Kyrsten Sinema on Health Care

Shaped $35 insulin cap; lower prescription drug cost

Sinema helped shape the final legislation. Her critics say she prevented it from providing more help to more people more quickly and some point to her financial support from the pharmaceutical industry as a likely reason why.

Gallego voted for the final measure and urged a more ambitious approach in the first place. His critics say that he had little impact in shaping the matter and supported a plan that would have made future drug development more difficult.

A Sinema spokesperson said, "Kyrsten delivered laws that make health care more affordable and accessible for Arizonans by personally negotiating policies capping the cost of insulin and lowering the cost of prescription drugs for seniors, while saving taxpayer dollars and protecting continued innovation."

Supported $35 insulin cap; cut prescription drug cost

Sinema helped shape the final legislation. Her critics say she prevented it from providing more help to more people more quickly and some point to her financial support from the pharmaceutical industry as a likely reason why.

Gallego voted for the final measure and urged a more ambitious approach in the first place. His critics say that he had little impact in shaping or pressing the matter and supported a plan that would have made future drug development more difficult.

"Ruben Gallego has been a longtime proponent of cutting the cost of prescription drugs for Arizonans, and he has the record to back it up," said a spokesperson. "The pharmaceutical lobby has enough people fighting for them in the Senate--Ruben will not be one of them."

Arizonans worry about coverage for preexisting conditions

(BEGIN VIDEO) SINEMA: The reality is that Arizonans are worried about losing access to this critical coverage. And Martha voted to take that protection away.

(END VIDEO) Q: Do you acknowledge that protection for people with preexisting conditions was significantly weaker under repeal and replace than it was under ObamaCare?

MCSALLY: I am passionate about protecting people with preexisting conditions and forcing insurance companies to provide them health insurance. I voted to make sure that they had that coverage. The reality is that ObamaCare right now is not covering people with preexisting conditions. We can't go back to what we were in the past.

Affordable health-care for everyone

ObamaCare isn't perfect; let's work to amend it

"Universal" sounds socialist, so say "affordable healthcare"

Opposes repealing ObamaCare.

Project Vote Smart infers candidate issue stances on key topics by summarizing public speeches and public statements. Congressional candidates are given the opportunity to respond in detail; about 11% did so in the 2012 races.

Project Vote Smart summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: 'Health Care: Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act?'

GOP can't beat ObamaCare, so they pretend it's a "disaster".

Heritage Action Summary: This vote would fully repeal ObamaCare.

Heritage Foundation recommendation to vote YES: (2/3/2015): ObamaCare creates $1.8 trillion in new health care spending and uses cuts to Medicare spending to help pay for some of it. Millions of Americans already have lost, and more likely will lose, their coverage because of ObamaCare. Many Americans have not been able to keep their doctors as insurers try to offset the added costs of ObamaCare by limiting the number of providers in their networks. In spite of the promise, the law increases the cost of health coverage.

Secretary of Labor Robert Reich recommendation to vote NO: (robertreich.org 11/22/2013): Having failed to defeat the Affordable Care Act, Republicans are now hell-bent on destroying the ObamaCare in Americans` minds, using the word `disaster` whenever mentioning the Act, and demand its repeal. Democrats [should] meet the Republican barrage with three larger truths:

1. The wreck of private insurance: Ours has been the only healthcare system in the world designed to avoid sick people. For-profit insurers have spent billions finding and marketing their policies to healthy people--while rejecting people with preexisting conditions, or at high risk.
2. We could not continue with this travesty of a healthcare system: ObamaCare is a modest solution. It still relies on private insurers--merely setting minimum standards and `exchanges` where customers can compare policies.
3. The moral imperative: Even a clunky compromise like the ACA between a national system of health insurance and a for-profit insurance market depends, fundamentally, on a social compact in which those who are healthier and richer are willing to help those who are sicker and poorer. Such a social compact defines a society.

Legislative outcome: Passed House 239-186-8; never came to a vote in the Senate.

Keep healthcare mandate, according to CC survey.

The Christian Coalition Voter Guide inferred whether candidates agree or disagree with the statement, 'Repealing the Nationalized Health Care System that Forces Citizens to Buy Insurance ' Christian Coalition's self-description: "Christian Voter Guide is a clearing-house for traditional, pro-family voter guides. We do not create voter guides, nor do we interview or endorse candidates."