So much for the battle cry of the last 7+ to repeal and replace. I’m so old, I remember the Republicans PROMISING replacement, not simply repeal. What a joke! Once again, proving they have one heck of an echo chamber but that governing stuff is far too difficult for them.
The major issue I see with repealing without a replacement is the lack of direction the government is giving the insurance carriers regarding various aspects, the most notable one being subsidies.
Remember how well it turned out when we subsidized corn, and other things that made extremely unhealthy foods become mainstream, and actually reversed the eating habits of the poor?
Are you aware those unhealthy foods actually used to be consumed by the rich? And the poor ate healthier than the rich with more organic food? Now the poor are stuck on the Mc Donalds type of garbage, we have an obesity crises as organic foods are expensive, (I don’t see those getting subsidized) and these same farms are often subsidized to this day.
Don’t worry though. That will never happen in any way if we do health subsidies, there couldn’t possibly be any bad affects.
In one respect here though I agree with you. Uncertainty is a bad thing. So if we are going to make a bill to replace the ACA, it should be done at the same time.
They do have plans, they have had many, I have listed them, and the issue we have is that 3 republicans can bring down the implementation of those plans, as the democrats are entirely blocking all plans that would replace the ACA. They insist, despite just how many regulations are entailed, that we work form the ACA. I’m sorry, the ACA is bad and should be scrapped, it is worse that the 48 democrats refuse to start new than it is that republicans have 3 people breaking away.
It is simply insane to watch the left implode like this. You guys are inept.
“The Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors so that we can produce a bill that finally provides Americans with access to quality and affordable health care,” McCain said in a statement.
Do you agree with McCain that the Republicans would have a MUCH better chance of passing legislation if they allow the other side to participate in the process?
““The Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors so that we can produce a bill that finally provides Americans with access to quality and affordable health care,” McCain said in a statement.”
This is lip service, and many people say this.
Do I agree that input is always needed from both side? No. Sometimes the other side is suggesting something that is wrong.
In this scenario though, do I believe that democrats have been allowed to participate? YES. Removing the ACA and replacing it is NOT negotiable. It has too many pages, too much that could be changed, with variable affects, and they don’t even know, or didn’t at the time of passing, what would occur, so we know they won’t do any better at modifying it.
Aspects the republicans gave them: Changing the credits to cut off based on income, not solely age, keeping kids on the plan, keeping pre existing, waiting to cut off Medicaid until they believe premiums may come down, so they aren’t cutting it off immediately, in other words, a buy off to get democrats on board, and subsides, which they threw the way of the democrats. Democrats chose to sit this one out. They were not blocked out.
July 19, 2017 at 2:21 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
6
2
“do I believe that democrats have been allowed to participate? YES.”
Come on. Seriously?? You honestly believe that?? I know you like data, so here we go.
591 amendments to the ACA were submitted by the committee’s Republican members and of those, 161 were adopted.
Now how many amendments did the Dem’s GET to propose? Zero.
Were they even INVITED to ONE hearing so they could propose amendments? No.
You can’t participate in drafting the legislation if you’re not even invited to the table to discuss it once.
When even politick, who is left leaning has to admit it on this one, you know the right were not allowed to make major contributions.
“Now how many amendments did the Dem’s GET to propose? Zero.”
They intentionally didn’t go to the meetings. I would expect it to be zero. Regarding the items I listed though, they were clearly put in for democrats, and they were not minimal Rosenblatt.
Admit it was not zero, immediately. I cannot debate someone who is foolish enough to say Zero as I showed the parts republicans added. Do you admit these were put in here for democrats? Even if you don’t admit the first, which I don’t expect you to be intelligent enough to understand, and will let slide, I cannot have you here saying the democrats were given no ability to participate. They sat it out. Also, the bill is not in amendment territory. I would also expect the amount to be zero because it never went to vote.
“Were they even INVITED to ONE hearing so they could propose amendments? No.”
Yes, they were.
“You can’t participate in drafting the legislation if you’re not even invited to the table to discuss it once.”
Schumer says he wanted to discuss bipartisan bills, but no such bills have been suggested by the democrats, at all, unlike when the republicans had a CBO rated plan alongside the ACA, there is no such plan with the democrats. So clearly we can assume Schumer likely meant to meet on changing the ACA, which republicans are refusing to do. Therefore, they have chosen not to make an alternate bill. They were not shut out.
McConnel has also said the democrats are refusing to work with them. And we do see the democrats without any bill or proposed changed in public, other than saying to fix the ACA. Lip service doesn’t matter to me, and it is clear what is occurring here. You say they weren’t allowed to contribute…If Schumer was bold enough to go in public and ask for a meeting, he would have been bold enough to have a counter bill or suggest changes, if he had them, but he doesn’t. They don’t want a replacement, they want changes to the ACA, and that is the non starter. That is their choice. They were not shut out.
The ACA isn’t a good bill, and right now the democrats care clearly lying about their goals. It isn’t to negotiate a new bill, and move forward, it’s to stick with the ACA, all the way.
Now show me the democrat bill/s or suggestions. I’ll wait. You won’t find any, because there aren’t any.
The democrats weren’t shut out, the refused to participate other than changing the ACA.
July 19, 2017 at 3:33 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
4
1
Uh, your first link confirms the numbers I posted are 100% accurate. We can debate how meaningful the amendments to the ACA were, but you can’t argue that 161 of the 591 amendments the R’s proposed were made part of the ACA.
Your second link supports my argument too. Schumer “push[ed] for a meeting with Trump … after [he] unsuccessfully requested an all-Senate meeting with Republicans.”
So Schumer wanted to have an all Senate meeting, but the R’s didn’t let him. Then he asked for a meeting with Trump, which didn’t happen. Once again, your link proves me right — the R’s shut out the D’s from the process.
“It’s unfortunate that our Democratic colleagues refused to work with us….in the seven years since they passed it,” does NOT mean the D’s refused to cooperate with the AHCA process – it means the D’s didn’t cooperate in the 7 years since they passed the ACA.
Your last link was posted to prove the R’s tried to work with the D’s in the ACA process. I conceeded this initially by citing the ~600/160 amendments.
Can you provide JUST ONE quote where any CURRENT Republican said something like “we invited them to our AHCA meetings in 2017, but the D’s refused to show up” or “we called a vote on the floor for input in drafting this legislation in 2017, but the D’s shot us down”?
I don’t believe you can and argue your links (so far) support everything I’ve posted as being 100% true.
While the R’s included a few items they **thought** the D’s wanted in the AHCA, the R’s NEVER ASKED the D’s for their input in a formal or informal setting.
July 19, 2017 at 4:04 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Bob,
You know. I almost don’t even want you to read and respond to what I typed before this. I want you to respond to this. How do you justify your defense of a President and WH who has repeatedly been caught lying?
July 19, 2017 at 4:45 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
4
1
Are you really arguing the D’s were NOT shut out of the AHCA process because the R’s put in those 4 items, even though it was never debated on the floor?
Are you really arguing that the D’s approving 160 of the R’s proposed amendments to the ACA counts as shutting out the R’s even though it was debated on the floor many times?
So 4 items were put in for the D’s means they were totally included in the process, but 160 items put in for the R’s means they were shut out of the process??
Regardless of how impactful those amendments may have been, is that really how one of your arguments boils down right now?
July 20, 2017 at 1:26 pm
Actu says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
The left is inept because Republicans can’t pass their bill taking insurance away from 30 million people to cut taxes on the rich. They need 100 seats in the Senate. Good old independent both sides Bob. So stupid. Pure ignorance. Literally everything is Democrats’or Obama’so fault. Twitter bots have more depth than this.
>Uh, your first link confirms the numbers I posted are 100% accurate
But that’s not what he has been told or what he wants to believe so he won’t consider it. The truth of the matter is, Democrats debated and held committee hearings for almost a year: Republicans didn’t hold one, and wouldn’t even show their bill to Republicans. This link came up 1st when he searched for ‘debunked’ therefore it proves him right, even if it didn’t say what he claimed.
Democrats are outrageous for 1 filibuster on this while Republicans broke all records for filibuster and obstruction and people like this idiot cheered it.
Now the president is considering attempting to make himself and his family above the law by researching pardoning himself, and they will still support it, and him, because they are anti American fascists.
Bob is a pathological liar, I don’t get why you waste time letting him pretend to debate.
It’s shame that with majority leadership that things cannot get done. Most people with common sense knew that the healthcare problem was extremely complex with deep rooted issues but all some gullible voters heard was “trust me folks I’m a business man, I’m a negotiator, I make really big deals”. Several other good Republican candidates were drowned out by this BS during the primaries and now we’re stuck with the “I’ll be too busy to play golf” huckster that will do everything in his power to deflect criticism and distance himself from blame.
