![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/ObamaDoctor-Repeal-Obamacare-D.jpg\")
<\/p>\nRUSH: Obamacare and the Democrats, the Senate Democrats say they may want to help replace Obama. Folks, this is a really, really — legislatively, this is going to be a pretty important thing. Now, Trump has been running around, “We\u2019re gonna repeal Obamacare. We\u2019re gonna replace it.” The Republicans have said we\u2019re gonna repeal and replace it, and people believe that Trump is gonna do that. But that\u2019s only the beginning. Repealing it is one thing. But then there\u2019s that word “replace.” And that\u2019s where all of the potential danger resides. Repeal and replace. <\/p>\n
Now, as the free market advocate I am, what do you mean, replace? Just get rid of this monstrosity and let the markets take care of this. But people are too afraid to let that happen. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
That\u2019s putting too much faith in the insurance companies, which everybody\u2019s supposed to hate. And that\u2019s just too risky. There has to be a replacement. Why does there have to be a replacement? Isn\u2019t the fact that the federal government\u2019s involved in the first place one of the reasons nobody can afford health care? <\/p>\n
Shouldn\u2019t the objective be, the longtime objective to have health care priced like anything else is? There are various levels of it that you can afford, and that\u2019s what you get. Like there is in hotels, like there is in airline seats, like there is in cars and TV sets and whatever. There\u2019s higher tier, middle class tier. The left says, “No, health care shouldn\u2019t be any different. The poor should have the same access as the rich.” <\/p>\n
Well, I understand the emotional aspect of that, but then why shouldn\u2019t the poor have access to every car the rich do? “Well, that\u2019s not health care.” What do you mean? What\u2019s magic about health care? “Well, health care is an entitlement. We\u2019re all entitled to not get sick.” Really? “And then we\u2019re all entitled to get well.” Really? Really. Well, that\u2019s what people think. I mean, even a lot of so-called conservatives do not want to go to war over market characteristics of health care. <\/p>\n
But I\u2019m just gonna tell you that it\u2019s never gonna get resolved until we devise a system where the vast majority of health care is priced according to what people can pay for, like everything else in the market is. We don\u2019t subsidize airline tickets. We don\u2019t subsidize cars — except for Elon Musk, who\u2019s one of the biggest corporate welfare beneficiaries in the history of corporate welfare. Not just tell us motors, but that SolarCity outfit of his which he\u2019s gonna buy. This guy\u2019s gotten over $6 billion worth of subsidizes! He hasn\u2019t made a profit in anything. <\/p>\n
Everybody talks what a great… Because of the left-wing prejudice and bias about electric cars that somehow that\u2019s clean energy they never stop to think that coal is being burned (sorry, I don\u2019t mean to be shouting) to charge these marvelous vehicles. But we don\u2019t subsidize airline tickets. We don\u2019t subsidize hotel rooms. We don\u2019t subsidize grocery… Ah, ah! I\u2019m sorry. (chuckles) Food stamps. So we subsidize cigarettes, we subsidize booze, we subsidize… But you get my point. There ought to be insurance for catastrophic health incidents, major, major things like an automobile accident or an act of God-type of thing or acquiring a terminal disease that takes years. <\/p>\n
But you\u2019re not even talking about insurance. Preexisting conditions? It\u2019s not insurance. You\u2019re talking something entirely different. I\u2019m a big believer that words mean things, and it\u2019s not insurance to insure against preexisting conditions. We don\u2019t let you buy insurance when your house is burning down. We do not allow people to buy insurance in the middle of a catastrophic event. If we\u2019re gonna say we do that in health care, we got call it what it is. It\u2019s a subsidy, it\u2019s this or that, but it\u2019s not insurance. But everybody wants to think they have health insurance.<\/p>\n
So we\u2019ll call it that because it makes it easier to make people think that officials are doing something good about it. But I\u2019m just telling you: Take care of the catastrophic side of the insurance and get this whole thing down to where the vast majority of daily, ordinary visits to the doctor and even some ordinary tests are things that you could put on your MasterCard and deal with it. That ought to be the objective. I know it\u2019s not something that could happen overnight, but it ought to be the objective. People say, “That\u2019s silly. You\u2019ll never be able to get there.” <\/p>\n
![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/ObamacareUnaffordable-1.jpg\")
I know. That attitude will make sure we never get there but it ought to be the objective. But I digress. The “replace” part of this: When do you replace it? Let\u2019s say first thing that Trump does within a week of being inaugurated is repeal Obamacare. Well, that doesn\u2019t get rid of it. Repealing it just simply says… But that doesn\u2019t get rid of it. The argument… There\u2019s two arguments being circulated on the Republican side. “Repeal and replace it with something in two years,” or, “Repeal it and replace it with something in three years.”<\/p>\n
Because the argument against repeal right now in the United States Congress is, “We don\u2019t have anything to replace it with.” That\u2019s comforting. We have intellectually… Since this thing was signed into law in 2010, we have told ourselves that the first chance we get, we\u2019re gonna repeal this. And you mean to tell me that since 2010 there\u2019s not a single Republican that\u2019s put together an alternative idea? That\u2019s what they\u2019re telling us. So we can\u2019t just repeal it \u2019cause there\u2019s nothing to replace it with, and we just can\u2019t repeal it and turn everything back over to market, because people say, “Ew, ew! Can\u2019t do that! That\u2019s horrible.”<\/p>\n
If you repeal and replace in two years, the idea is there would be time to come up with a plan that you could pass before the next midterms in 2018. But what if you come up with a plan that nobody likes and then the election comes in 2018 and a bunch of members of Congress and the Senate are thrown out because they don\u2019t like — the public doesn\u2019t like — what the replace plan is? So, okay, let\u2019s wait for three years. Let\u2019s not… We\u2019ll repeal it, but we\u2019ll keep everything as is for three years, and then we\u2019ll replace it. We\u2019ll replace it after the midterms. The argument for that is, “Well, we might even have 60 seats in the Senate by then by then! <\/p>\n
“Why, in the midterms, the Democrats have 25 seats to defend. They don\u2019t have a prayer! Many of them are in red states. Why, if we wait until after the midterms and don\u2019t do our new replacement plan until 2019 or 2020, we\u2019ll be able to do anything because we will own majorities in the House and Senate and we will be veto-proof.” But the danger of that is, what if you don\u2019t win in the midterms? What if you don\u2019t get your 60 in the Senate? This a recipe for disaster here, and the reason it is because the “replace” crowd doesn\u2019t want to do anything any time soon, meaning repealing Obamacare doesn\u2019t mean jack.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
RUSH: Obamacare and the Democrats, the Senate Democrats say they may want to help replace Obama. Folks, this is a really, really — legislatively, this is going to be a pretty important thing. Now, Trump has been running around, “We\u2019re gonna repeal Obamacare. We\u2019re gonna replace it.” The Republicans have said we\u2019re gonna repeal and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":70,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n