RyanTrumpCare on Life Support?

Speaker Ryan press conference, originally scheduled for 11:30 and postponed to 3:30, has just now been postponed until further notice
— Jon Ward (@jonward11) March 23, 2017

NEWS - No AHCA vote today, per GOP source. Still possible tomorrow
— John Bresnahan (@BresPolitico) March 23, 2017

Couple of questions/thoughts:

1. Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any fix? Consider: With no federal health care law existing -- and apparently that is too horrible a notion for even many Republicans to contemplate now -- that ups the pressure on Democrats to get on board with a replacement to be passed later.

If they filibuster and block that later replacement, they cannot execute their plan -- blame all of health care problems on Republicans, as they always have -- as cleanly as they'd like.

Doesn't a full repeal put the GOP in a much better bargaining position for any later health care moves?

2. Doesn't starting from zero get you to where you want to be faster? Some houses cannot be repaired. They have to be razed to the foundation. Then, the foundation needs to be jackhammered into nothingness. Then the dirt that surrounded the foundation has to be dug out, set inside a large weighted steel globe filled with air, dropped to the bottom of the ocean, and then set on fire at the bottom of the ocean.

Then you build a proper house. You do not attempt to patch up and add additions on to a crumbling, rickety house loaded with termites, asbestos, and mold-borne AIDS.

3. There is also that tiny concern about honoring promises you've made for eight long years too, if that even matters at all, and I'm quite sure it does not.

Vote Tomorrow at 9am? That's what some commenters are saying. Could just be yet another Strong Horse Bluff (we're definitely having this vote so you better vote for it!).

Could also be that my commenters are Big Huge Liars.

Here's McCarthy saying he just needs a few more votes and then he thinks they'll be ready for a vote.

Do you have the votes to pass bill? @GOPLeader: "We need a couple more to get together" https://t.co/uXS0iysp97 https://t.co/hazhsK9gpQ
— The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) March 23, 2017

Posted by: Ace at 03:32 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Corgis called

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 03:34 PM (eauMe)

2 JackStraw has your answers, ace.

I won't speak for him, but basically, Ryan's answer is FYNQ.

Posted by: blaster at March 23, 2017 03:35 PM (tewYv)

3 Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Again.

Posted by: Pipe HOlder at March 23, 2017 03:35 PM (Z/diL)

4 I guess RyanCare liked its doctor but couldn't keep its doctor.

Posted by: broseidon being a capitalist pigdog (yknow, working) at March 23, 2017 03:35 PM (oZ6kz)

5 Mike Lee really screwed up their plans.

But he was insufficiently excited about Trump, so he must be purged.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 03:35 PM (mC1ZI)

6 I was against a full repeal with out a replacement but as things stand now, it might be the only way.

So sick of this shit

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 23, 2017 03:36 PM (KlI/a)

7 a large weighted steel globe filled with air, dropped to the bottom of the ocean,

----------

The science is settled!

Posted by: Bill Degrasse Nyeson at March 23, 2017 03:36 PM (7HtZB)

8 Heard Mike Lee (R Utah) on a repeat from Mark Levin this morning and talked me into not wanting this bill.

Posted by: Skip at March 23, 2017 03:36 PM (GPaiX)

9 >>>If they filibuster and block that later replacement

Uh, ace - they'll filibuster and block the full repeal. Harry Reid let a repeal bill get to president's desk only bc Obama was there to veto.

Posted by: crrr6 (Hotair refugee) at March 23, 2017 03:36 PM (efDDJ)

10 It's great to see the Freedom Caucus asserting itself. Long overdue.

Posted by: Cloyd Freud, Unemployed at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (97XyN)

11 Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any fix? Consider: With no federal health care law existing -- and apparently that is too horrible a notion for even many Republicans to contemplate now -- that ups the pressure on Democrats to get on board with a replacement to be passed later.

If they filibuster and block that later replacement, they cannot execute their plan -- blame all of health care problems on Republicans, as they always have -- as cleanly as they'd like.

