Repealing the ACA under Trump

[commando]

pass this if you want to republicans....but make it effective immediately so the voters will know what a turd burger it is before the next midterms.   say goodbye to a lot of republicans in washington now.  the democrats will win a lot of seats after people get to see what trumpcare really is. 

[Danny Bateman]

Jimmy Kimmel teed off on Bill Cassidy last night, in case you haven't seen this:

 

 

Obama gets a few shots in as well. Namely, what about this bill is supposed to be better than what we have now?

 

Commando, you're right. We saw how Dems bled seats in 2010 after they passed the ACA. It doesn't matter how far they backload the effects of this bill - that was before the ACA was implemented as well. Lots of people will lose seats.

 

Moreover, if they do pass it this way, using this mechanism, I don't see what's to stop Democrats from doing the same thing when they regain power to pass national single-payer with 50 votes. Someday, someone not named Mitch McConnell who is trying to lead the GOP in Congress is going to regret all norms and traditions he burnt to the ground.

[zoogs]

What does it say about a group of people that every time one of these efforts come up, they serious contemplate it? Like, what draws them to this sort of thing? What does that mean about who they are and what they want to do with their power?

 

 

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, zoogs said:

What does it say about a group of people that every time one of these efforts come up, they serious contemplate it? Like, what draws them to this sort of thing? What does that mean about who they are and what they want to do with their power?

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know the answer to that question, but I'm going to keep voting for them every time because (R). 

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, zoogs said:

What does it say about a group of people that every time one of these efforts come up, they serious contemplate it? Like, what draws them to this sort of thing? What does that mean about who they are and what they want to do with their power?

 

 

 

I thought Roberts' answer in that Vox piece was incredibly instructive. I think his answered betrayed a bit of what he (and others) really believe about the matter. 

 

We know that the RNC and thus Republican leadership is framing this as a choice between their bill & the expensive, inefficient socialism of the Sanders plan.

 

That said, the actual bill itself is almost an afterthought for Roberts. When you geniunely buy into the GOP dogma that the ACA failed horribly & the healthcare system really is collapsing, I suppose it makes it easier to view this bill as necessary. But he doesn't seem like he cares about the implications or consequences of this bill at all. He only claims it's necessary due to elections. He doesn't seem to have any real understanding of the bill at all beyond the shallowest talking points.

 

It tells me they care way more about votes than improving healthcare.

[TGHusker]

This is such a cluster..    All could have been avoided if someone lead in a bi-partisan way. But there are no statesmen in DC.  John Kasish had it right in the tweet above.

[zoogs]

You know what else would have prevented this?

 

A Legislative not controlled by Republicans and an Executive not led by one.

[Danny Bateman]

It appears that the president doesn't understand his party's healthcare offering. Again.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

no.....your responsibility is to create a good bill. 

[Danny Bateman]

Vox did a deep-dive debate on the Graham-Cassidy bill on their podcast if you want to listen & learn a bit more about the bill. Pretty easy listening and Vox always does a great job with healthcare.
 

Pretty good primer if you feel like you don't understand exactly what is in the new bill. It's hard to keep up with all the new renditions.

[Danny Bateman]

 

Hooray, now we can have a bunch of poorly-used, cherry-picked stats and figures and "truths" rammed down our throats to fit both agendas. 

I've no doubt that the Dems are going to be the more honest voices in the debate, but Bernie could do a lot better job selling his vision for healthcare. I've never really found his super appealing - it just seems really simplistic and of course he can't explain nearly any details of his plan with any level of nuance. 

My hope is at least that he and Klobuchar (as well as the anchors - both Tapper and Bash do not let obvious lies pass, IMO) will be able to expose the numerous problems in this new plan their colleagues are trying to pass, as well as the greatly untruthful arguments they try to use to hock it.

 

I haven't decided if I'll watch this.

[NM11046]

Hmmmm - think he'll hold to this?

 

 

[Danny Bateman]

McCain is a no!
 

That makes him and Rand Paul as no's thus far. I didn't trust Paul at all, but he's been railing on the bill this morning and talking about not being bullied or bribed, so he seems like a firmer no for now. (Edit: Didn't see his tweets from NM above.)

 

Collins is leaning towards a no as well, which would make it three votes, which is enough to sink this. Murkowski is being wooed with essentially a buy off where Alaska gets some extra money and doesn't actually have to undo their ACA system to implement Graham-Cassidy, which is ridiculous, but this is where we're at.

 

 

 

[TGHusker]

Time for the Dems and the Repubs to bury the axe and come up with a solution (that is not single payor). 

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/mccain-graham-cassidy-healthcare/2017/09/22/id/815195/

McCain said he would consider supporting a proposal similar to the Graham-Cassidy bill if it were "the product of extensive hearings, debate and amendment. But that has not been the case."

“We should not be content to pass health care legislation on a party-line basis, as Democrats did when they rammed Obamacare through Congress in 2009," McCain said.

Collins criticized the bill because among other things it undermines protection for people with pre-existing medical conditions, according to the Portland Press Herald. "The premiums would be so high they would be unaffordable," she said.

[NM11046]

I read a quote earlier from Murkowski that said (paraphrasing - from memory) "I would struggle to vote for a plan that might make Alaskans safe with their healthcare but would sink the rest of the US"