Wyomingites who need health insurance deserve so much more than the petty partisan bickering in Congress that has given many people only two choices: pay a fortune to keep Affordable Care Act coverage or go without any insurance at all. Opinion Wyoming legislators are debating whether to pu rsue a third option — BearCare, a state-operated, federally funded plan to provide catastrophic coverage against major illnesses and injuries. Let’s start by justifiably lashing out at the self-serving half-wits in both parties in Washington, who are motivated not by achieving the greater good, but by whether they can pin the blame on opponents. Wyoming residents are facing the largest premium hikes in the country because Republicans did not extend enhanced premium tax credits past the end of the year. The larger subsidies made ACA marketplace plans affordable; without them, some families will see increases over 400%. The GOP has tried and failed to repeal the ACA dozens of times, largely because it never offered a better plan. Republicans still haven’t, though you wouldn’t know that by listening to Wyoming’s U.S. Sen. John Barrasso. Barrasso, a retired physician, should have had a laugh track playing in the background when he said, “The American people can’t afford to pay these high costs for health care. We need to focus on the cost of care.” Barrasso should focus on the needs of his constituents, all of whom will be paying more for health insurance or doing without it if tax credits are not extended. Private insurance rates are rising, and struggling hospitals will have to grapple with billions of dollars more in uncompensated care. Perhaps Barrasso thinks his voter base won’t be affected because it gets some kind of MAGA discount on health insurance. Or, more likely, he just doesn’t care what anyone pays because it’s all about his party staying in power. I have just as much animosity for moderate Senate Democrats who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory last month. Divided Republicans were near folding on tax credits after being rightfully blamed for the unpopular federal government shutdown.  Then eight Democrats broke ranks with their party by ending the shutdown for the guarantee of a vote on tax credits they would obviously lose. An anemic Republican plan to spend up to $1,500 for individual health savings accounts — not remotely enough to make a difference — was killed by Democrats. Both parties will try to use their rivals’ incompetence to gain seats in the 2026 mid-term election. A pox on both of them. Back in Wyoming, the bleak picture for some victims of the failure to extend tax credits was made a little brighter thanks to the state Department of Health, which developed a health plan called BearCare. No, the plan isn’t named after Rep. John Bear, R-Gillette, of the far-right Freedom Caucus. The moniker is a play on words that would provide catastrophic health insurance that only covers the “bare necessities.” (It’s also the kind of coverage designed for major medical emergencies like, say, a bear mauling.) As co-chairman of the Joint Appropriations Committee, Bear criticized the plan and suggested it be named after Gov. Mark Gordon, who praised it. I don’t care what it’s called if it helps Wyomingites who don’t deserve the crap sandwich Congress has served them. BearCare is part of a grant application the Department of Health made to capture some of the $50 billion available to states under the Rural Health Transformation Program. Wyoming could receive up to $800 million over five years if its total package — which includes plans to stabilize hospitals, bolster preventative health care, grow the workforce and use technology to improve access — is approved later this month.  Department of Health Director Stefan Johansson asked the Appropriations Committee to create a placeholder in the budget if BearCare gets a paws-up from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Legislature. Would BearCare be any better than private catastrophic insurance plans that don’t pay for typical care, and have low costs and high deductibles? Bear, the lawmaker, charged it would be a costly government-backed program that’s unsustainable. But he’s wrong. Johansson described BearCare as an alternative to the ACA marketplace for individuals and small businesses whose premiums are too expensive. Federal dollars would be used as “seed” money to get the optional program started, but eventually, members’ monthly enrollment fees would fund it. Americans’ health insurance problems won’t be solved short of Medicare for All. BearCare isn’t a magic solution for Wyoming, but it’s worth a try during perilous times for many. Would I sign up if I had an unaffordable ACA plan and wanted at least some protection from being bankrupted by a major medical emergency? When I lost my health insurance along with my job in 2013, I couldn’t sign up for the ACA because I didn’t qualify for Medicaid or federal subsidies. I was living on unemployment benefits, had no savings to buy a private plan, and was terrified about not having insurance for my family. I would have jumped at the chance for BearCare to ease my mind — and help my family in an emergency. Wyoming lawmakers should jump on backing this cost-effective, self-sustaining plan that, with federal support, will cost the state almost nothing to start. The post ‘BearCare’ could help Wyomingites who struggle to afford health insurance appeared first on WyoFile . ...read more read less