Repealing the ACA under Trump

[Danny Bateman]

Somewhere, in a smoke-filled back room packed to the brim with coastal elites, Nancy Pelosi is snickering.

 

[QMany]

[QMany]

[Danny Bateman]

The Turtle's facial expressions in photos just write the headlines themselves. Could it be any more perfect?

 

[QMany]

[deedsker]

https://twitter.com/allanimallan/status/878294352807776260

[Fru]

 

Lots of courage in the GOP

[Danny Bateman]

Good primer on why this bill sucks.

 

[Danny Bateman]

Republicans should have to watch this clip before voting Yea on this piece of crap bill. Hell, they ought to have to look this young man in the eyes and explain to him why they want to take away his healthcare.

 

 

[Danny Bateman]

Why not this one too?

 

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

To be fair we should also show a video about someone who this bill helps.

 

Like those families who are finally getting tax relief and can now better afford the payments on their boat.

 

That would be heartwarming.

[funhusker]

I've been trying to find the answer to this question the last couple of days, but haven't found straight forward answers. So I'm unsure. Admittedly, I didn't follow healthcare policy before "Obamacare" (I was in my mid to late 20's, healthy, and had insurance through work).

 

But my question(s) is: How does the proposed Senate bill compare to life before the ACA? Are the tax breaks bigger? Are cuts to Medicaid/Medicare larger?

 

I understand why conservatives would want the federal government out of the healthcare industry, but why go so far as to make more problems? Outside of the obvious answers that Democrats would give, what would be wrong, in the eyes of conservatives, with just going back to the way things were pre-2009?

[Moiraine]

I've been trying to find the answer to this question the last couple of days, but haven't found straight forward answers. So I'm unsure. Admittedly, I didn't follow healthcare policy before "Obamacare" (I was in my mid to late 20's, healthy, and had insurance through work).

 

But my question(s) is: How does the proposed Senate bill compare to life before the ACA? Are the tax breaks bigger? Are cuts to Medicaid/Medicare larger?

 

I understand why conservatives would want the federal government out of the healthcare industry, but why go so far as to make more problems? Outside of the obvious answers that Democrats would give, what would be wrong, in the eyes of conservatives, with just going back to the way things were pre-2009?

 

I'm not sure on that either. Some of these medicaid and tax cuts might just be reverting things back to they were pre-ACA. I'm not sure.

 

Conversely, insurance rates were increasing pre-ACA.

 

Each side spins the numbers how they want. There's a correct way to interpret them, but that's not what they do.

 

If the medicaid and tax numbers are going back to pre-ACA, the Democrats are spinning it to make the Republicans to look worse by just calling it tax breaks for the rich and medicaid cuts.

[Moiraine]

Why not this one too?

 

https://twitter.com/AdamParkhomenko/status/877972190213292032

Just to play devil's advocate, this woman also makes the Republicans' point for them. This woman will never in her lifetime be able to pay enough back to the insurance companies to make up for the cost of treatment. So she's costing taxpayers $ with the ACA. We need to get to the root of the problem which is cost.

 

I don't think Republicans truly have any interest in doing that though. I think the only way to lower costs is to regulate the drug companies' charging practices.

[funhusker]

 

I've been trying to find the answer to this question the last couple of days, but haven't found straight forward answers. So I'm unsure. Admittedly, I didn't follow healthcare policy before "Obamacare" (I was in my mid to late 20's, healthy, and had insurance through work).

 

But my question(s) is: How does the proposed Senate bill compare to life before the ACA? Are the tax breaks bigger? Are cuts to Medicaid/Medicare larger?

 

I understand why conservatives would want the federal government out of the healthcare industry, but why go so far as to make more problems? Outside of the obvious answers that Democrats would give, what would be wrong, in the eyes of conservatives, with just going back to the way things were pre-2009?

 

I'm not sure on that either. Some of these medicaid and tax cuts might just be reverting things back to they were pre-ACA. I'm not sure.

 

Conversely, insurance rates were increasing pre-ACA.

 

Each side spins the numbers how they want. There's a correct way to interpret them, but that's not what they do.

 

If the medicaid and tax numbers are going back to pre-ACA, the Democrats are spinning it to make the Republicans to look worse by just calling it tax breaks for the rich and medicaid cuts.

 

To the bolded: That is exactly what I'm trying to figure out. If it's the same as it was, it is going to really suck for a lot of people the ACA helped, but at least we've been there before and could try again when political tides change. If it goes beyond pre-ACA, why? Why would the Republican party go out of their way to make things worse for the sick people that had a period of hope? Out of spite?