Should the GOP repeal Obamacare without a replacement? | The Tylt

The Koch Brothers–funded group FreedomWorks immediately endorsed Trump’s new approach. Sasse argued coming up with a replacement plan at the same time seems highly unlikely, and that just repealing Obamacare would at least would allow Republicans to honor their promise to voters. 

“On the current path, it looks like Republicans will either fail to pass any meaningful bill at all, or will instead pass a bill that attempts to prop up much of the crumbling ObamaCare structures.” 

But at the Los Angeles Times, Jon Healey said to repeal without a replacement for the tens of millions of Americans who rely on Obamacare could be catastrophic. At the Brookings Institute, health policy fellow Matthew Fiedler agreed.

"Upending the whole health care system and then giving insurers no certainty on what would come after is a recipe for disaster." 

Ohio's Republican governor John Kasich strongly opposes repeal without some kind of replacement.

But others agree with the president—if the GOP cannot pass a replacement plan, they need to at least fulfill their promise to repeal, and tackle replacement later.

Sasse argues there will be a replacement for ACA, it will just be further down the road. Coupling repealing with replacement is making both impossible.

Others call the idea not only reckless but ridiculous. Republicans have had more than seven years to devise a replacement for the health care plan they have reviled since its implementation. Taking away healthcare from millions just so they can claim they fulfilled a campaign promise isn't just wrong, it's political suicide.

Others just want things to go back to the way they were.

Critics are asking where the assurance would be that after this many years, Republicans would ever replace the plan.