will cover basic health care needs.

    Republicans wanted to eliminate Obamacare for a variety of reasons. If we want to win the hearts of the people we need to make sure that in Obamacare’s place emerges a plan which will truly make health care affordable for working class Americans.

  • bobnstuff

    One sixth of our economy is healthcare. Care really needs to be taken when screwing around with it. Peoples live depend on healthcare so making sure you don’t leave people high and dry might be a smart thing. Trump promised no one would loose healthcare, Trump promised a even better system. Just repealing it fixes nothing and just makes thing worse. Mr. Paul’s bill may or may not be the answer but at least he understand that there needs to be careful. The republicans have the power to either make things better or worse, lets see if they can use that power wisely.

    • Retired

      And 2/3 is Gov. employees.

      • bobnstuff

        2/3 and they do the work of private insurance company for half the cost. 20% for private insurance over head cost, 9% overhead cost for government run insurance. I guess paying twice as much to have a private company do it makes sense to someone.

        • Retired

          What I should have said 2/3 of all employees are Gov. workers starting with your community to the federal Gov.

        • gvette

          As government becomes the largest employer, the math isn’t there to support it.

          • bobnstuff

            The government has been the largest single employer for a good while but Walmart has been catching up. Less then 1 in 10 people work for the government and as a percentage of population the number has came down. Over the years it’s been the Republican presidents that add workers.

          • gvette

            The number of federal employees has risen under President Obama. There were 2,790,000 federal workers in January 2009 when the president took office, and now there are 2,804,000 workers. The fact is that there is no month during President Obama’s term when the federal workforce was smaller than it was in the first month of Mr. Obama’s presidency. The president took over in January 2009. Every month after January 2009 has seen more federal workers than were employed in January 2009.

          • bobnstuff

            Sorry but go recheck your facts
            https://www.opm.gov/POLICY-DATA-OVERSIGHT/DATA-ANALYSIS-DOCUMENTATION/FEDERAL-EMPLOYMENT-REPORTS/HISTORICAL-TABLES/TOTAL-GOVERNMENT-EMPLOYMENT-SINCE-1962/
            Up until 2014 he was cutting employees. The ACA did involve hiring some people. If you include the military he comes out as having one of the smallest number of people on the payroll.

          • gvette

            I just found this. Your nigger still gets the award.
            President Obama will set a record for the size of the basic federal workforce, leaving office with more than 1.4 million people collecting government salaries in the civilian agencies in 2017, according to the budget he delivered to Congress on Tuesday.
            Bob, you just hate being wrong, I know. But that’s a liberal trait! Hating being wrong, and usually being wrong!

          • bobnstuff

            Government employees total 22,223,000
            Federal employees 2,804,000

            Sorry not the record, Reagan gets that title.

            https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceseeb1a.htm

          • gvette

            Which part of 1.4 million getting a check from the fed, don’t you get. That, if you can read, was as of Tuesday.

          • bobnstuff

            What part of 2.8 million don’t you understand Your number was way low. All government employee, local, state and fed make up around 8% of the population.

          • gvette

            I was giving you the latest figure!

          • bobnstuff

            If you check my numbers are from the end of December 2016 BLS report, I don’t think you can get newer numbers. What you are looking at is what is being asked for in the budget which they will change before they pass it.

          • gvette

            It just gives accurate numbers, is all. If they pass the budget, it’ll be the first one in 7 years.

          • bobnstuff

            If you say so but that means the government is much smaller then the BLS says it is. I trust you understand who the Bureau of Labor Statistic is. I would be very surprised that the US Department of Labor got their numbers wrong.

          • gvette

            As of late, it’s hard to know, or trust any of them!

          • bobnstuff

            The BLS has been pretty reliable over the years. I don’t think the people working there care who is in power, they work for the system, Thank God for bureaucrats, they keep thing going. It these people who do the real work of government.

  • rowleya

    How many will die while they are trying to fix it.

    • Julie

      Probably about same number who will die if they don’t. These people are not gods!!!!

      • rowleya

        They are Devils

    • Retired

      How many will die because of the ACA and how insurance Co. mandate to treat the elderly , well you are over 75 and you are going to die in a few years any way. Insurance is dictating how your Dr. or hospital treats you as well as what kind of medicine [ poison ] you recive, WAKE UP PEOPLE.

Google Analytics Alternative