++++

They can't do that. Even if you have 50 GOP senators willing to vote for a full repeal (questionable), the Dems will filibuster that. The GOP could only pass full repeal if they kill the filibuster for legislation, something that they don't have 50 votes for. Thus, they can only tinker.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (R+30W)

12 6 I was against a full repeal with out a replacement but as things stand now, it might be the only way.

So sick of this shit
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 23, 2017 03:36 PM (KlI/a)

=================

It probably wouldn't pass, but present it and let the chips fall where they may.

That bill would be the one to do that stunt on, not a half-written mostly hidden bill that is going to make tweaks.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (mC1ZI)

13 Negotiations fell through. Back to the drawing board. It would be nice if the Donald got Ryan, the Turtle, the House Freedom Caucus, and RAND PAUL! in the same room and did some horse trading.

Posted by: joncelli, Gobsmacked Rage Monkey and Crossbowman at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (RD7QR)

14 Repeal it already.

Posted by: ALH at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (uLuPn)

15 >>I won't speak for him, but basically, Ryan's answer is FYNQ.

It does amuse me that people keep calling this Ryancare when it was written by 4 committees but be that as it may, I look forward to a straight repeal bill being proposed in both the House and Senate.

I haven't seen a good version of failure theater in some time now.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (/tuJf)

16 let the whole thing crash and burn. can't be any worse.

Posted by: chavez the hugo at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (KP5rU)

17 is this 'house' Washington DC?

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (h/uSM)

18 Hannity is talking about this. Lots of really good conservative organizations were NEVER even asked to contribute to this.

Sigh.

Not feeling good about any of this.

BTW... I still think Ryan etc. are trying to screw Trump because he's an Outsider and Not of the Body.

Posted by: shibumi at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (FkAXz)

19 *raises hand*

Wait.

*clambers up stepstool*

*raises hand*

I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)

20 Ace,

That's crazy talk.

I wise man once told me "if you don't ask, you don't receive "

Posted by: MAGA at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (A4HOq)

21 The GOPe is not interested in giving us back control of our health care...

They are interested in which part of the Fed Behemoth controls it.

This is a battle between Washington and the rest of the Country.... and the GOPe are part of the Washington cabal.

Posted by: Don Q. at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (NgKpN)

22 11
They can't do that. Even if you have 50 GOP senators willing to vote for a full repeal (questionable), the Dems will filibuster that. The GOP could only pass full repeal if they kill the filibuster for legislation, something that they don't have 50 votes for. Thus, they can only tinker.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (R+30W)

=================

You know what it would actually accomplish, though?

Political cover.

"We tried full repeal but X, Y, and Z senators prevented it, so we had to half measure it. Repealing it completely would have prevented your problems, but we had to compromise."

It's better than, "We rushed something through and sorry for your problems. Vote for us!"

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mC1ZI)

23 GOP will need 60 Senators and the White House to get what they want.

Posted by: RioBravo at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (SsblQ)

24 One thing I thought of the other day was with a burocracy, Democrats or Republicans you still get a bill written by burocracy. A little of everything for everyone.

Posted by: Skip at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (GPaiX)

25
Some houses cannot be repaired. They have to be razed to the foundation. Then, the foundation needs to be jackhammered into nothingness. Then the dirt that surrounded the foundation has to be dug out, set inside a large weighted steel globe filled with air, dropped to the bottom of the ocean, and then set on fire at the bottom of the ocean.

Damn. Teh Ewok uses his tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (XWkhW)

26 Yo!

Posted by: Yo! at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (GwIKd)

27 I have no party.

Posted by: Moron Pundit at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (xeeHA)

28 Screw you, ace!

Posted by: the termites at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (+INtM)

29 I believe Meadows is in tighter with Trump than Ryan.

Without Meadows support, Trump could've loss NC.

Ryan didn't do squat for Trump in WI.

Posted by: MAGA at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (A4HOq)

30 19 *raises hand*

Wait.

*clambers up stepstool*

*raises hand*

I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.
Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)

====================

Sunset all plans in 12 months.

Insurance companies will do the rest.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (mC1ZI)

31 I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.
Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)

----

No.

There has to be a phase out.... just like there was a phase in.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (8XRCm)

32 Trump lobbied awfully hard for this POS bill that isn't going to pass.

Another unforced error.