There were a few Republicans who hinted at replacement plans. NARY A ONE PROMISED what could not occur when Obama had the veto power. Lie more and get caught in lies more when people following the matter are watching.
I would applaud them, but only one of the 4 who stood up to the bill did so because it was too harsh and removed too much. The other three were various levels of garbage about it not going far enough.
Some men just want to watch the world burn. I would applaud them if they actually had some shred of decency and love for their fellow man, and not just for their pocketbooks, but that is not the case.
“I must give credit where credit is due. I applaud the Republicans who are opposing this bill and putting the people ahead of their campaign promises.
They know this bill is bad, and most likely worse than the PPACA, and are standing up against the GOP leadership for what is right.”
Two words: Lip service, on your end.
Removing a mandate for insurance, and thus having less people insured, does not translate to less people receiving care.
You are forgetting that the majority of new insureds are young, and thus them not being insured and not receiving insurance premium credits at worst leaves them equal. This is especially true because standard doctor visits, which would be cheaper doing outside of insurance, is the typical exposure they will have, and if they are poor and have a massive exposure (aka heart attack/cancer/etc)they do have access to government assistance and or automatic care.
What we had before the ACA was better than the ACA, and the current republican plan is also better. It removes the regulations that increased costs, and gives credits to be able to buy insurance, and directs the healthiest to other avenues that work better.
@Ron; explain how delaying the repeal (and replacement?) is putting the people ahead of ANYTHING when the ACA death spiral is making the HC and HI market perilous and health care shortages frustrating to MOST Americans?
Do not dodge this simple request to explain. Ready, steady, … GO!
Simple. This bill is worse for the people than the PPACA. And that is saying a lot.
Besides, the most recent strategy is to delay the end of the PPACA for 2 years to work on a replacement.
Question: What is the difference between repealing now with a future effective date of 2 years, and working on a simultaneous repeal and replace for another year with the same effective date?
Answer: The Republicans, especially President Trump, are ONLY after a political victory.
I doubt that R’s will pass anything.
How do you think the ACA will do?
( Unlimited in High Tech Healthcare for everyone with no increase in revenue.)
BP
Once gain the elected officials have failed the population.
Customer service at the market place is horrible. The web site is horrible. The govt just needs to get out of the way of the people that know what they are doing. Put distribution back in the hands of regulated / licensed / insured / trained Bonded people that actually care about the local population and know the local markets / networks.
After fighting for 6 months to get my health care back (it was cancelled due to a web site error) I ran the reinstatement and made my payment. Now I am getting reminders to pay my premium. Where did my premium money go?
Additionally, they cancelled my dental and no one can tell me why. At the very least, when the carrier messes things up, we the people have recourse and can absolutely count on things getting fixed in 30 days – not 6 months on an expedited basis.
How much more time do I need to spend on the phone trying to fix what they screwed up?
Shame on the R’s that are not on board. Shame on the D’s that aren’t on board. What ever it is, it cant be worse.
I agree with the sentiment, here. Let the government regulate pricing and market fairness, but ensure that standard private carriers are the ones servicing these accounts.
It is unconscionable that someone’s experience should be as bad as yours.
With it taking them 6 months to look at my bills and determine I was paying what I should be paying, it speaks to their work load – there are many more then just me having this issue.
“I agree with the sentiment, here. Let the government regulate pricing and market fairness, but ensure that standard private carriers are the ones servicing these accounts.”
The market has to regulate the availability and market, otherwise sections become stagnant that can go down.
If you can’t go to a doctor, and he can’t set pricing, and the next one has set pricing to similar amounts, competition cannot work.
This shows a great ineptitude into how the market works.
Again: Watch some Ben Shapiro commentary on this, for the love of God.
The BIG shame is that these politicians can’t put a committee of Republicans and Democrats together to come up with a new plan, one that revamps the entire way we buy and use medical plans.
Jack, our POTUS said some time ago and repeated it recently that we should just let Obamacare go completely belly up and then maybe we can craft a plan that works. All this posturing is by the leftist Demoncrats and the RINO’s for political purposes to keep the President from succeeding in MAGA.
The hardest of hardcore right-wingers are who killed this bill, not your so-called RINOs, who have almost entirely been run out of office by tea party types and soon to be replaced again by proto-fascist, racist alt-right types.
The democrats have had no say in the matter, it only had to pass on a majority vote, and the GOP couldn’t even get that done, even with kickbacks to individual states.
If you let the ACA go belly up with replacing it, millions will be thrown off of coverage immediately. Those with preexisting conditions will lose access to necessary treatments, and a serious decline in physical and mental health will sweep the nation.
Do you want that blood and heartache on your party’s shoulders? By all means, enjoy the 2018 election season if you manage to do so. It will be a bigger rallying cry for maligned voters than having an orange turd in the office of presidency.
Doug, are you sure you are not UW or Actu who changed your moniker to slam Republicans? Democrats messed up Healthcare in this country and that is a FACT. Hard to clean up that massive failure.
Democrats only failed because they didn’t go far enough. Giving poor red states the option to reject increased Medicaid funding helped set those states’ exchanges up to fail. Those governors and representatives from those states want to point the finger, but they should be pointing it at themselves.
The ACA is the baby step the country needed to take to realize that everyone deserves the chance at health care. If the GOP wants to improve on it, great, if not, they need to get out of the way in ’18 to let people who know how to legislate and govern improve on things the ACA laid the ground work for.
July 18, 2017 at 4:21 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
8
2
Thank you for commenting on the lack of accepting the Medicare Expansion as a reason some state exchanges are failing right now. I know neither of us are saying it’s the only reason, but it’s certainly a contributing factor.
July 19, 2017 at 1:43 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
Doug is not UW. It’s very clear in the behavior differences Agent.
As for you Doug:
“Democrats only failed because they didn’t go far enough. Giving poor red states the option to reject increased Medicaid funding helped set those states’ exchanges up to fail.”
What are you talking about? Are you honestly trying to say that more companies failed in red states? Proof needed. Here’s something I found real quick.
Note the worst is a Liberal state, New York, and Texas is in the top three. The ACA did not fail solely due to who opted out of certain small sections of the ACA. That is hogwash.
“Those governors and representatives from those states want to point the finger, but they should be pointing it at themselves.”
Nope. You have far to simple of a way of looking at things. I still haven’t seen any links and studies from you…It’s funny how much you bragged about this.
I guess when you argue Agent it’s easy to say that, as you lambast him, especially when you’re on the ruling/winning side in society, the one that people will agree with you easily. When you’re on the rough one, and have ideas that don’t conform to “I love people, you hate people!” come back and talk to me.
I get the back end of that all the time, and I assure you, that you don’t.
Racist, bigoted, xenophobic person, you want Muslims to die, and despite being Mexican, you hate Mexicans, and by the way did I mention you want poor people to die?
July 20, 2017 at 10:21 am
Actu says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
>What are you talking about? Are you honestly trying to say that more companies failed in red states? Proof needed. Here’s something I found real quick.
Red states blocked the Medicaid expansion. Instead of worrying about your pathetic online debates and getting your knowledge by looking up things “real quick,” stop posting and educate yourself. An actual education, not one where The Southern Strategy is fake, climate change is fake, and data means whatever you think even if it’s exactly opposite what you claim, like with your stupid Reagan rants.
On second thought, just STFU, you are in a fantasyland. Most people have almost no savings and you think they can afford most medical care. Just clueless uninformed and unintelligent.
July 20, 2017 at 8:10 pm
Natasha and Bearis says:
Like or Dislike:
0
4
Hooray for red states blocking Medicaid expansion!
LBJ stands for Lock Box Raider Johnson, who created a Ponzi Scheme that Bernie Madoff could never have envisioned or risked implement.
I don’t see how you can force anyone to ‘STFU’ on this website now that your BOTs have been neutered after I petitioned the management of IJ to do so. Perhaps you can visit your local coffee hole and pay some patrons to visit IJ and down vote Conservatives posts that irk you the most? If that works, ask Georgie Sore-os for reimbursement for your ‘Socialist Soldier’ work.
July 18, 2017 at 6:48 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
3
10
That would all be on the dems. They jammed it through. Its their fault things are this bad and getting worse.
“The hardest of hardcore right-wingers are who killed this bill, not your so-called RINOs, who have almost entirely been run out of office by tea party types and soon to be replaced again by proto-fascist, racist alt-right types.
This is all I need to read to see how ignorant you are. proto-fascist, racist alt right types? Name a few. List their fascist laws and their racist laws.
“The democrats have had no say in the matter, it only had to pass on a majority vote, and the GOP couldn’t even get that done, even with kickbacks to individual states.”
The republicans kept pre existing conditions to appease them, as well as kids on policies, as well as threw in subsidies to some degree, as well as made sure credits would have cut offs based on income. They had every say. They are the ones who chose to not do anything other than modify the ACA because they are being political.
