So @realDonaldTrump is announcing his “America First Healthcare Plan” today in a spacious airplane hangar. Chairs spaced out to six feet. A lot of doctors in white coats in the room. I’ll tweet out some comments as POTUS makes his remarks.
One thing to keep an eye out for: how much of today’s discussion is about Trump’s health care policies to date (price transparency, reducing drug prices) vs. what he proposes to do in a second term.
As much as Trump is disliked by Dems, the stuff Trump has done through executive action in health care is broadly bipartisan in nature. Lots of people support price transparency, better negotiation of drug prices, etc.
Obviously the upcoming #SCOTUS appointment has a lot of people thinking about the Texas v. Azar Obamacare case. I seriously doubt that even with a 6-3 majority the Court’s conservatives will strike down the entirety of the ACA. I explain here: forbes.com/sites/theapoth…
Contrary to what a lot of people on the right and left believe, it is possible to achieve universal coverage with private insurance: freopp.org/key-findings-f…
Trump is highlighting Biden’s support for federally subsidized coverage for illegal immigrants. I wonder if this will come up in the first presidential debate...
“If we win,” Trump promises, we’ll have a plan that is less expensive that protects people with preexisting conditions. The exchanges are no longer “Obamacare” because the mandate was repealed.
Along with more choice, Trump talking up price transparency and the end of surprise billing as ways to lower costs. Transparency can lower costs but surprise billing reform done the wrong way can actually drive costs up.
Here is my explainer in surprise medical billing and the wrong way to reform the problem: forbes.com/sites/theapoth…
The most significant reforms Trump has proposed are the price transparency rules, which are now law, and his proposal to enact “most favored nation” pricing for Medicare drugs. I explain that policy here: forbes.com/sites/theapoth…
Trump now touting the ongoing negotiations between @MarkMeadows and the pharmaceutical industry to do something different than the executive order. Watering down the EO would be a mistake, because U.S. biologic drug prices are skyrocketing: freopp.org/the-growing-po…
Trump now highlighting another very important, bipartisan reform: site-neutral payment. Medicare overpays hospitals for services that can be delivered outside of hospitals for less. This is one of many provisions in Bruce a Westerman’s Fair Care Act: freopp.org/bruce-westerma…
Trump now talking about my favorite obscure wonky topic: the fact that Congress and President Clinton shut down the Puerto Rico pharmaceutical manufacturing industry beginning in 1996. Trump is noting that Biden supported the measure (as did many others). forbes.com/sites/theapoth…
(1/x) In advance of tonight's #VPDebate, I thought I'd comment on a @crampell piece falsely claiming that @JDVance wants to "destroy the health-care system." I know more about JD's views on health care than pretty much anyone outside of his team, due to firsthand interactions.
@crampell @JDVance (2/x) The @crampell piece is here: . It's full of misrepresentations of @JDVance's views. JD was against the GOP's repeal-and-replace efforts, because JD believes in universal coverage, as do I (though I supported AHCA/BCRA). washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/… nytimes.com/2017/07/21/opi…
@crampell @JDVance (3/x) @crampell makes an actuarially illiterate argument that it is *necessary* to overcharge young and healthy people for health insurance in order to have a functioning insurance system. This is the opposite of the truth. Overcharging the healthy blows up insurance markets.
🧵(1/x): I want to extend my sincerest congratulations to @JDVance1 for nomination as the GOP VP candidate. I have great respect for JD. There are things we disagree on (e.g. ) but many essential things we *do* agree on, as I will explain in this thread.
@JDVance1 (2/x) JD and I first got to know each other a few years after he graduated from law school. He shared my view that free-market alternatives to Obamacare should strive to achieve universal coverage, and that there was a role for government in doing so. nytimes.com/2017/07/21/opi…
@JDVance1 (3/x) The biggest obstacle to health reform isn't the left-right debate, but the contest between reformers and economic elites, the latter of whom benefit from high-cost health care. JD is absolutely right that economic elites, in many sectors of our economy, are self-serving.
A week ago, popular Substacker @HC_Richardson reiterated the widely held—but factually flawed—view of most on the left that wealthy Americans don't pay their "fair share" of taxes, and that we can fix this problem by adopting European tax policies. (1/x)
@HC_Richardson (2/x) It's true that OECD countries generally have higher tax burdens than the U.S. does. But they don't do it by taxing the rich more—but by taxing the *middle class* more through payroll & consumption taxes. U.S. depends much *more* on progressive income taxes.
@HC_Richardson (3/x) In your typical EU country, the VAT tax (somewhat comparable to US sales taxes) is 21%. That's what pays for EU welfare states. The lowest standard VAT rate in Europe is Luxembourg's, at 16%. taxfoundation.org/data/all/globa…
THREAD: I'm honored to announce today the publication of the Freedom Conservatism Statement of Principles, signed by over 80 leaders of the liberty movement. Its core idea is this: the thing that has made America great is *freedom*. freedomconservatism.org/p/freedom-cons…
As you know, more and more people on the left and the right reject the importance of liberty. Some of these people call themselves "national conservatives" even though they reject the American political tradition in favor of...Hungary's? Forget that.
The Freedom Conservatism statement of takes inspiration from the Sharon Statement, signed by a group of young conservatives at the home of William F. Buckley, Jr., in 1960. (Buckley, the founder @NRO, built the postwar American conservative movement.) yaf.org/news/the-sharo…
@JDVance1 The @JDVance1 I know has the potential to be a good, even great, senator someday. So I'll leave the ad hominem alone and stick to data and economics. (1) 1 million Ukrainian refugees don't live in Hungary. 2.12MM have crossed the border into Hungary; 2.08MM (98.4%) then left.
@JDVance1 ...Those 2.08 million Ukrainians who crossed into Hungary apparently believed that their families would face better prospects outside of Hungary than inside of it. (2) Hungary has a population of 9.7 million; it isn't plausible that a pop. increase of 0.3% caused 25% inflation.
@JDVance1 (3) The anti-immigration argument natcons usually supply is that immigration is *deflationary*; i.e., that immigrants drive down wages (and thereby prices) by competing with native-born labor. But in Hungary, natcons make the opposite argument: that immigration is inflationary.
(1/x) Natcons claim to speak for The People™, and not the "cocktail-party class," on all issues but especially immigration. Strangely, however, the views expressed by natcons at cocktail parties don't reflect those of the American public, especially wrt legal immigration.
(2/x) Natcons are not only critics of illegal immigration, but of *legal* immigration, seeking "much more restrictive policies" and even a "moratorium." But only 33% of *Rs* support reducing legal immigration. 61% say it should stay the same or increase. pewresearch.org/politics/2018/…
(3/x) And, as a reminder, Republicans are a minority of the voting public. Overall, only 24% of Americans support reducing legal immigration. 32% support increasing it, and 38% want it to stay the same. Reducing legal immigration is, in fact, an anti-populist position.