Economix had a fun tear down of the current plan put forth by the President and the GOP to replace the current ACA. The author’s politics run counter to Trump’s and the far right, but he does a pretty good job of keeping it real from an economic standpoint. He also points out that one of the big issues of repealing the ACA is how much of it was based on Republican ideas. If you’re protesting your own ideas, your alternative options tend be even more limited and extreme.
One of the things he briefly touches on, but doesn’t really address, is that success is sometimes measured by how we failed less than previously. Specifically I am speaking about the rise of costs and premiums, which continued to rise at rapid rates during the ACA, with many traditionally conservative states seeing the largest increases. The success is that some of the increases were less than the increases seeing prior to the ACA. That kind of measuring for success works in the short term, but if you’re measuring against a flood, either do something different or build a boat…
Another thing the author glosses over is the use of subsidies. Although he points out that the Feds will subsidize the premium for the States, which he uses as an argument for why some states should have adopted the ACA, he ignores their premise for why they might have rejected it in the first place – It doesn’t matter whether the Federal government or the State government subsidizes the premium, it’s still a redistribution of wealth. If you’re opposing the ACA, or any similar plan, because of your opposition to Taxation, any argument involving subsidies is going to fall flat.
Take the analysis for what it is, a visual breakdown of the shortcomings of the current and proposed plans, as well as a bit of insight as to why things might not be working as they could. It’s a fun read and he lists his references, so if you disagree with a particular point, you can at least see what he based his argument on.