Posted by: Bill Wynn at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (hYLLM)

33 9 >>>If they filibuster and block that later replacement

Uh, ace - they'll filibuster and block the full repeal. Harry Reid let a repeal bill get to president's desk only bc Obama was there to veto.

Posted by: crrr6 (Hotair refugee) at March 23, 2017 03:36 PM (efDDJ)

++++

That actually didn't happen. What they did get to Obama's desk was a full defund bill, and that's what Obama vetoed. For some reason people call that defund bill a full repeal, but it just wasn't. The Dems would have filibustered a repeal bill.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (R+30W)

34 The GOPe needs a little reminder of why they hold the Senate House and the presidency, call your rep and remind them.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at March 23, 2017 03:40 PM (6Ll1u)

35 Why do they treat the parlimentarian as the Voice of God?

I don't recall him as a co-equal branch of the government and yet he has a kind of veto power over legislation created by actual elected officials.

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at March 23, 2017 03:40 PM (h/uSM)

36 if you are going to go against Trump, then going against him from the Right is the way to go. thank you, Mike Lee.

Ryan sure showed his ass on this one. ads against other conservatives, transparent Romneyesque tough-talk beltway bullshit ("gutting")... I hope this Bill's failure is treated as a no-confidence vote and we're rid of him.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at March 23, 2017 03:41 PM (wzTK0)

37 Is it petty to just want repeal so TFG's only accomplishment is Cash for Clunkers?

Which was a horrible shit sandwich, but there isn't anything to be done about it now.

Posted by: Chupacabra at March 23, 2017 03:41 PM (UUSGT)

38
Posted by: Bill Wynn

Well since you're always Wrong, cucksucker, this bill is gonna definitely pass.

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (iNv61)

39 >>That actually didn't happen. What they did get to Obama's desk was a full defund bill, and that's what Obama vetoed. For some reason people call that defund bill a full repeal, but it just wasn't. The Dems would have filibustered a repeal bill.

I've been saying this for weeks. I hope you will be more convincing because it happens to be the truth.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (/tuJf)

40 Ryan sure showed his ass on this one. ads against other conservatives, transparent Romneyesque tough-talk beltway bullshit ("gutting")... I hope this Bill's failure is treated as a no-confidence vote and we're rid of him.
Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at March 23, 2017 03:41 PM (wzTK0)

-----

"Its a binary choice." ~ Paul Ryan.

Ok then. "No."

Posted by: fixerupper at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (8XRCm)

41 GOP will need 60 Senators* and the White House to get what they want.

*not named McCain

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (h/uSM)

42 Maybe a total wipe out by a certain date then figure out to best ideas and pass it in due time. A quick Repeal In Name Only isn't a bill with much life expectancy, it will require patches just like its predecessor.

Posted by: Skip at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (GPaiX)

43 They can't do that. Even if you have 50 GOP senators
willing to vote for a full repeal (questionable), the Dems will
filibuster that. The GOP could only pass full repeal if they kill the
filibuster for legislation, something that they don't have 50 votes for.
Thus, they can only tinker.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 03:37 PM (R+30W)

It is fully within the Republican's power to nuke the filibuster. That being the case, it ceases to be a reason not to do things including the repeal they promised and ran on for 7 years.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (FTXAT)

44 CNN is now reporting that the vote is scheduled for 9 am tomorrow morning.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:42 PM (/tuJf)

45 >>>They can't do that. Even if you have 50 GOP senators willing to vote for a full repeal (questionable), the Dems will filibuster that. The GOP could only pass full repeal if they kill the filibuster for legislation, something that they don't have 50 votes for. Thus, they can only tinker.

wrong. The parliamentarian has said that she doesn't think a full repeal would necessarily run afoul of the "budgetary only" rule.

Furthermore, any ruling by the parliamentarian can be overruled by a simple majority of the Senate.

This is what Reid did when he nuked the filibuster rule. He proposed a change of rules, the Parliamentarian said that a change of rules could only happen with 60 votes, the Democrats overruled that ruling with a simple majority, then the Democrats voted the filibuster-ending rule with a simple majority.