“If you let the ACA go belly up with replacing it, millions will be thrown off of coverage immediately.”
The majority who are thrown off coverage would be better off not having to buy it. If they had a crises they would have to receive care if they had an event, and those who were actually poor would still likely get assistance. My brother who landed out of a job while he was making $70,000 had a leg injury. The state covered it. In full, while he was out of a job. For all other typical avenues, people can afford a doctor visit, and all too often, it’s actually cheaper without insurance. With my carrier I’ve specifically had set pricings (many times that federal or state regulations mandate) be more expensive than just paying myself and not using insurance. And you above said you would rather have more of these regulations. Insane.
“Those with preexisting conditions will lose access to necessary treatments, and a serious decline in physical and mental health will sweep the nation.” Nope. If that’s true, we should have had a vast health increase sweep the nation. Oops! That didn’t happen.
“Do you want that blood and heartache on your party’s shoulders?”
As usual the giant shame sandwich of a liberal, we are loving, you want people to die! Instead of I don’t know, saying that maybe the system you think works doesn’t.
“By all means, enjoy the 2018 election season if you manage to do so.”
This has no place here other than to gloat.
“It will be a bigger rallying cry for maligned voters than having an orange turd in the office of presidency”
Very mature. I thought you work in facts and everyone else here is immature?
Bob, where have you been? We have had our weekly battles on Healthcare and you may have been on vacation. What do you think about Seattle passing an income tax on their citizens even though it is against Washington State’s Constitution? What a bunch of wacko’s you have up there.
July 20, 2017 at 5:48 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
I leave often, it’s just annoying and too boring for my appetite. Then I watch more Ben Shapiro and new links to come back stronger with new info. If I parrot the same thing to people saying the same thing, I’ll become just as bad. I just needed a reset.
On the Seattle tax it’s as much of a load of crap as their soda tax.
July 18, 2017 at 3:09 pm
SWFL Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
10
3
Yes, that’s the spirit. Just give up and distance himself from the problem. To hell with the promise of “Look folks I’m a business man, I negotiate really big deals”. He can’t even negotiate with his own party. Maybe he should have watched a few old medical shows like Marcus Web MD or St. Elsewhere to get an idea on how to fix healthcare. You know like he did with getting military information from the generals “on the shows”.
It doesn’t matter what TrumPresident said many months ago. What matters is the death spiral will soon lead to more urgency to repeal. When that happens, work on regulatory reform will occur at the behest of Congressional leaders who know how to get big government out of the Health Care and Health Insurance industry.
Right! by modeling it after Singapore’s big government solution…
wait a minute!
July 19, 2017 at 10:06 am
SWFL Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
6
2
“Doesn’t matter what TrumPresident said” is about the only statement you’ve made that makes sense. You’re correct, it doesn’t matter. He ran for office promoting the fact that he wasn’t a politician but he actually took politics to the next level with his outrageous lies, embellishment of his intellect, and bellicose behavior. I suspect many Republicans felt like he’d step out of the way (which is true) once in office so they could get to work. Sort of like having a substitute teacher in school that no one listens to and is temporary.
July 19, 2017 at 10:28 am
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
7
3
“Mexico will pay for the wall” now means “Hey guys, can I get a few trillion in taxypayer dollars to build the wall?”
“Drain the swamp” now means “put more Goldman Sachs employees in the swamp”
July 20, 2017 at 8:12 pm
Natasha and Bearis says:
Like or Dislike:
0
3
Not on Singapore’s failure. On a free market plan. And following more / most of ‘HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’.
July 18, 2017 at 4:27 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
5
2
“Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors…[to provide] Americans with access to quality and affordable health care”
Excellent news!
I sincerely hope the party that controls all three branches of the government starts doing that governing thing that even folks from within their own party are suggesting they try next!
“Excellent news!
I sincerely hope the party that controls all three branches of the government starts doing that governing thing that even folks from within their own party are suggesting they try next!
Impossible when all democrats block it, you need 60 votes, and even at 51, losing 3 makes it impossible. It is not the issue of the party if 3 people plus 48 make things impossible.
It is not the rest of the 48 republicans who should be removed. Youi start with the 48 democrats. When they are out of the way, then you can see what republican ideals will do.
I posit that less than 100% of the Democrats would block it if they were actually allowed to participate in the drafting of said law. You know … doing that actual governing thing instead of trying to freeze one side out of the process entirely.
” posit that less than 100% of the Democrats would block it if they were actually allowed to participate in the drafting of said law. You know … doing that actual governing thing instead of trying to freeze one side out of the process entirely.”
They already made it clear they will settle for nothing other than altering the ACA.
Also, they were allowed to participate. They chose not to. The republicans, in order to get them to participate, included Medicaid for several years until they believe premiums will go down, credit cut offs based on income, which you should know is not usually a republican thing, pre existing condition clauses, as well as kids on the plan to the same age.
In what way have the republicans refused to let the democrats in on this?
So when one party says they will only accept modifying the ACA, and as a result the senate decides to use a 51 vote measure which moves the debate to the later section of the structure, the party who refused to allow a new bill, is not the one who chose to sit out the debate?
They still are refusing to debate a new bill.
They were wrong as it was, and couldn’t predict the ACA. Why should we trust them to fix the 2,700 page bill?
You are putting no blame on democrats here, and are bending over backwards to claim the republicans blocked them out. They didn’t.
Bob, what do you think about the Cruz Amendment to allow several free market plans and side by side, the Obamacare Plans and let the American people decide on which one they want? Does that sound like free choice instead of coercion? My guess is that enrollment would go up and people could get plans they wanted instead of having them cancelled to enroll in the rapidly imploding Obamacare.
July 21, 2017 at 1:14 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
I think Cruz’s plan can only work with more measures to remove regulations from the healthcare market.
Otherwise, it may actually increase the cost of insurance. It’s all complicated, and I’m not an expert, but I do know that insurance is far too regulated as it is.
July 21, 2017 at 3:24 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Bob, I do agree with you that the insurance market is far too regulated as it is. The Dems passed a 2,700 page monster, then have been gleefully adding thousands of regulations and rules since 2010. That is why Obamacare needs to be scrapped altogether and a free market approach put in where Americans can choose the plan they want. If the Obamacare mandated plans do not measure up and are too expensive, they will die peacefully.
July 18, 2017 at 5:22 pm
TxLady says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
Before the election had even occurred, Obamacare was already in a death spiral and it was just going to get worse. Carriers pulling out of the market left and right before last year’s open enrollment, then this year even more saying we’re done. Many areas will be left with no Obamacare companies at all come next year. Unaffordable prices for all. So now this congress is faced with fixing the mess handed to them by a previous congress. No matter how messy though, it’s got to be fixed. This has to be fixed, it’s not going to fail, it has failed. Get your crap together, quit whining about I want this and I want that, and I need, need, need and come up with a fix. Every single one of you is responsible for this mess. Those that passed it the first time and those failing to pass it this time. Own up to it, quit pointing fingers and fix it. Sit yourselves down in a room and hammer it out. Screw your damned vacations and republicans, quit your infighting.
Death spiral will very soon cause a HI market crash. Some states have already experienced it ahead of other states. ‘Repeal and Replace’ will soon change to ‘Recover and Reform the Health Insurance Regulatory Environment’. Hooray for freedom and open competition, free of government intervention! MHC&HIGA!
Joe Manchin said he had a way to get Republicans and Democrats together to fix the monumental mess. Where has he been all this time, hiding in the hills of West Virginia?
Because you say so doesn’t make it true. Thus far, most of the elements of ‘HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’ have appeared in the House and Senate bills written by Republicans. The problem in passing the composite bills is the moderate Republicans fear of being ousted in their re-election bid because they supported removal of ACA provisions that WON’T be in the final bill.
Example: Ted Cruz’s recent proposal to amend the Senate Bill is the ‘EC’ part of HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’ Since you’re so smart, you reply with what that (EC) means. Ready, steady, …. GO!
Nat, I am all for the Cruz amendment to offer free market plans and the Obamacare mandate plans side by side. Free Americans can pick which one meets their needs. Freedom of choice at its finest. Something tells me the free market plans will be more popular, but that is a wild guess.
The MANDATED plans were the ACA’s means of causing the Death Spiral via an unstable pooling equilibrium that lasted only a nanosecond after the ACA went into effect.
Free market plan choices will lead to a separating equilibrium, a la Rathman-Stiglitz model, or aka Nash Separating Equilibrium. Cruz is a smart guy. Actuaries would refer to it as ‘risk classification’ on ‘expected cost basis’. Ordinary people refer to it as freedom of choice from plans offered at fair rates and varying coverage levels.
