http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/06/07/the-fundamentally-different-goals-of-the-affordable-care-act-and-republican-replacement-plans/?utm_campaign=KFF-2016-June-Drew-ACA-GOP-alternatives&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9Uqf60gdSQ_FC57uSLNkYvFicHfqEALEVvadSgR8xY01bL5QFOrYsCgcl6KB_N5PVHy5G8fwynf8MEywb7m1kUxPljFQ&_hsmi=30331935&utm_content=30331935&utm_source=hs_email&hsCtaTracking=7825060e-e865-4738-ba5a-68a31a8904b6%7C192993c0-5763-4c2a-b289-c32fd7a5274a

Rep. Pete Sessions and Sen. Bill Cassidy introduced legislation last month calling for replacing elements of the Affordable Care Act. A House task force established by SpeakerPaul Ryan is expected to follow with more health-care proposals. These Republican health plans are generally referred to as “replacements” for the ACA–in the spirit of “repeal and replace”–as though they would accomplish the same objectives in ways that conservatives prefer. But the proposals are better understood as alternatives with very different goals, trade-offs, and consequences. Whether they are “better” or “worse” depends on your perspective.

To boil down to the most basic differences: The central focus of the Affordable Care Act is expanding coverage and strengthening consumer protections in the health insurance marketplace through government regulation. By contrast, the primary objective of Republican plans is to try to reduce health-care spending by giving people incentives to purchase less costly insurance with more “skin in the game,” with the expectation that they will become more prudent consumers of health services. They also aim to reduce federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid and the federal government’s role in both programs. Elements of the ACA were designed to reduce costs, such as the law’s Medicare payment reforms, and elements of Republican plans such as tax credits aim to expand access to insurance, but the primary aims of the ACA and the Republican plans differ.