This claim that you can only do these things with the Parlimentarian's blessing is a lie and always has been. It's yet another fig-leaf to excuse fainthearted Republicans' reluctance to be both bold and honorable as regards their serial promises.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (8rNrN)

46 some state rep wrote an editorial saying no to repeal, as it would bankrupt the state. this was a bit ago.

my state is red with some citified areas of blue.

i thought i left all this behind me when i drove out of ca.

Posted by: concrete girl at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (DPfCl)

47 "I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?"

No, a contract remains in force. Repealing the ACA lets the parties negotiate new future contracts.

Repeal any mandate that someone must buy insurance. Repeal any requirements as to what insurance policies must cover. If you want to have your children covered up until age 26 - fine, here's the cost. If you want to cover pediatric dental - fine, here's the cost. If you want to drop childbirth coverage - fine, here's the savings.

Now - what about all the other things such as the poor, and pre-existing conditions, and so on? Deal with those in their own separate bills.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Spring Sale! Get Your Vernal Vituperations at the Outrage Outlet! at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (hLRSq)

48
I doubt that there's an American out there -- on the producer side of the equation -- who hasn't looked at some provision of this bill who didn't know they were getting screwed.

While the recipient side of the equation was sure the producer side wasn't getting screwed thoroughly enough.

Let it crash and burn without a single (R) attached to the failure. Half the Senate democrats got voted out of office after they voted in favor of O'Care.

If that's not a 'heads on spikes' warning to the GOP, I don't know what is.

Posted by: E Depluribus Unum at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (ZFUt7)

49 I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.
Posted by: alexthechick

I don't know honestly. Wouldn't it defund the government covered plans/exchanges?

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (eauMe)

50 >>It is fully within the Republican's power to nuke the filibuster. That being the case, it ceases to be a reason not to do things including the repeal they promised and ran on for 7 years.

And as I have told you over and over and over, they don't even have 50 votes for a straight repeal vote.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (/tuJf)

51
What's this about ryancare still containing the mandate?

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (iNv61)

52 "Its a binary choice." ~ Paul Ryan.

Ok then. "No."

----

0

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (h/uSM)

53 All this stoopid, it hurts

Posted by: Yo! at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (GwIKd)

54 I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)

MFM: Not only will 15 trillion people lose their health insurance, Trump will kick them out of their homes and slaughter them in the streets.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (493sH)

55 The Ryan/CoC plan is more about shifting around costs to hide the pea under a different shell, and not much about reducing costs.

They love to use "refundable tax credits" to administer entitlement programs because it doesn't sound like a giant welfare program.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at March 23, 2017 03:45 PM (3OAG2)

56 And PS... Graham came out in favor of nuking the filibuster for SCOTUS. Since he has been one of the main proponents of Senate comity above all things, there has been movement there. If they can do it for SCOTUS, they can do it for Obamacare repeal.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:45 PM (FTXAT)

57 The vote will be tomorrow morning.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 03:46 PM (OFxPz)

58 "Its a binary choice." ~ Paul Ryan.

----

pssssssst....... dude....... theyre not fucking around

Posted by: Eric Fucking Cantor at March 23, 2017 03:46 PM (8XRCm)

59 It's our fault. We forgot to elect 50 senators who promised to repeal the bill AND overrule the parliamentarian.

we are soooo stoopid.

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at March 23, 2017 03:46 PM (h/uSM)

60 MFM: Not only will 15 trillion people lose their health
insurance, Trump will kick them out of their homes and slaughter them in
the streets.
---

And if any of them are pregnant, they will be FORCED to have their babies. Then killed.

Also.. "FEMA CAMPS!!!"

Posted by: shibumi at March 23, 2017 03:47 PM (FkAXz)

61 The Ryan/CoC plan is more about shifting around
costs to hide the pea under a different shell, and not much about
reducing costs.