ACA will fail. Republicans won’t FIX it. They’ll repeal it and let free market forces fix it over a two year period. The needed elements are found in ‘HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’. Because you’re so smart, tell us what that means. Ready, steady, … GO!
Why do you need an exact date? Your team failed miserably, and more and more of them are being ‘taken off the field’ by the US voters fed up with their loss of coverage and perpetual lies by the political players who were ‘disqualified from office’ for their deceit in devising the ACA turd behind CLOSED and LOCKED-WITH-REPLACEMENT-LOCKS Congressional doors, and dropping it on the trusting public which needs its HC coverage.
While trying to figure out what the hell “HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS” means, I came across this post of yours from May 4, cheers!
“Tick, tock, tick, tock.
ACA is on the Congressional vote clock,
Repeal and ‘partly replace’ is a certain lock.
To soon be pushed off the end of the Liberals dock.
We’ll immediately hear lies from the Dems purveyor of doom & gloomer,
NY Senator and Minority Party Leader, Chucky Schmucky Schumer,
and his second niece Amy, the peddler of humorless humor.
But worry not, disaffected tax-paying US citizens, it’s not a rumor.”
Oh this is just too, too delish to pass up. The GOP has all tree houses and they are still cannot get anything done. In this case, that is a good thing.
But it’s the Democrats fault – none of them said they would vote for the legislation they weren’t allowed to discuss, debate nor propose any changes to. You can’t blame the Republicans for not passing things with a simple ‘majority rule’ — it’s the other side’s fault! (end sarcasm)
Seriously? I could understand a little better if they believe the meeting didn’t cover the topics referenced in the email, but those folks don’t think the meeting even happened?
I think it’s something like 7% of Americans believe chocolate milk comes from brown cows, so I shouldn’t be surprised at how dumb some people in this country really are (NOT saying R’s are more/less stupid than D’s – just talking in general terms).
“But it’s the Democrats fault – none of them said they would vote for the legislation they weren’t allowed to discuss,debate nor propose any changes to.”
No. The starting point was they said they would not discuss anything other than modifying the ACA. When that happened, the republicans knew they would have no support in standard measures and so thus went to reconciliation, which changes HOW debate happens, amendments and debate of 25 hours is still mandated and must occur before the bill passes. It is now in a different area however.
“You can’t blame the Republicans for not passing things with a simple ‘majority rule’”
You have grossly mischaracterized this based on puns that liberals are saying, demonstrating you don’t know what you’re talking about. Did you know about the 25 hour rule I just mentioned for example? Didn’t? Then you’re parroting talking points.
“— it’s the other side’s fault! (end sarcasm)”
And it is. The democrats said they would not debate anything other than changes to the ACA, they have not proposed alternate bills which the republicans made 3 of themselves when the ACA was being passed, they have openly said they won’t accept anything but debate on the ACA, which means they are the reason behind republicans taking another avenue. The ACA didn’t do what the dems said it would, and there is no reason to believe they even know how to modify their own bill. Wake up kid. Freaking millennials.
It’s a suspense building scheme, that will end with the crash at the end of the ACA Death Spiral designed to lead to Single Payer Govt control under Prez Hillary. OOOOOOPS!
OOOOOPS is right. She isn’t in charge. She said she would expand Obamacare, if elected. We dodged a several trillion dollar bankruptcy hole and the freeloaders have been screaming ever since.
Captain’s other post was deleted, but it was a quality comment underlining how insane the right currently is about ignoring all of the garbage going on in Washington right now.
Turn the tables, put a (D) in the White House and on Capitol Hill, and each and every one of them would be foaming at the mouth (well, more than usual anyway) calling for impeachment.
July 24, 2017 at 1:44 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Nope. The issue here is you guys are assigning blame based on who has majority, and not what is done by who.
The ACA is not popular. The democrats refused to have a 60 vote process which would have open debate. The republicans as a result went with reconciliation, which requires 51, and that still requires 25 hours of open debate and amendments. The democrats didn’t try to present an alternate bill to the ACA, to try and start a 60 vote debate, and are now claiming they were blocked out. They threw the fit, refused to participate, had no alternate bills, adamantly said they would accept modifying the aca and that is is, and then claimed they were blocked out of debate. They are acting like babies, meanwhile, each complaint they headlined (affluent earners getting access to the credits) were then quickly modified in favor of what the democrats wanted. They have bent over backwards to work with the democrats.
The democrats are the ones out of line, and you are too easily mislead. You’re a sheep. A fool. Grow up.
July 24, 2017 at 2:14 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Are you still arguing that the D’s did not have an open debate with the R’s, even though it was discussed on the floor many times and over 150 amendments proposed by the R’s were incorporated in the plan?
Similarly, you’re still saying that even though the R’s never brought the bill on the floor for debate even once, because the R’s put in 4 items they thought the D’s wanted that means the D’s were totally included in the process???
July 24, 2017 at 4:10 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“The ACA is not popular. The democrats refused to have a 60 vote process which would have open debate. The republicans as a result went with reconciliation, which requires 51, and that still requires 25 hours of open debate and amendments. The democrats didn’t try to present an alternate bill to the ACA, to try and start a 60 vote debate, and are now claiming they were blocked out. They threw the fit, refused to participate, had no alternate bills, adamantly said they would accept modifying the aca and that is is, and then claimed they were blocked out of debate. They are acting like babies, meanwhile, each complaint they headlined (affluent earners getting access to the credits) were then quickly modified in favor of what the democrats wanted. They have bent over backwards to work with the democrats.”
All of this, is since Trump was elected. Regarding the ACA being unpopular, the public wants it gone.
You explain to me how the republicans should have acted and what they should have done when the democrats said they would not allow an alternate bill, despite being a minority, other than reconciliation?
Also, yes, I am still arguing the democrats did not allow any aspects to the ACA that would affect or control cost, they did not allow republican aspects, and as I already showed, due to how a 60 vote process works, by default if a committee votes for something, it gets added. In other words, the other side has a say, and I showed that many of your amendments you claim the democrats allowed were nearly blocked party line vote by democrats. Some of these committees happened to be majority republican lead, like say 38, to get an amendment going, and thus pieces passed.
Again, you do not know how this process works, and the democrats definitely tried to block all republican aspects they could.
DEFINITELY. It is not at all debatable, and this is why only one republican voted for it. If they had a say, they would have voted for the bill Rosenblatt!
July 24, 2017 at 4:12 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
List to me one line item section amendment from republicans which would have affected actual healthcare provisions and or cost.
I’ve shown how many of your amendments did nothing, and had nothing to do with quality of care. Would you agree that if you cannot prove republicans backed healthcare in the bill, that the democrats blocked them from deciding issues of healthcare? A 2700 page bill with pork, much of which they tried to block, is not working with the other side.
July 24, 2017 at 4:14 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So we are going to start here:
Did the democrats allow for a process in which the republicans could have assumed they could do a 60 vote bill?
And if they didn’t, what were the republicans supposed to do?
I’m getting really tired of this style of attack, and this is actually the damaging aspect.
You keep saying they weren’t invited, if a bill is put up, debate is mandated. You don’t debate nothing. It’s not how the process works. You introduce a bill, debate then follows. The democrats have introduced no bills, and want to instead start a 60 vote process to alter their bill, which would allow debate on that basis. When they say they want open debate, considering they have no bill to bring to the floor, they don’t want open debate on anything other than their bill. Will you finally agree this is true and then explain what the republicans should have done?
July 24, 2017 at 4:19 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It’s very clear considering all you and confused have said that you don’t understand how debate works in the office and how it pertains to bills.
There are literally rules on debate hours, amendments, committees, etc. The government debates particulars on the floor for a bill, the committees are made to engage in crafting the bill outside of the debate floor, the convene, after they vote on it, and then the result of that adds it as an amendment.
The debate does not start until a bill is on the floor. This is what you don’t understand. You are so ignorant, you think they were stopped from say getting in a room and talking. They weren’t stopped.
After they decided to bring no bills of their own, and refused to do anything other than a process to modify the ACA, the republicans decided the only path was reconciliation. There was no other way to get a new bill on the floor as the democrats refused. They then started putting bill after bill on the floor. They put in actual huge aspects of democrat wants so as to not tick them off. That is gracious, they don’t have to do that. There will still be debate, at a different point in the process, 25 hours, with amendment process. So they aren’t blocked out entirely. It changes the how.
You are now idealistically saying they were blocked out, without regard to process. It is insane.
So much for the battle cry of the last 7+ to repeal and replace. I’m so old, I remember the Republicans PROMISING replacement, not simply repeal. What a joke! Once again, proving they have one heck of an echo chamber but that governing stuff is far too difficult for them.
The major issue I see with repealing without a replacement is the lack of direction the government is giving the insurance carriers regarding various aspects, the most notable one being subsidies.
