Well, that was a push-poll that failed utterly.
I have employer-provided insurance so strictly speaking, there is not a major net effect on me, but I’m an advocate of single payer and this the closest the people concerned are going to get at the moment, so I remain an advocate.
The kerfuffle over the web rollout was a technical issue and never had anything significant to do with whether the ACA, as legislation, was viable or not.
My daughter now has insurance, so I’m happy. I’d be happier if they’d expanded medicaid in Tennessee so more low income workers qualified.
If it had had more gradations, I might have swayed from “was a fan, still a fan.”
It’s better than if it didn’t exist. A woman I know argued pretty persuasively with me that it would work much better in smaller pieces - state by state, or region by region, rather than monolithically.
Still, I know when I was laid off in 2003, Cobra was exorbitant, and I couldn’t look for consulting gigs because I couldn’t get healthcare on my own (a healthcare expert who was part of my termination package told me straight up my wife was un-insurable outside of a large corporate situation).
As the workforce becomes ever more fluid, carrying one’s own health insurance rather than depending on a company will make more and more sense. The free market just wasn’t doing enough.
I’m a capitalist, but I recognize that Adam Smith’s invisible hand is absolutely amoral - it’s the beast without a head, and sometimes we need a moral compass in sectors of the economy.
We have employer-sponsored insurance so I did not see changes ( same co-pay, deductable, etc ) during the open-enrollment period. I did get a $400 cash rebate that HR says is a result the insurance company ( United HealthCare ) taking “advantages of efficiencies” that were a result of the ACA.
While I think it was a start, I don’t really trust the insurance companies, so things may be different in a year or so.
I can’t vote from my phone but I’m ok with ACA. I have health care through my employer so I don’t really have a dog the fight, and i know it isn’t perfect, but it’s a good start.
The OP.
Probably talking about the death panels
*Forcing *efficiencies would be a better term. ACA requires rebates from any insurer with overhead (i.e. bureaucracy and excessive executive compensation) above certain limits.
I voted with the majority, but my view is more nuanced. I would have voted for it, and still would, but I think the ACA is a pretty bad idea. The status quo is/was just way worse.
My thoughts exactly. ACA is not good, but its the best thing that could possibly have been passed in this political climate.
Was for it in 2007 when John Edwards proposed a similar plan, and am still for it now. It would be a lot more effective if SCOTUS hadn’t come up with a bizarre right for the states to refuse the Medicaid expansion. (OK, that’s not exactly what they did, but you know what I mean.) And it would have helped if the Federal exchange website hadn’t been a rat’s nest of glitches that had to be fixed. And if people with access to the media (and certain media themselves) weren’t spouting lies about it, and trying to get people who would benefit from the ACA to not sign up.
But that’s life in a world filled with assholes. The fact that a lot of people have worked hard to undermine the ACA, with a certain amount of success, doesn’t change the fact that it’s still doing a lot of people a lot of good. And it will do more people more good as time goes along. Of course I’m still for it.
Step in the right direction. Supported it and still do.
Wait, they couldn’t keep the illegals from getting free healthcare, but the death panels still got to stay?! What a crock! :mad:
O_o
Would prefer single-payer, but this is a small step in the right direction.
Dis I think it was perfect when it passed? No.
Do I think it’s perfect now? No.
Do I wish the Federal Exchange rollout had been done competently? Yes.
Could it use a bunch of tweaks to increase the covered population even more and address cost increases? Yes.
Is it better than the previous status quo? Hell, yes.
For it then. For it now.
Before ACA passed, I had no access to health care. No private insurer would sell me a policy, period, because I had pre-existing conditions. Period. What do you suppose I could have done, pre-ACA? Dropped dead? Pay cash?
Now I have health insurance. It’s affordable, it works fine with doctors and pharmacies and labs, everything’s close by, and it’s cheaper to have a platinum plan than pay a la carte for my chronic health problems.
In other words, “I got mine.” So my favorable opinion has not changed.
As others said, I support a universal health care system and the ACA was the best we were going to pass. So while I regret the missteps in its implementation, I still support it as a step forward and don’t regret supporting it.
It could have been a lot better than it is, but it’s a lot better than what we had before. I support it as an intermediate step to real universal health coverage.
I find the results so far rather astounding. While I fully expected the general trend line of the results, I thought there’d be more then one—1—person who thought it was a good idea generally, based on the information we were given, but would have changed their minds based on what we know now.
I can definitely see how the driving philosophy of a single payer/national healthcare system aligns with support for the ACA, as it is closer. But I don’t see how that makes ANY move from what we had toward a national plan a good idea worthy of implementation.
I wonder how this poll would go if given to the 535 people in congress. Thoughts?
I can only speak for myself but I don’t think the core plan is a terrible one. I think it could have been implemented better (I also think some issues were due to GOP obstruction at both state and federal levels) but the plan itself wasn’t bad. So comparing it to a mindset that “ANY” plan would have been supported purely on “It gets us closer” grounds is a bit misleading.