They love to use "refundable tax credits" to administer entitlement
programs because it doesn't sound like a giant welfare program.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at March 23, 2017 03:45 PM (3OAG2)

Even though it is a giant welfare program.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:47 PM (FTXAT)

62 What do the Russians think about it?

Posted by: Yo! at March 23, 2017 03:47 PM (GwIKd)

63 What is the f#cking hurry? There are more important things to tackle. Put Gorsuch on the court, double down on the travel ban and make it a one year ban, find and deport all illegal aliens who have committed a crime beyond the crime of entering, enforce all immigration laws already on the books, and start dismantling sanctuary states and cities that are defying the immigration laws.

Posted by: colfax mingo at March 23, 2017 03:48 PM (PX+kj)

64 MFM: Not only will 15 trillion people lose their health insurance, Trump will kick them out of their homes and slaughter them in the streets.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (493sH)
------------

What if we just promise there will be health care provided in the CAMPS?

Posted by: Moron Pundit at March 23, 2017 03:48 PM (xeeHA)

65 The vote will be tomorrow morning.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 03:46 PM (OFxPz)

I sure hope not.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:48 PM (FTXAT)

66 >>>That actually didn't happen. What they did get to Obama's desk was a full defund bill, and that's what Obama vetoed. For some reason people call that defund bill a full repeal, but it just wasn't. The Dems would have filibustered a repeal bill.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 03:39 PM (R+30W)

Thanks for the clarification. Probably bc the media reported it as a repeal since that's what they do.

Anyway, my point stands. I really wish people who seem to think they've thought this through wouldn't just paper over the 60 vote threshold as if it didn't exist. The filibuster was our lifeline from a slew of additional disastrous laws in 2009-2010. Either Ace et al need to make the argument that we need to get rid of it now to get rid of Obamacare or come up with a better strategy.

Ryan's strategy is to pass a lesser piece of shit that only requires 51 votes and then make red state senators up in 2018 take uncomfortable votes on phases 2 & 3 for things that would be subject to filibuster. Looks like that plan is falling apart bc people don't seem to understand that pounding the table is not a parliamentary strategy.

Posted by: crrr6 (Hotair refugee) at March 23, 2017 03:49 PM (efDDJ)

67 >>> Couple of questions/thoughts:...

All your thoughts are correct, of course.

With the exception that not a single damn one of them has any interest is handing 1/3 of the economy back to the great unwashed.

If we stop pretending that any of this was ever about healthcare or insurance and accept that it has always been about nothing more than redirecting trillions in new "income" to D.C., it all makes sense.

As Dread Justice Roberts said, "It's a tax!" It's also, according to the talking points,"popular". Just like everyone other entitlement (which all function is entirely on debt while raking in cash to D.C.), they have created vast new sums of graft while people thank them for it! $20 million new government dependents, people!

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 03:49 PM (n3oGs)

68 I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.
Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)

You have 14 million(or 11 million, or whatever the exact number is) people whose plans receive government subsidies to cover the premium. A full repeal with no glide path for those people means that their plan is not being paid for going forward.
No pay your plan, no plan.

I want you to picture what the Democrats would do with the optics of that. And frankly, you have people who were told they had to have insurance or the government was going to fine/penalize them, if they signed up and were eligible for a subsidy, they would receive it.

So they did.

So now , pull that out from under them three months into their plan.

No, the lesson won't be "don't trust the government to provide for you". It will be the Republicans and Conservatives screwed over millions of people , KNOWING they would lose their insurance, and didn't care.

And the screams will cause the Republicans to go ahead with whatever worse plan the Dems. come up with.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 03:49 PM (9z842)

69 There was a meme going around during the shutdown, I think it was Reid and Boehner talking to each other, with the caption going something like "we'd better end this now before they realize they don't need us".

The same thing would apply to repeal first.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 03:49 PM (2lndx)

70 As to points 1 and 2. Trump won't let them. Those were his campaign promises and as we know, he takes those seriously.

Posted by: WisRich at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (hdpay)

71
What do the Russians think about it?

Posted by: Yo! at March 23, 2017 03:47 PM (GwIKd)

I'll ask Bob with the NSA. *brushes hair first*

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (PY9jH)

72 I am very disturbed by the demonizing of the Freedom Caucus by 'mainstream' Republicans. Worst of all, I believe that they are influencing Trump.