Remember how well it turned out when we subsidized corn, and other things that made extremely unhealthy foods become mainstream, and actually reversed the eating habits of the poor?
Are you aware those unhealthy foods actually used to be consumed by the rich? And the poor ate healthier than the rich with more organic food? Now the poor are stuck on the Mc Donalds type of garbage, we have an obesity crises as organic foods are expensive, (I don’t see those getting subsidized) and these same farms are often subsidized to this day.
Don’t worry though. That will never happen in any way if we do health subsidies, there couldn’t possibly be any bad affects.
In one respect here though I agree with you. Uncertainty is a bad thing. So if we are going to make a bill to replace the ACA, it should be done at the same time.
We have a plan…trust us!!!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
They do have plans, they have had many, I have listed them, and the issue we have is that 3 republicans can bring down the implementation of those plans, as the democrats are entirely blocking all plans that would replace the ACA. They insist, despite just how many regulations are entailed, that we work form the ACA. I’m sorry, the ACA is bad and should be scrapped, it is worse that the 48 democrats refuse to start new than it is that republicans have 3 people breaking away.
It is simply insane to watch the left implode like this. You guys are inept.
“The Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors so that we can produce a bill that finally provides Americans with access to quality and affordable health care,” McCain said in a statement.
Do you agree with McCain that the Republicans would have a MUCH better chance of passing legislation if they allow the other side to participate in the process?
““The Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors so that we can produce a bill that finally provides Americans with access to quality and affordable health care,” McCain said in a statement.”
This is lip service, and many people say this.
Do I agree that input is always needed from both side? No. Sometimes the other side is suggesting something that is wrong.
In this scenario though, do I believe that democrats have been allowed to participate? YES. Removing the ACA and replacing it is NOT negotiable. It has too many pages, too much that could be changed, with variable affects, and they don’t even know, or didn’t at the time of passing, what would occur, so we know they won’t do any better at modifying it.
Aspects the republicans gave them: Changing the credits to cut off based on income, not solely age, keeping kids on the plan, keeping pre existing, waiting to cut off Medicaid until they believe premiums may come down, so they aren’t cutting it off immediately, in other words, a buy off to get democrats on board, and subsides, which they threw the way of the democrats. Democrats chose to sit this one out. They were not blocked out.
“do I believe that democrats have been allowed to participate? YES.”
Come on. Seriously?? You honestly believe that?? I know you like data, so here we go.
591 amendments to the ACA were submitted by the committee’s Republican members and of those, 161 were adopted.
Now how many amendments did the Dem’s GET to propose? Zero.
Were they even INVITED to ONE hearing so they could propose amendments? No.
You can’t participate in drafting the legislation if you’re not even invited to the table to discuss it once.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/mar/16/luis-gutierrez/rep-gutierrez-says-hundreds-republican-amendments-/
When even politick, who is left leaning has to admit it on this one, you know the right were not allowed to make major contributions.
“Now how many amendments did the Dem’s GET to propose? Zero.”
They intentionally didn’t go to the meetings. I would expect it to be zero. Regarding the items I listed though, they were clearly put in for democrats, and they were not minimal Rosenblatt.
Admit it was not zero, immediately. I cannot debate someone who is foolish enough to say Zero as I showed the parts republicans added. Do you admit these were put in here for democrats? Even if you don’t admit the first, which I don’t expect you to be intelligent enough to understand, and will let slide, I cannot have you here saying the democrats were given no ability to participate. They sat it out. Also, the bill is not in amendment territory. I would also expect the amount to be zero because it never went to vote.
“Were they even INVITED to ONE hearing so they could propose amendments? No.”
Yes, they were.
“You can’t participate in drafting the legislation if you’re not even invited to the table to discuss it once.”
True, but that didn’t occur.
Rosenblatt,
In this scenario someone is lying.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/339876-schumer-to-trump-meet-with-democrats-on-healthcare
Schumer says he wanted to discuss bipartisan bills, but no such bills have been suggested by the democrats, at all, unlike when the republicans had a CBO rated plan alongside the ACA, there is no such plan with the democrats. So clearly we can assume Schumer likely meant to meet on changing the ACA, which republicans are refusing to do. Therefore, they have chosen not to make an alternate bill. They were not shut out.
McConnel has also said the democrats are refusing to work with them. And we do see the democrats without any bill or proposed changed in public, other than saying to fix the ACA. Lip service doesn’t matter to me, and it is clear what is occurring here. You say they weren’t allowed to contribute…If Schumer was bold enough to go in public and ask for a meeting, he would have been bold enough to have a counter bill or suggest changes, if he had them, but he doesn’t. They don’t want a replacement, they want changes to the ACA, and that is the non starter. That is their choice. They were not shut out.
The ACA isn’t a good bill, and right now the democrats care clearly lying about their goals. It isn’t to negotiate a new bill, and move forward, it’s to stick with the ACA, all the way.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/republicans-have-offered-three-alternative-health-care-reform-bills
Three presented alongside the ACA.
Now show me the democrat bill/s or suggestions. I’ll wait. You won’t find any, because there aren’t any.
The democrats weren’t shut out, the refused to participate other than changing the ACA.
Uh, your first link confirms the numbers I posted are 100% accurate. We can debate how meaningful the amendments to the ACA were, but you can’t argue that 161 of the 591 amendments the R’s proposed were made part of the ACA.
Your second link supports my argument too. Schumer “push[ed] for a meeting with Trump … after [he] unsuccessfully requested an all-Senate meeting with Republicans.”
So Schumer wanted to have an all Senate meeting, but the R’s didn’t let him. Then he asked for a meeting with Trump, which didn’t happen. Once again, your link proves me right — the R’s shut out the D’s from the process.
“It’s unfortunate that our Democratic colleagues refused to work with us….in the seven years since they passed it,” does NOT mean the D’s refused to cooperate with the AHCA process – it means the D’s didn’t cooperate in the 7 years since they passed the ACA.
Your last link was posted to prove the R’s tried to work with the D’s in the ACA process. I conceeded this initially by citing the ~600/160 amendments.
Can you provide JUST ONE quote where any CURRENT Republican said something like “we invited them to our AHCA meetings in 2017, but the D’s refused to show up” or “we called a vote on the floor for input in drafting this legislation in 2017, but the D’s shot us down”?
I don’t believe you can and argue your links (so far) support everything I’ve posted as being 100% true.
While the R’s included a few items they **thought** the D’s wanted in the AHCA, the R’s NEVER ASKED the D’s for their input in a formal or informal setting.
Bob,
You know. I almost don’t even want you to read and respond to what I typed before this. I want you to respond to this. How do you justify your defense of a President and WH who has repeatedly been caught lying?
Are you really arguing the D’s were NOT shut out of the AHCA process because the R’s put in those 4 items, even though it was never debated on the floor?
Are you really arguing that the D’s approving 160 of the R’s proposed amendments to the ACA counts as shutting out the R’s even though it was debated on the floor many times?
So 4 items were put in for the D’s means they were totally included in the process, but 160 items put in for the R’s means they were shut out of the process??
Regardless of how impactful those amendments may have been, is that really how one of your arguments boils down right now?
The left is inept because Republicans can’t pass their bill taking insurance away from 30 million people to cut taxes on the rich. They need 100 seats in the Senate. Good old independent both sides Bob. So stupid. Pure ignorance. Literally everything is Democrats’or Obama’so fault. Twitter bots have more depth than this.
>Uh, your first link confirms the numbers I posted are 100% accurate
But that’s not what he has been told or what he wants to believe so he won’t consider it. The truth of the matter is, Democrats debated and held committee hearings for almost a year: Republicans didn’t hold one, and wouldn’t even show their bill to Republicans. This link came up 1st when he searched for ‘debunked’ therefore it proves him right, even if it didn’t say what he claimed.
Democrats are outrageous for 1 filibuster on this while Republicans broke all records for filibuster and obstruction and people like this idiot cheered it.
Now the president is considering attempting to make himself and his family above the law by researching pardoning himself, and they will still support it, and him, because they are anti American fascists.
Bob is a pathological liar, I don’t get why you waste time letting him pretend to debate.
It’s shame that with majority leadership that things cannot get done. Most people with common sense knew that the healthcare problem was extremely complex with deep rooted issues but all some gullible voters heard was “trust me folks I’m a business man, I’m a negotiator, I make really big deals”. Several other good Republican candidates were drowned out by this BS during the primaries and now we’re stuck with the “I’ll be too busy to play golf” huckster that will do everything in his power to deflect criticism and distance himself from blame.
Republicans are now saying they didn’t know governing would be so hard… Sad…VERY sad.
“Republicans are now saying they didn’t know governing would be so hard… Sad…VERY sad.”
