Fully repealing Obamacare will cost $350 billion

SFC Beaver, that's what I figure also. Republicans are for many of the ACA, but a lot of it needs to be fixed. And democrats know this.

MAJ (Join to see) - A lot will be changed around but what we were told and we got are two different things. The first idea of Oboma care was not what was put in place. But in ways your right, you can't fix shattered glass, but you can take the broken Peices and make something better.
There a solution to every problem. Sometimes you have to walk away and come back in order to see the problem and it's entirety in order to fix it.

The bottom line is that it is a cash cow/golden goose, whatever money term you wish to ascribe to it. Its making insurance rich and they will fight ANYONE tooth and nail who tries to "fix"/repeal or kill it. "Well my senator he..." "my congresswoman she..." Yeah. Right. Big money says that they have a board seat or stock options with one of the ACA companies. But thats just me being naturally distrustful of American politicians...

It'll be renamed to "freedom care" or "merica care" or "hard working red meat eating people care" but it will never go away. This time next year we'll still be whining about it.

The other thing to remember about it is that the "money" part is all thats important. That's how Europe's system works. The care is the same; its just that the premiums are automatic (they come out of your taxes). ACA doesn't come out of our taxes but you're fined for not having it which is the next best thing from a rich insurance perspective.

SFC (Join to see) - There are only two solutions, full communist also known as one payer system, where government is in control and rations your healthcare. Or a free market system where government forces individual doctors to establish set prices for their services, and requires all insurance companies to pay their own insurance company plans published rate for that type of service. The employer negotiated prices needs to go, replaced with a public competitive market rate for equivalent service. That way prices will be competed rather than established by HMOs. Problem is as PO3 Donald Murphy suggests, the insurance companies will fight this tooth and nail because it ends their control over the healthcare costs and thereby stops their cash cow money train.

Ideally we can come up with a hybrid solution where emergency care and mental health are provided by the Government, because those two can never be effectively competed, as price is irrelevant when you are having a heart attack, and people that really need mental health can't get insurance. the rest of the health care industry is completely privatized.

SSG (Join to see) - If they do the "best case" scenario you mentioned, the Democrats will just call it Obamacare v2.0. It will just become a PR war.

LTC Kevin B. - It would still be a much better outcome for working class/low income Americans and the Republican brand, than allowing tens of millions to lose coverage or pay for insurance that doesn't really cover major illnesses or accidents.

SSG (Join to see) - I definitely agree. The funny thing about Obamacare is that if you break it down into pieces, most of the pieces poll really high (except for the mandate and the device tax). Americans seem to dislike it in the abstract ("Obamacare"), but love it in the details (e.g. keeping your kids on it until 26, no exclusions for pre-existing conditions, no annual/lifetime coverage caps, free preventive care, etc.).

LTC Kevin B. - Obamacare has been on the losing end of a PR war. If it were as popular as its components, and voters had decided to defend it... Clinton would probably have won the electoral college as well as the popular vote.

SPC Randy Semanko - The article clearly articulates that.

CPL Shawn Lawson - They do have health insurance. And, whatever flaws it has, it's certainly better than having nothing at all. Was it a perfect solution? No. Was it an improvement over the previous system? Yes. Were there winners and losers? Yes. If the GOP can come up with a better plan, then let's hear it. Seven years running, and we're still waiting.

CPL Shawn Lawson - They can use it. If they don't want to pay the deductible, then that's their decision. If they can't afford the deductible, then maybe they need to work longer, or work harder, or get a second job, or retrain to get a better job, or any of the other standard conservative solutions typically thrown out when an individual's wealth (or lack thereof) becomes an issue. As long as healthcare is treated like a service that is purchased in a market-based, capitalist society, that's a complexity that people will have to overcome. When it comes to healthcare in the US, there are no cheap solutions. Like I said, if the conservative politicians think they have a better idea, we're still awaiting. Seven years...and the clock is still ticking.

CPL Shawn Lawson - Plenty of friends of mine are in the same boat, they can't afford the deductibles and the few doctors that accept their polices have 6 month waiting periods. I certainly agree that having a policy does not equate to having access to healthcare.