Not good.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (NBHj5)

73 Repeal won't fly in the Senate. Those Obamacare entitlements are cemented in for eternity.

To repeal is mean and nasty, and the squishes won't go along.

Posted by: Les Kinetic at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (FOLru)

74 What's this about ryancare still containing the mandate?

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (iNv61)

It still contains both the individual and employer mandates. It also still contains the penalty language... the penalties are just set to 0 (temporarily, I am sure).

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (FTXAT)

75 I'll ask Bob with the NSA. *brushes hair first*

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (PY9jH)

-------

I didnt know you were left handed.

Posted by: Bob from the NSA at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (8XRCm)

76 Christ, what an asshole government.

Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 03:51 PM (nFwvY)

77 *points and laughs at Paul Ryan*

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at March 23, 2017 03:51 PM (Om16U)

78
Is it just me or is John "Light up another Lucky" Boehner looking to be less repulsive than Paul Ryan as time passes, or what?

That's a binary choice too.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:51 PM (mbhDw)

79 Why did we ever trust Paul Ryan? I just don't know.

Posted by: m at March 23, 2017 03:51 PM (3jGss)

80 News on Patriot says vote postponed to Monday.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 03:51 PM (9z842)

81 I have to echo Jack Coldcuts on Twitter: its time to resign if you can't force your signature legislation through.

There are parts of it I liked; defunding planned parenthood, etc. But it wasn't what they promised, isn't any good for anyone, and isn't liked by anyone.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 03:52 PM (39g3+)

82 The filibuster will not survive long. If the Republicans cave and let it stand when the Democrats filibuster the court-changing nominee after Gorsuch, the Democrats will undo it themselves when it's THEIR turn to change the court forever.

It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:52 PM (8rNrN)

83 Rand Paul on Twitter:

We can do real repeal. The naysayers are wrong. Hold the line for #FullRepeal. Pull the House bill, delay the vote & let's do this right.

Posted by: m at March 23, 2017 03:52 PM (3jGss)

84 The vote is tomorrow morning? So the plan is to get the entire Freedom Caucus likkered up tonight?

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (lwiT4)

85 What do the Russians think about it?

Posted by: Yo!
---------

*stabs finger at Reset button, misses, stabs at it again, misses again*

Posted by: Slab of Meat at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (ZO497)

86 They should go forward with a full complete replacement bill that includes all 3 elements that Ryan has talked about: the Reconciliation measures, the HHS rules changes, and then the structural changes to the insurance market (state line provisions etc.).

That is a bill that should have every conservative and market based reform included. It would need 60 votes to clear the Senate and would likely die at the hands of Dems. At least you get the Dems on record (again) about keeping the misery of Obamacare in place. They own healthcare.

From there do the three stage approach.

Posted by: scofflaw_x at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (y9ZJX)

87 If we get a full repeal, I will make a Nancy Pelosi and Her Stupid Giant Gavel Flaming Skull.

Posted by: Mega at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (S3q0Y)

88 Keep these four names in mind

Rob Portman - Ohio
Shelly Capito - West Virginia
Cory Gardner - Ohio
Lisa Murkowski - Alaska

These four Senators, Republicans all, sent a letter to McConnell on March 6th saying they would not vote for a bill that did not have a plan to deal with Medicaid expansion.

There are 52 Republican Senator in the Senate. 52 - 4 equals 48.

Please stop with the myth that they can blow up the filibuster, a dumb idea, and they can pass a straight repeal vote. They can't.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (/tuJf)

89 The obvious, right, and proper thing to do is to pass a clean, one-page "the ACA is repealed, and will sunset on x date 2019" bill. One and done, absolute.

Then you start from scratch, build a better bill that works on reducing costs and streamlining health insurance. One that makes the system work better rather than just burying it in bureaucracy.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (39g3+)

90 Remember when the Alternative Minimum Tax only was going to affect less than 100 people when it was passed.

We are at this level of stoppid

Posted by: Yo! at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (GwIKd)

91 At some point they are going to have to face a filibuster like stage 3 of their stupid 3 phase plan. Let obamacare collapse.

Posted by: Biggie Rat at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (ejr6Y)

92 72 I am very disturbed by the demonizing of the Freedom Caucus by 'mainstream' Republicans. Worst of all, I believe that they are influencing Trump.

--

Trump met with the Freedom Caucus today and they gave him a prolonged standing ovation when he arrived. I think they will get along.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (Om16U)

93 You have 14 million(or 11 million, or whatever the exact number is) people whose plans receive government subsidies to cover the premium.

I'm willing to forgive that debt. For now. Keep it up and I'll want it clawed back.

Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (nFwvY)

94 76 Christ, what an asshole government.
Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 03:51 PM (nFwvY)

It's incredible; we've electorally wiped out the Democrat Party in 3 of the last 4 elections, control Congress and the Executive branch and can essentially ram every policy we want home with little to no effective resistance - reverse most of the last 8 years and quite possibly the past 30-50 (Reagan not included).

And the GOP is acting as if it has less power than Jimmy "the rent is too damn high" McMillan.

Not stupid. Collaborationist.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (mbhDw)

95 Bob at the NSA prefers you hot moronettes to use your webcams and not this pixytext stuff

Posted by: Jean at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (zZb/S)

96 Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any
fix? Consider: With no federal health care law existing -- and
apparently that is too horrible a notion for even many Republicans to
contemplate now -- that ups the pressure on Democrats to get on board
with a replacement to be passed later

Everything I have seen from every pundit on the air is that the Republicans MUST pass some socialist plan or the Party will die.

It is abosulte BS. I think most rank and file agree that a return to pre-2008 is what we need. Republican leadership though can not stand that a huge socialist program with their name on it is not good.

AND on top of all that they have added stealth gun control to the POS.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (mpXpK)

97
A vote tomorrow??

Since when does the federal govt work on Fridays??

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (iNv61)

98 I'll ask Bob with the NSA. *brushes hair first*

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 03:50 PM (PY9jH)

-------

I didnt know you were left handed.
Posted by: Bob from the NSA

She's pretty too!

Posted by: Bob's Boss at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (eauMe)

99 Burn it down.

Scatter the stones.

Salt the area with Cobalt-60 where it stood.

Posted by: Drill Thrawl at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (0Askb)

100 I have a question. Do people think that if ACA is repealed that means all of the existing insurance policies are instantly nullified?

Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)

As I mentioned a few nights ago on the ONT, my great revelation the past few years is that, outside of being competent at their specific job, a huge majority of people DON'T know any better.

Outside of their job, so many people, especially Obama and Hillary supporters, are the biggest group of ignorant dumbfucks I have ever experienced in my mumble mumble years on this planet.

They don't know better, they're incapable of knowing any better, and they never will.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (Jcg9Q)

101 Here we go again. Fine ... I'm game. This shit never gets old. Folks ... may I present ... Paul Ryan on 1/7/16 after passage of HR 3762 ...

This is the closest we have come to repealing Obamacare. And we are now sending that repeal to the president's desk. And we have now shown that with a Republican president, there is a clear path to repealing Obamacare without 60 votes in the United States Senate. We are confronting the president with the hard, honest truth. Obamacare does not work. It has to go.

Jack ... the chicken just wanted me to let you know that you've been a stallion this week. A true sexual force of nature.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (/BTP8)

102 It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Posted by: ace
------------

Say, could I hitch a ride across the pond?

Posted by: Scorpion at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (ZO497)

103 wrong. The parliamentarian has said that she doesn't think a full repeal would necessarily run afoul of the "budgetary only" rule.

Furthermore, any ruling by the parliamentarian can be overruled by a simple majority of the Senate.

This is what Reid did when he nuked the filibuster rule. He proposed a change of rules, the Parliamentarian said that a change of rules could only happen with 60 votes, the Democrats overruled that ruling with a simple majority, then the Democrats voted the filibuster-ending rule with a simple majority.

This claim that you can only do these things with the Parlimentarian's blessing is a lie and always has been. It's yet another fig-leaf to excuse fainthearted Republicans' reluctance to be both bold and honorable as regards their serial promises.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (8rNrN)

++++

First off, we don't have the parliamentarian's exact quote, we only have Lee's report of what was said. Secondly, what Lee said was said is that some regulations could be undone with reconciliation, not that the full Obamacare bill could be repealed through reconciliation.