Context and citation needed. If they are talking about democrats refusing to scrap the ACA, they would be correct.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-grand-promises-to-very-very-quickly-repeal-obamacare-run-into-reality/2017/07/18/91b5f220-6bd3-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html?utm_term=.00cf47d61bd7
Battle cry? Campaign pledge, maybe. Battle cry is hyperbole to try to emphasize a minor delay in wiping ACA off the books.
I must give credit where credit is due. I applaud the Republicans who are opposing this bill and putting the people ahead of their campaign promises.
They know this bill is bad, and most likely worse than the PPACA, and are standing up against the GOP leadership for what is right.
I would applaud them, but only one of the 4 who stood up to the bill did so because it was too harsh and removed too much. The other three were various levels of garbage about it not going far enough.
Some men just want to watch the world burn. I would applaud them if they actually had some shred of decency and love for their fellow man, and not just for their pocketbooks, but that is not the case.
Nice “Batman” reference!
I agree, those who said it doesn’t go far enough need to have their Christian values they brag about so much checked.
“I must give credit where credit is due. I applaud the Republicans who are opposing this bill and putting the people ahead of their campaign promises.
They know this bill is bad, and most likely worse than the PPACA, and are standing up against the GOP leadership for what is right.”
Two words: Lip service, on your end.
Removing a mandate for insurance, and thus having less people insured, does not translate to less people receiving care.
You are forgetting that the majority of new insureds are young, and thus them not being insured and not receiving insurance premium credits at worst leaves them equal. This is especially true because standard doctor visits, which would be cheaper doing outside of insurance, is the typical exposure they will have, and if they are poor and have a massive exposure (aka heart attack/cancer/etc)they do have access to government assistance and or automatic care.
What we had before the ACA was better than the ACA, and the current republican plan is also better. It removes the regulations that increased costs, and gives credits to be able to buy insurance, and directs the healthiest to other avenues that work better.
@Ron; explain how delaying the repeal (and replacement?) is putting the people ahead of ANYTHING when the ACA death spiral is making the HC and HI market perilous and health care shortages frustrating to MOST Americans?
Do not dodge this simple request to explain. Ready, steady, … GO!
Simple. This bill is worse for the people than the PPACA. And that is saying a lot.
Besides, the most recent strategy is to delay the end of the PPACA for 2 years to work on a replacement.
Question: What is the difference between repealing now with a future effective date of 2 years, and working on a simultaneous repeal and replace for another year with the same effective date?
Answer: The Republicans, especially President Trump, are ONLY after a political victory.
I doubt that R’s will pass anything.
How do you think the ACA will do?
( Unlimited in High Tech Healthcare for everyone with no increase in revenue.)
BP
Once gain the elected officials have failed the population.
Customer service at the market place is horrible. The web site is horrible. The govt just needs to get out of the way of the people that know what they are doing. Put distribution back in the hands of regulated / licensed / insured / trained Bonded people that actually care about the local population and know the local markets / networks.
After fighting for 6 months to get my health care back (it was cancelled due to a web site error) I ran the reinstatement and made my payment. Now I am getting reminders to pay my premium. Where did my premium money go?
Additionally, they cancelled my dental and no one can tell me why. At the very least, when the carrier messes things up, we the people have recourse and can absolutely count on things getting fixed in 30 days – not 6 months on an expedited basis.
How much more time do I need to spend on the phone trying to fix what they screwed up?
Shame on the R’s that are not on board. Shame on the D’s that aren’t on board. What ever it is, it cant be worse.
I agree with the sentiment, here. Let the government regulate pricing and market fairness, but ensure that standard private carriers are the ones servicing these accounts.
It is unconscionable that someone’s experience should be as bad as yours.
With it taking them 6 months to look at my bills and determine I was paying what I should be paying, it speaks to their work load – there are many more then just me having this issue.
“I agree with the sentiment, here. Let the government regulate pricing and market fairness, but ensure that standard private carriers are the ones servicing these accounts.”
The market has to regulate the availability and market, otherwise sections become stagnant that can go down.
If you can’t go to a doctor, and he can’t set pricing, and the next one has set pricing to similar amounts, competition cannot work.
This shows a great ineptitude into how the market works.
Again: Watch some Ben Shapiro commentary on this, for the love of God.
Are you saying the ACA is not working out well for you?
Just give it another year….. it will be worse.
BP
The BIG shame is that these politicians can’t put a committee of Republicans and Democrats together to come up with a new plan, one that revamps the entire way we buy and use medical plans.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
The hardest of hardcore right-wingers are who killed this bill, not your so-called RINOs, who have almost entirely been run out of office by tea party types and soon to be replaced again by proto-fascist, racist alt-right types.
The democrats have had no say in the matter, it only had to pass on a majority vote, and the GOP couldn’t even get that done, even with kickbacks to individual states.
If you let the ACA go belly up with replacing it, millions will be thrown off of coverage immediately. Those with preexisting conditions will lose access to necessary treatments, and a serious decline in physical and mental health will sweep the nation.
Do you want that blood and heartache on your party’s shoulders? By all means, enjoy the 2018 election season if you manage to do so. It will be a bigger rallying cry for maligned voters than having an orange turd in the office of presidency.
Doug, are you sure you are not UW or Actu who changed your moniker to slam Republicans? Democrats messed up Healthcare in this country and that is a FACT. Hard to clean up that massive failure.
Democrats only failed because they didn’t go far enough. Giving poor red states the option to reject increased Medicaid funding helped set those states’ exchanges up to fail. Those governors and representatives from those states want to point the finger, but they should be pointing it at themselves.
The ACA is the baby step the country needed to take to realize that everyone deserves the chance at health care. If the GOP wants to improve on it, great, if not, they need to get out of the way in ’18 to let people who know how to legislate and govern improve on things the ACA laid the ground work for.
Thank you for commenting on the lack of accepting the Medicare Expansion as a reason some state exchanges are failing right now. I know neither of us are saying it’s the only reason, but it’s certainly a contributing factor.
Doug is not UW. It’s very clear in the behavior differences Agent.
As for you Doug:
“Democrats only failed because they didn’t go far enough. Giving poor red states the option to reject increased Medicaid funding helped set those states’ exchanges up to fail.”
What are you talking about? Are you honestly trying to say that more companies failed in red states? Proof needed. Here’s something I found real quick.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gobankingrates/10-best-and-worst-states_b_9030422.html
Note the worst is a Liberal state, New York, and Texas is in the top three. The ACA did not fail solely due to who opted out of certain small sections of the ACA. That is hogwash.
“Those governors and representatives from those states want to point the finger, but they should be pointing it at themselves.”
Nope. You have far to simple of a way of looking at things. I still haven’t seen any links and studies from you…It’s funny how much you bragged about this.
I guess when you argue Agent it’s easy to say that, as you lambast him, especially when you’re on the ruling/winning side in society, the one that people will agree with you easily. When you’re on the rough one, and have ideas that don’t conform to “I love people, you hate people!” come back and talk to me.
I get the back end of that all the time, and I assure you, that you don’t.
Racist, bigoted, xenophobic person, you want Muslims to die, and despite being Mexican, you hate Mexicans, and by the way did I mention you want poor people to die?
>What are you talking about? Are you honestly trying to say that more companies failed in red states? Proof needed. Here’s something I found real quick.
Red states blocked the Medicaid expansion. Instead of worrying about your pathetic online debates and getting your knowledge by looking up things “real quick,” stop posting and educate yourself. An actual education, not one where The Southern Strategy is fake, climate change is fake, and data means whatever you think even if it’s exactly opposite what you claim, like with your stupid Reagan rants.
On second thought, just STFU, you are in a fantasyland. Most people have almost no savings and you think they can afford most medical care. Just clueless uninformed and unintelligent.
Hooray for red states blocking Medicaid expansion!
LBJ stands for Lock Box Raider Johnson, who created a Ponzi Scheme that Bernie Madoff could never have envisioned or risked implement.
I don’t see how you can force anyone to ‘STFU’ on this website now that your BOTs have been neutered after I petitioned the management of IJ to do so. Perhaps you can visit your local coffee hole and pay some patrons to visit IJ and down vote Conservatives posts that irk you the most? If that works, ask Georgie Sore-os for reimbursement for your ‘Socialist Soldier’ work.
That would all be on the dems. They jammed it through. Its their fault things are this bad and getting worse.
“The hardest of hardcore right-wingers are who killed this bill, not your so-called RINOs, who have almost entirely been run out of office by tea party types and soon to be replaced again by proto-fascist, racist alt-right types.
This is all I need to read to see how ignorant you are. proto-fascist, racist alt right types? Name a few. List their fascist laws and their racist laws.
“The democrats have had no say in the matter, it only had to pass on a majority vote, and the GOP couldn’t even get that done, even with kickbacks to individual states.”
