Talk:Executive Order 13813

In today's article we are going to delve into the fascinating world of Talk:Executive Order 13813. This topic has been the subject of study and interest for years, and it is no wonder. Talk:Executive Order 13813 has captured the attention of scientists, researchers, hobbyists and the curious alike. Throughout history, Talk:Executive Order 13813 has played a crucial role in different aspects of everyday life, culture, technology, and society in general. In this article, we will explore the different aspects of Talk:Executive Order 13813, from its origin to its impact on the world today. We are sure that at the end of this reading, you will have a broader and richer understanding of Talk:Executive Order 13813. Get ready to embark on a journey of discovery and learning!

Executive Order number

I presume that this will be Executive Order 13813, since I am not aware of any intervening orders after 13812, but I don't yet have a confirmatory source. bd2412 T 22:50, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

"Replacing" Obamacare?

I don't believe this actually replaces Obamacare, as much as amends its implementing regulations. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 01:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Obamacare is a very specific set of elements, each intended to work in an integrated manner with the others. One of those elements is a prohibition on certain kinds of insurance policies and policy exclusions which this Executive Order specifically allows. The Executive Order creates a completely different structure for the regulation of insurance markets, a fact exemplified by Rand Paul calling this Executive Order "the biggest free market reform of health care in a generation". That is not a statement that can be reconciled with the idea that this merely amends implementation. bd2412 T 02:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Two problems with your explication of your position: 1.Paul, as much as I like him, could be simply exaggerating, and 2.you did not otherwise support your argument. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 02:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
The language of the Executive Order itself contains various passages asserting that specific elements of Obamacare drive up insurance costs and otherwise harm insurance markets, and describing how it is revoking or obviating those elements. For example, Section 1. b. 2 describes the limitations that Obamacare placed on the sale of "short-term, limited-duration insurance", and counters in Section 1. c. 1 that the new Executive Order "expand the availability of and access to alternatives to expensive, mandate-laden PPACA insurance, including AHPs, STLDI, and HRAs". bd2412 T 02:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Also (perhaps more to the point), the Washington Examiner article cited as a source states:

Trumpcare is coming to an association health plan near you. President Trump is expected to sign an executive order this week that will allow people to buy lower-cost health insurance that can circumvent some of the mandates created under Obamacare. Trump will direct the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and Treasury to take steps to make it easier for people to band together and buy coverage through what is known as "association health plans." The executive order also would allow people to buy low-cost, short-term health insurance plans, which the Obama administration limited to three months, and would expand the use of health savings accounts. The plans offered by associations or short-term providers would be less expensive because they wouldn't have the same requirements as Obamacare coverage.

This is describing a new health care structure that is different and separate from Obamacare, being set up by the referenced Executive Order. bd2412 T 02:44, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

(Outdent) I'll concede the point, but it still is not replacing Obamacare, as much as loosening regulations on alternate types of insurance. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 03:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

In fairness, this Executive Order is one day old, so we won't know for a long time whether its effects match some of the hype surrounding it. Of course, the article is equally new, and will itself probably become massively different over the next few weeks or months. In particular, the section on provisions needs to be increased a great deal, but eventually we will be writing about how the insurance markets changed pursuant to this executive action. bd2412 T 03:30, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Note: I do not think there is any question about this point any more. Trump himself said today that following his recent executive orders Obamacare doesn't exist anymore. bd2412 T 20:54, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Oh, but there is; based on what you showed me, I stand my ground and additionally assert his statement was hyperbole. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 04:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Move page to Executive Order 13813

Following the naming convention of Trump's other executive orders, the page should be Executive Order 13813 I think. The move would also help NPOV, I suggest we follow the convention of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, where "Obamacare" appears in the body of the text in bold, but not the title. Forbes72 (talk) 18:35, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

I think that such a proposal should be made through Wikipedia:Requested moves. I would note, however, that to my knowledge at least, there has not yet been an official designation of an executive order number. That will probably come within a few days. bd2412 T 19:27, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Ummm... the title of this article is blatantly POV. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:57, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
The title of this article reflects usage by both supporters and opponents of the measure in reliable sources. However, it is only a temporary title, until there is an official designation of an executive order number, which should come within days. It is, therefore, a moot point. bd2412 T 21:00, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
I've not seen any supporters of the EO referring to it as TRUMPCARE. I can't find any references to it in the body of the article. The only sources I've seen using that language are DNC talking points and left leaning op-ed writers and talking heads. This is not OK and it is not moot. It is a serious NPOV fail. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
A closer look reveals two sources, both of which are op-ed pieces and nowhere near adequate for supporting that kind of language in the title. A Google is yielding others but again mostly of the op-ed sort and overwhelmingly from critics of the EO. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
The very first source that I found when preparing to write this article was the Washington Examiner piece. Our own article on the Washington Examiner describes it as "a competitor to The Washington Post with a conservative editorial line" with a strict policy of "nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers". These are not "left-leaning" writers. Forbes, also cited in the article, is not considered a left-leaning venue either. These were the first sources that I found out of the gate in drafting this. As for this being a moot point, I mean that it is moot because the title will change soon as a matter of course. In the interim, this is the most concise title with which to explain what the article is about. bd2412 T 00:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Support move to Executive Order 13813, for reasons already given. I have read quite a number of sources about this executive order and non have mentioned the name "Trumpcare." --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 04:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
    • Has the order officially been designated Executive Order 13813? I have little doubt that it will be, I just want to be sure that the order number is official. bd2412 T 04:04, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
      • Update: the numbering has been confirmed, so I have moved the page accordingly. bd2412 T 12:29, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

"Impact" section

I have removed the following section because it incorrectly characterizes the content of the Executive Order.

This order resulted in no longer paying the cost sharing reduction (CSR) subsidies, which are payments to insurers to keep premiums down for low-income persons. The Congressional Budget Office reported in August 2017 that not making the CSR payments could increase health insurance premiums on the ACA exchanges by as much as 20% and add nearly $200 billion to the budget deficit over a decade. The deficit increase is because the premium tax credit subsidy (the largest Affordable Care Act subsidy) increases to offset increases in health insurance premium amounts, far outweighing savings from not paying the smaller CSR subsidy.<ref></ref>

Although subsidies were eliminated at roughly the same time, the Executive Order did not eliminate them, and says nothing about them. Although this is a related issue, and can be properly characterized as part of the same effort to introduce a new health care regime, it is not part of the language of the same order. bd2412 T 23:07, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia