Repealing the ACA under Trump

[BigRedBuster]

It will possibly be at least several weeks before the Senate votes.

[Danny Bateman]

At the same time, professional medical groups and patient advocacy groups have ONE job: do what's best for healthcare & the patients.

 

They all say this bill is hot garbage. I haven't heard one single professional group say a positive word about this bill outside of the Heritage Foundation and Club for Growth. That should tell us something.

 

The thing that really grates on me is the way they just plowed ahead in a vacuum ignoring all those groups and the concerns of the constituents. Their singular vision for healthcare must be REALLY awesome if they can afford to just disregard every other informed voice and do the damn thing completely on their own.

 

Also, I like how they got exactly the votes they needed to pass it and not a vote more. That tells me they're a cold, calculating group of people who know on some level how truly terrible this bill is. They know how unpopular it is, how bad it is as an actual piece of legislation, so they minimized the damage and forged ahead anyway.

[NM11046]

It's a great question - all I know is that they're all on an 11 day break now, and that when they start to review it they should have the CBO information, which should make it DOA.

[Danny Bateman]

When will we know the senates decision and what are the odds the new healthcare gets shot down?

 

The Senate will tear up this piece of trash and start from scratch. It's still important to pay attention.

[DrunkOffPunch]

 

 

When will we know the senates decision and what are the odds the new healthcare gets shot down?

The Senate will tear up this piece of trash and start from scratch. It's still important to pay attention.

Thank god. Sincerely hope you're right.

[BigRedBuster]

At the same time, professional medical groups and patient advocacy groups have ONE job: do what's best for healthcare & the patients.

 

They all say this bill is hot garbage. I haven't heard one single professional group say a positive word about this bill outside of the Heritage Foundation and Club for Growth. That should tell us something.

 

The thing that really grates on me is the way they just plowed ahead in a vacuum ignoring all those groups and the concerns of the constituents. Their singular vision for healthcare must be REALLY awesome if they can afford to just disregard every other informed voice and do the damn thing completely on their own.

 

Also, I like how they got exactly the votes they needed to pass it and not a vote more. That tells me they're a cold, calculating group of people who know on some level how truly terrible this bill is. They know how unpopular it is, how bad it is as an actual piece of legislation, so they minimized the damage and forged ahead anyway.

Ummm...no.

 

You can say that about patient advocacy groups. But, professional medical groups are there to help the medical profession. Now, a large part of that is improving health care. BUT, another large part of that is insuring the industry is "healthy" (pardon the pun).

 

If congress would come up with a plan that would provide healthcare for everyone and at the same time, cut the cost of providing that healthcare by 50% (like they should be) these professional groups are going to come out with very negative reports on the bill.

[Danny Bateman]

It's a great question - all I know is that they're all on an 11 day break now, and that when they start to review it they should have the CBO information, which should make it DOA.

 

This means more town halls, right? They ought to be extra fun!

[NM11046]

 

It's a great question - all I know is that they're all on an 11 day break now, and that when they start to review it they should have the CBO information, which should make it DOA.

 

This means more town halls, right? They ought to be extra fun!

 

Fingers crossed. Sounds like most R's are opting not to schedule any ... only 5 on the books across the US right now. Which is almost better - I love it when they set up a mic and a chair and leave it empty or have a cardboard cutout.

[Danny Bateman]

 

At the same time, professional medical groups and patient advocacy groups have ONE job: do what's best for healthcare & the patients.

 

They all say this bill is hot garbage. I haven't heard one single professional group say a positive word about this bill outside of the Heritage Foundation and Club for Growth. That should tell us something.

 

The thing that really grates on me is the way they just plowed ahead in a vacuum ignoring all those groups and the concerns of the constituents. Their singular vision for healthcare must be REALLY awesome if they can afford to just disregard every other informed voice and do the damn thing completely on their own.

 

Also, I like how they got exactly the votes they needed to pass it and not a vote more. That tells me they're a cold, calculating group of people who know on some level how truly terrible this bill is. They know how unpopular it is, how bad it is as an actual piece of legislation, so they minimized the damage and forged ahead anyway.

Ummm...no.

 

You can say that about patient advocacy groups. But, professional medical groups are there to help the medical profession. Now, a large part of that is improving health care. BUT, another large part of that is insuring the industry is "healthy" (pardon the pun).

 

If congress would come up with a plan that would provide healthcare for everyone and at the same time, cut the cost of providing that healthcare by 50% (like they should be) these professional groups are going to come out with very negative reports on the bill.

 

 

I'm taking about groups like the following. If you want to say they're strictly patient advocacy groups, fine.

 

 

Part of the reason even medical professional groups oppose it is because less people insured means less people getting treatment which means less profit. We can take issue with the last bit, but less people having access to healthcare because they can no longer afford it is unquestionably a bad thing.

[Danny Bateman]

 

Not a single woman on the list.

[funhusker]

 

 

At the same time, professional medical groups and patient advocacy groups have ONE job: do what's best for healthcare & the patients.

 

They all say this bill is hot garbage. I haven't heard one single professional group say a positive word about this bill outside of the Heritage Foundation and Club for Growth. That should tell us something.

 

The thing that really grates on me is the way they just plowed ahead in a vacuum ignoring all those groups and the concerns of the constituents. Their singular vision for healthcare must be REALLY awesome if they can afford to just disregard every other informed voice and do the damn thing completely on their own.

 

Also, I like how they got exactly the votes they needed to pass it and not a vote more. That tells me they're a cold, calculating group of people who know on some level how truly terrible this bill is. They know how unpopular it is, how bad it is as an actual piece of legislation, so they minimized the damage and forged ahead anyway.

Ummm...no.

 

You can say that about patient advocacy groups. But, professional medical groups are there to help the medical profession. Now, a large part of that is improving health care. BUT, another large part of that is insuring the industry is "healthy" (pardon the pun).

 

If congress would come up with a plan that would provide healthcare for everyone and at the same time, cut the cost of providing that healthcare by 50% (like they should be) these professional groups are going to come out with very negative reports on the bill.

 

 

I'm taking about groups like the following. If you want to say they're strictly patient advocacy groups, fine.

 

 

Part of the reason even medical professional groups oppose it is because less people insured means less people getting treatment which means less profit. We can take issue with the last bit, but less people having access to healthcare because they can no longer afford it is unquestionably a bad thing.

 

My family has been directly impacted by 6 of those groups:

 

My children and several cousins' kids were premature: March of Dimes

My mom and uncle suffered a heart attack in the last 18 months: WomenHeart & American Heart Association

My Grandmother died of cancer (years ago): American Cancer Society

My cousin has cystic fibrosis (also diabetes at the age of 23'ish) : Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

My father and 2 cousins are diabetic: American Diabetes Association

 

Yet my brother and a large chunk of Aunts, Uncles, and cousins applaud this mess. Well, because Trump told them to.....

[RedDenver]

So the House Repubs passed this mess of a bill, and they apparently didn't read it, or at least not carefully:

http://www.businessinsider.com/gop-house-republicans-didnt-read-ahca-healthcare-bill-2017-5

[Red Five]

[zoogs]

BRB's right. These groups have interests that are sometimes orthogonal to patients' needs. Which isn't to say their interests are illegitimate, either. They're obviously a critical part of the health care infrastructure we all depend on and need to work with.

 

^In defense to the above, this is exactly why you have staff. I don't expect every legislator to read through every bill line-by-line. There's too much. Of course, it's also why you have competent staff. And it's also why we elect competent, conscientious politicians to begin with: ones who can tell the difference between swill and substance and who don't sit around rubber stamping whatever they're told to.

[JJ Husker]

 

When will we know the senates decision and what are the odds the new healthcare gets shot down?

 

The Senate will tear up this piece of trash and start from scratch. It's still important to pay attention.

I hope you're right but I have serious reservations if the senate is any more inclined than the house to do the right thing.