The republicans kept pre existing conditions to appease them, as well as kids on policies, as well as threw in subsidies to some degree, as well as made sure credits would have cut offs based on income. They had every say. They are the ones who chose to not do anything other than modify the ACA because they are being political.
“If you let the ACA go belly up with replacing it, millions will be thrown off of coverage immediately.”
The majority who are thrown off coverage would be better off not having to buy it. If they had a crises they would have to receive care if they had an event, and those who were actually poor would still likely get assistance. My brother who landed out of a job while he was making $70,000 had a leg injury. The state covered it. In full, while he was out of a job. For all other typical avenues, people can afford a doctor visit, and all too often, it’s actually cheaper without insurance. With my carrier I’ve specifically had set pricings (many times that federal or state regulations mandate) be more expensive than just paying myself and not using insurance. And you above said you would rather have more of these regulations. Insane.
“Those with preexisting conditions will lose access to necessary treatments, and a serious decline in physical and mental health will sweep the nation.” Nope. If that’s true, we should have had a vast health increase sweep the nation. Oops! That didn’t happen.
“Do you want that blood and heartache on your party’s shoulders?”
As usual the giant shame sandwich of a liberal, we are loving, you want people to die! Instead of I don’t know, saying that maybe the system you think works doesn’t.
“By all means, enjoy the 2018 election season if you manage to do so.”
This has no place here other than to gloat.
“It will be a bigger rallying cry for maligned voters than having an orange turd in the office of presidency”
Very mature. I thought you work in facts and everyone else here is immature?
Bob, where have you been? We have had our weekly battles on Healthcare and you may have been on vacation. What do you think about Seattle passing an income tax on their citizens even though it is against Washington State’s Constitution? What a bunch of wacko’s you have up there.
I leave often, it’s just annoying and too boring for my appetite. Then I watch more Ben Shapiro and new links to come back stronger with new info. If I parrot the same thing to people saying the same thing, I’ll become just as bad. I just needed a reset.
On the Seattle tax it’s as much of a load of crap as their soda tax.
Yes, that’s the spirit. Just give up and distance himself from the problem. To hell with the promise of “Look folks I’m a business man, I negotiate really big deals”. He can’t even negotiate with his own party. Maybe he should have watched a few old medical shows like Marcus Web MD or St. Elsewhere to get an idea on how to fix healthcare. You know like he did with getting military information from the generals “on the shows”.
Our president has also said he wants a repeal and simultaneous replacement. Also that he has a great plan and it will be so easy.
Please stop cherry picking his words to benefit your narrative. This guy makes President Obama look like a presidential super star.
It doesn’t matter what TrumPresident said many months ago. What matters is the death spiral will soon lead to more urgency to repeal. When that happens, work on regulatory reform will occur at the behest of Congressional leaders who know how to get big government out of the Health Care and Health Insurance industry.
Right! by modeling it after Singapore’s big government solution…
wait a minute!
“Doesn’t matter what TrumPresident said” is about the only statement you’ve made that makes sense. You’re correct, it doesn’t matter. He ran for office promoting the fact that he wasn’t a politician but he actually took politics to the next level with his outrageous lies, embellishment of his intellect, and bellicose behavior. I suspect many Republicans felt like he’d step out of the way (which is true) once in office so they could get to work. Sort of like having a substitute teacher in school that no one listens to and is temporary.
“Mexico will pay for the wall” now means “Hey guys, can I get a few trillion in taxypayer dollars to build the wall?”
“Drain the swamp” now means “put more Goldman Sachs employees in the swamp”
Not on Singapore’s failure. On a free market plan. And following more / most of ‘HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’.
“Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors…[to provide] Americans with access to quality and affordable health care”
Excellent news!
I sincerely hope the party that controls all three branches of the government starts doing that governing thing that even folks from within their own party are suggesting they try next!
“Excellent news!
I sincerely hope the party that controls all three branches of the government starts doing that governing thing that even folks from within their own party are suggesting they try next!
Impossible when all democrats block it, you need 60 votes, and even at 51, losing 3 makes it impossible. It is not the issue of the party if 3 people plus 48 make things impossible.
It is not the rest of the 48 republicans who should be removed. Youi start with the 48 democrats. When they are out of the way, then you can see what republican ideals will do.
I posit that less than 100% of the Democrats would block it if they were actually allowed to participate in the drafting of said law. You know … doing that actual governing thing instead of trying to freeze one side out of the process entirely.
” posit that less than 100% of the Democrats would block it if they were actually allowed to participate in the drafting of said law. You know … doing that actual governing thing instead of trying to freeze one side out of the process entirely.”
They already made it clear they will settle for nothing other than altering the ACA.
Also, they were allowed to participate. They chose not to. The republicans, in order to get them to participate, included Medicaid for several years until they believe premiums will go down, credit cut offs based on income, which you should know is not usually a republican thing, pre existing condition clauses, as well as kids on the plan to the same age.
In what way have the republicans refused to let the democrats in on this?
So when one party says they will only accept modifying the ACA, and as a result the senate decides to use a 51 vote measure which moves the debate to the later section of the structure, the party who refused to allow a new bill, is not the one who chose to sit out the debate?
They still are refusing to debate a new bill.
They were wrong as it was, and couldn’t predict the ACA. Why should we trust them to fix the 2,700 page bill?
You are putting no blame on democrats here, and are bending over backwards to claim the republicans blocked them out. They didn’t.
Bob, what do you think about the Cruz Amendment to allow several free market plans and side by side, the Obamacare Plans and let the American people decide on which one they want? Does that sound like free choice instead of coercion? My guess is that enrollment would go up and people could get plans they wanted instead of having them cancelled to enroll in the rapidly imploding Obamacare.
I think Cruz’s plan can only work with more measures to remove regulations from the healthcare market.
Otherwise, it may actually increase the cost of insurance. It’s all complicated, and I’m not an expert, but I do know that insurance is far too regulated as it is.
Bob, I do agree with you that the insurance market is far too regulated as it is. The Dems passed a 2,700 page monster, then have been gleefully adding thousands of regulations and rules since 2010. That is why Obamacare needs to be scrapped altogether and a free market approach put in where Americans can choose the plan they want. If the Obamacare mandated plans do not measure up and are too expensive, they will die peacefully.
Before the election had even occurred, Obamacare was already in a death spiral and it was just going to get worse. Carriers pulling out of the market left and right before last year’s open enrollment, then this year even more saying we’re done. Many areas will be left with no Obamacare companies at all come next year. Unaffordable prices for all. So now this congress is faced with fixing the mess handed to them by a previous congress. No matter how messy though, it’s got to be fixed. This has to be fixed, it’s not going to fail, it has failed. Get your crap together, quit whining about I want this and I want that, and I need, need, need and come up with a fix. Every single one of you is responsible for this mess. Those that passed it the first time and those failing to pass it this time. Own up to it, quit pointing fingers and fix it. Sit yourselves down in a room and hammer it out. Screw your damned vacations and republicans, quit your infighting.
Death spiral will very soon cause a HI market crash. Some states have already experienced it ahead of other states. ‘Repeal and Replace’ will soon change to ‘Recover and Reform the Health Insurance Regulatory Environment’. Hooray for freedom and open competition, free of government intervention! MHC&HIGA!
Joe Manchin said he had a way to get Republicans and Democrats together to fix the monumental mess. Where has he been all this time, hiding in the hills of West Virginia?
And you are credible how? Everything you have predicted about healthcare reform so far has been wrong.
Because you say so doesn’t make it true. Thus far, most of the elements of ‘HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’ have appeared in the House and Senate bills written by Republicans. The problem in passing the composite bills is the moderate Republicans fear of being ousted in their re-election bid because they supported removal of ACA provisions that WON’T be in the final bill.
Example: Ted Cruz’s recent proposal to amend the Senate Bill is the ‘EC’ part of HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’ Since you’re so smart, you reply with what that (EC) means. Ready, steady, …. GO!
Nat, I am all for the Cruz amendment to offer free market plans and the Obamacare mandate plans side by side. Free Americans can pick which one meets their needs. Freedom of choice at its finest. Something tells me the free market plans will be more popular, but that is a wild guess.
The MANDATED plans were the ACA’s means of causing the Death Spiral via an unstable pooling equilibrium that lasted only a nanosecond after the ACA went into effect.
Free market plan choices will lead to a separating equilibrium, a la Rathman-Stiglitz model, or aka Nash Separating Equilibrium. Cruz is a smart guy. Actuaries would refer to it as ‘risk classification’ on ‘expected cost basis’. Ordinary people refer to it as freedom of choice from plans offered at fair rates and varying coverage levels.
Watch for the new slogan: “Failed so Fixing It”.
