Well right out of the chute your statement "now that the dust has settled " is incorrect. In fact what the House did was stir up more dust.

Don't misinterpret my meaning because I am relieved that this health bill is getting much debate by competitive parties, unlike Obamacare that was passed under the cover of darkness with the stipulation "we have to pass it before we know what is in it"

As to what posters think will depend on where their political ideology lies, their soci-economic status, etc.

The better question in my view is what type of plan will meet people's needs at affordable prices and without sticking it too badly to taxpayers. Essentially the guaranteed issue is a very emotional issue and the House's support of a risk pool is the only way to retain guaranteed issue.

Risk pools are the only viable options in order to this because they will provide the funding that was inadequate in Obamacare. Obamacare was unsustainable in part because it severely penalized the young in order to subsidize those who insured because they were already sick.

However, even within this topic of subsidies is the need for rational judgment as to who or whom need a subsidy...do all senors need a handout or only the poor ones?.....

Insurance companies should be given the opportunity to sell insurance across state lines, and to taylor policy benefits to meets customers pocketbooks.

Another factor to consider are the consumers of healthcare. Policies and insurance regulations must maintain a balance of being effective (meet consumers needs)yet operate such that consumers do not overspend

In summary to respond to your real question yes I have more faith in the business decisions made by Republicans then I do democrats and the state of Obamacare supports that opinion.

Personal Best Regards: