General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: ACA: Setting aside the issue of cost. [View all]Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)And as such it provides tweaks to the current system, instead of replacing it -as you and I both support- with something like a SPHC system.
But many of the tweaks involve rectifying long-term inequities or deficiencies in the status quo, like the ability of insurers to deny issue over pre-existing conditions.
If others of those tweaks are, as I suspect, making standard a basic level of coverage for women- for instance, maternity or oral contraception- that wasn't there before, in law, I don't see what the problem is.
I do not believe the ACA is somehow discriminatory against men. I think it's a modest improvement but a long overdue one. I have not seen evidence that, implimented, it will result in "facts on the ground" that involve less care covered for men than there was previously before. Improving coverage for women is clearly overdue in these areas, which is why the word "women" appears so often, I suspect.