ACA will fail. Republicans won’t FIX it. They’ll repeal it and let free market forces fix it over a two year period. The needed elements are found in ‘HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS’. Because you’re so smart, tell us what that means. Ready, steady, … GO!
Give us the next date, Yogi. Your predictions are as hilarious as the cult leader who keeps changing the end of days.
Why do you need an exact date? Your team failed miserably, and more and more of them are being ‘taken off the field’ by the US voters fed up with their loss of coverage and perpetual lies by the political players who were ‘disqualified from office’ for their deceit in devising the ACA turd behind CLOSED and LOCKED-WITH-REPLACEMENT-LOCKS Congressional doors, and dropping it on the trusting public which needs its HC coverage.
While trying to figure out what the hell “HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS” means, I came across this post of yours from May 4, cheers!
“Tick, tock, tick, tock.
ACA is on the Congressional vote clock,
Repeal and ‘partly replace’ is a certain lock.
To soon be pushed off the end of the Liberals dock.
We’ll immediately hear lies from the Dems purveyor of doom & gloomer,
NY Senator and Minority Party Leader, Chucky Schmucky Schumer,
and his second niece Amy, the peddler of humorless humor.
But worry not, disaffected tax-paying US citizens, it’s not a rumor.”
LOL. Never change, Yogi. Never change.
Whether it be by Republican repeal or the inevitable crash at the end of the Death Spiral, ACA will end abruptly.
Oh this is just too, too delish to pass up. The GOP has all tree houses and they are still cannot get anything done. In this case, that is a good thing.
But it’s the Democrats fault – none of them said they would vote for the legislation they weren’t allowed to discuss, debate nor propose any changes to. You can’t blame the Republicans for not passing things with a simple ‘majority rule’ — it’s the other side’s fault! (end sarcasm)
Seriously? I could understand a little better if they believe the meeting didn’t cover the topics referenced in the email, but those folks don’t think the meeting even happened?
I think it’s something like 7% of Americans believe chocolate milk comes from brown cows, so I shouldn’t be surprised at how dumb some people in this country really are (NOT saying R’s are more/less stupid than D’s – just talking in general terms).
“But it’s the Democrats fault – none of them said they would vote for the legislation they weren’t allowed to discuss,debate nor propose any changes to.”
No. The starting point was they said they would not discuss anything other than modifying the ACA. When that happened, the republicans knew they would have no support in standard measures and so thus went to reconciliation, which changes HOW debate happens, amendments and debate of 25 hours is still mandated and must occur before the bill passes. It is now in a different area however.
“You can’t blame the Republicans for not passing things with a simple ‘majority rule’”
You have grossly mischaracterized this based on puns that liberals are saying, demonstrating you don’t know what you’re talking about. Did you know about the 25 hour rule I just mentioned for example? Didn’t? Then you’re parroting talking points.
“— it’s the other side’s fault! (end sarcasm)”
And it is. The democrats said they would not debate anything other than changes to the ACA, they have not proposed alternate bills which the republicans made 3 of themselves when the ACA was being passed, they have openly said they won’t accept anything but debate on the ACA, which means they are the reason behind republicans taking another avenue. The ACA didn’t do what the dems said it would, and there is no reason to believe they even know how to modify their own bill. Wake up kid. Freaking millennials.
And I might add KNOWING THIS the democrats are taking political actions sheltered from consequence. The democrats are taking the worse actions here.
And I can itemize how. What is insane is how focused you guys are on absurd issues. Again, grow up.
It’s a suspense building scheme, that will end with the crash at the end of the ACA Death Spiral designed to lead to Single Payer Govt control under Prez Hillary. OOOOOOPS!
Trump will just pretend that he never met him, wouldn’t recognize him in a crowd, and never spoke to him direct.
At least the Cult45 crew will believe it.
OOOOOPS is right. She isn’t in charge. She said she would expand Obamacare, if elected. We dodged a several trillion dollar bankruptcy hole and the freeloaders have been screaming ever since.
Corporations have been screaming ever since?
Captain’s other post was deleted, but it was a quality comment underlining how insane the right currently is about ignoring all of the garbage going on in Washington right now.
Turn the tables, put a (D) in the White House and on Capitol Hill, and each and every one of them would be foaming at the mouth (well, more than usual anyway) calling for impeachment.
Nope. The issue here is you guys are assigning blame based on who has majority, and not what is done by who.
The ACA is not popular. The democrats refused to have a 60 vote process which would have open debate. The republicans as a result went with reconciliation, which requires 51, and that still requires 25 hours of open debate and amendments. The democrats didn’t try to present an alternate bill to the ACA, to try and start a 60 vote debate, and are now claiming they were blocked out. They threw the fit, refused to participate, had no alternate bills, adamantly said they would accept modifying the aca and that is is, and then claimed they were blocked out of debate. They are acting like babies, meanwhile, each complaint they headlined (affluent earners getting access to the credits) were then quickly modified in favor of what the democrats wanted. They have bent over backwards to work with the democrats.
The democrats are the ones out of line, and you are too easily mislead. You’re a sheep. A fool. Grow up.
Are you still arguing that the D’s did not have an open debate with the R’s, even though it was discussed on the floor many times and over 150 amendments proposed by the R’s were incorporated in the plan?
Similarly, you’re still saying that even though the R’s never brought the bill on the floor for debate even once, because the R’s put in 4 items they thought the D’s wanted that means the D’s were totally included in the process???
“The ACA is not popular. The democrats refused to have a 60 vote process which would have open debate. The republicans as a result went with reconciliation, which requires 51, and that still requires 25 hours of open debate and amendments. The democrats didn’t try to present an alternate bill to the ACA, to try and start a 60 vote debate, and are now claiming they were blocked out. They threw the fit, refused to participate, had no alternate bills, adamantly said they would accept modifying the aca and that is is, and then claimed they were blocked out of debate. They are acting like babies, meanwhile, each complaint they headlined (affluent earners getting access to the credits) were then quickly modified in favor of what the democrats wanted. They have bent over backwards to work with the democrats.”
All of this, is since Trump was elected. Regarding the ACA being unpopular, the public wants it gone.
You explain to me how the republicans should have acted and what they should have done when the democrats said they would not allow an alternate bill, despite being a minority, other than reconciliation?
Also, yes, I am still arguing the democrats did not allow any aspects to the ACA that would affect or control cost, they did not allow republican aspects, and as I already showed, due to how a 60 vote process works, by default if a committee votes for something, it gets added. In other words, the other side has a say, and I showed that many of your amendments you claim the democrats allowed were nearly blocked party line vote by democrats. Some of these committees happened to be majority republican lead, like say 38, to get an amendment going, and thus pieces passed.
Again, you do not know how this process works, and the democrats definitely tried to block all republican aspects they could.
DEFINITELY. It is not at all debatable, and this is why only one republican voted for it. If they had a say, they would have voted for the bill Rosenblatt!
List to me one line item section amendment from republicans which would have affected actual healthcare provisions and or cost.
I’ve shown how many of your amendments did nothing, and had nothing to do with quality of care. Would you agree that if you cannot prove republicans backed healthcare in the bill, that the democrats blocked them from deciding issues of healthcare? A 2700 page bill with pork, much of which they tried to block, is not working with the other side.
So we are going to start here:
Did the democrats allow for a process in which the republicans could have assumed they could do a 60 vote bill?
And if they didn’t, what were the republicans supposed to do?
I’m getting really tired of this style of attack, and this is actually the damaging aspect.
You keep saying they weren’t invited, if a bill is put up, debate is mandated. You don’t debate nothing. It’s not how the process works. You introduce a bill, debate then follows. The democrats have introduced no bills, and want to instead start a 60 vote process to alter their bill, which would allow debate on that basis. When they say they want open debate, considering they have no bill to bring to the floor, they don’t want open debate on anything other than their bill. Will you finally agree this is true and then explain what the republicans should have done?
It’s very clear considering all you and confused have said that you don’t understand how debate works in the office and how it pertains to bills.
There are literally rules on debate hours, amendments, committees, etc. The government debates particulars on the floor for a bill, the committees are made to engage in crafting the bill outside of the debate floor, the convene, after they vote on it, and then the result of that adds it as an amendment.
The debate does not start until a bill is on the floor. This is what you don’t understand. You are so ignorant, you think they were stopped from say getting in a room and talking. They weren’t stopped.
After they decided to bring no bills of their own, and refused to do anything other than a process to modify the ACA, the republicans decided the only path was reconciliation. There was no other way to get a new bill on the floor as the democrats refused. They then started putting bill after bill on the floor. They put in actual huge aspects of democrat wants so as to not tick them off. That is gracious, they don’t have to do that. There will still be debate, at a different point in the process, 25 hours, with amendment process. So they aren’t blocked out entirely. It changes the how.
You are now idealistically saying they were blocked out, without regard to process. It is insane.