During a CNN interview, an Alabama lawmaker supporting “Trumpcare” bluntly explained why rich people shouldn’t have to dish out money for the cost of the poor and sick patients.
Rep. Mo Brooks, a Republican, joined CNN’s Jake Tapper to make a case against former President Obama’s Affordable Care Act after a provision was added that would enable states to waive some of the care mandates for those with pre-existing conditions.
The Republican did not mince words when it came to defending Trumpcare and explained in selfish terms that it would no longer require healthy people to bear the burden of the sick.
“My understanding is that it will allow insurance companies to require people who have higher health care costs to contribute more to the insurance pool that helps offset all these costs, thereby reducing the cost to those people who lead good lives, they’re healthy, they’ve done the things to keep their bodies healthy,” Brooks drawled. “And right now, those are the people who have done things the right way that are seeing their costs skyrocketing.”
So, shame on those poor, little children for getting cancer because they failed to “lead good lives,” right?
The Republican completely disregarded the fact that “those people who lead good lives” (and by them he probably means rich people like him) can actually afford to eat good food, are unburdened by multiple jobs and have the luxury of making healthy life choices. In contrast, people who are not as financially sound often lose sleep over work and eat whatever they can afford — which often means a McDonald’s burger, or less — and they are the ones who are more prone to medical emergencies and often cannot afford expensive treatments.
In fact, according to the congressman, it’s not just people who don’t live healthy lifestyles that pose problems. It’s new born babies with birth defects (which are considered preexisting conditions) who are also at fault. What’s even more shocking is the fact that many insurance companies used to consider pregnancy as a preexisting condition before Obamacare. So if you take that logic, that means becoming a mother is not leading a “good life.” However, being pro-life and a staunch critic of Planned Parenthood, it's mind boggling how this factors into Brooks’ logic.
Also, the fact that a lot of people who eat healthy, don’t drink to excess, don’t do drugs, exercise and generally lead “good lives” also contract some terrible diseases, so don’t they deserve some compassion?
In essence, what Brooks means is that those who have money should be given health care benefits but those without it should continue being sick and their illnesses should be blamed on them.
Here’s what the Twitterverse thinks about that:
@chrislhayes "They should have made better choices than being born with Diabetes." -Mo Brooks— Florida Guy 18 (@GuywhoTweets18) May 1, 2017
@RepMoBrooks I have asthma since I was 12. My daughter has had it since birth. Please let me know what we did that was "bad" to get it.— HaveWeMet (@Begin_Again4) May 2, 2017
Dear @RepMoBrooks,— BlondeResisterATX (@cateady53) May 2, 2017
My husband had prostate cancer, but led a "clean life". Should he die for it?
@RepMoBrooks maybe you want to explain to Jimmy Kimmel what his infant son did wrong in order to be born with a nearly fatal heart defect.— Lesley Handel (@LesleyHandel) May 2, 2017
@RepMoBrooks you represented my family in 1982 after a drunk driver slammed into our car at 75 mph. I was 5 years old. You were my lawyer— Carol C.leaver (@10128brandywine) May 2, 2017
Banner and thumbnail credit: Reuters