But, the regulations that could be gutted by the bill can already be gutted by Price. Sure, it is good to lock them in legislatively, but it still doesn't get us to full repeal. The only way to full repeal at this point in time is if the senate votes to change the rules and kill the legislative filibuster. Hatch has already publicly said he won't do that. I guarantee you there are at least two more GOP senators that will be with Hatch if it actually comes to a vote. It just ain't going to happen.

That means that what is possible right now is A) more limited legislation that can be done with reconciliation, and B) what Price gets to do with the regs as is permitted by the law itself.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (R+30W)

104 >>>What's this about ryancare still containing the mandate?
Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX

that part is untrue. Ryancare says if you do not keep up insurance, you can be hit with a 30% overcharge when you do re-sign up for it. That's not a mandate -- that's a penalty you pay for gaming the system, which is probably what a lot of people are going to do. (That is, don't buy health insurance, then sign up for it when they get sick -- a 30% overcharge in premium is barely a slap on the wrist for doing that. I'd like to see a 50% penalty for up to five years, not just a 30% penalty for one year.)

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (8rNrN)

105 repeal the whole thing and honor any insurance arrangements anyone got through the aca.

no one can get new insurance anyways until next november, so no aca regulations can go into effect for new customers.

then take the next six months to write good legislation.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (WTSFk)

106
Joke:

What did one govt employee say to another govt employee on Thursday afternoon?

"Have a good weekend!"

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (iNv61)

107 The filibuster was our lifeline from a slew of additional disastrous laws in 2009-2010. Either Ace et al need to make the argument that we need to get rid of it now to get rid of Obamacare or come up with a better strategy.

The problem is that I don't think the filibuster really exists in any meaningful way today. I don't believe the Democrats would have left the filibuster in place for the Supreme Court, for example, if they had held the Senate. Nor do I believe they'll leave it in place for anything else.

So the real options are, (1) let Democrats filibuster Republican things but realize that filibustering that thing will end if ever Democrats control the Senate again and need it to end, (2) end it now and take the heat for it now rather than face losing it later, or (3) come up with some real compromise that somehow truly binds Democrats from ending the filibuster when they feel the need to do so.

The latter will probably require a constitutional amendment. But if we decide that the filibuster is a good thing (and I believe it is) ending it now increases the chances that Democrats will agree to a compromise, such as a constitutional amendment, that can be enforced.

As long as they believe that they can benefit by filibustering Republican senates and piecemeal end filibustering under Democrat senates, nothing good will happen.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (2lndx)

108 88 Keep these four names in mind

Rob Portman - Ohio
Shelly Capito - West Virginia
Cory Gardner - Ohio
Lisa Murkowski - Alaska

These four Senators, Republicans all, sent a letter to McConnell on March 6th saying they would not vote for a bill that did not have a plan to deal with Medicaid expansion.

There are 52 Republican Senator in the Senate. 52 - 4 equals 48.

Please stop with the myth that they can blow up the filibuster, a dumb idea, and they can pass a straight repeal vote. They can't.
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (/tuJf)

May I then suggest to our President that, instead of threatening the Freedom Caucus, HE THREATEN THESE 4 SCUMBAGS???

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (mbhDw)

109 Bob at the NSA prefers you hot moronettes to use your webcams and not this pixytext stuff

------

Correction.

*I* use your webcams already.

Posted by: Bob from the NSA at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (8XRCm)

110 To say that a full straight repeal is impossible is simply nonsense. It depends not on the bill but on how its sold and how you reach out to congressmen, not the repeal as a concept. A good leader would be able to make that happen. Ryan and McConnell, not so much.

Selling the repeal as a slow-implementing clean slate to start over with a better bill and showing how roundly ACA is despised along with how miserably its working is the easy part.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (39g3+)

111
And by Thursday, I mean Wednesday.

And by have a good weekend, I mean see you on Tuesday.

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (iNv61)

112 97
A vote tomorrow??

Since when does the federal govt work on Fridays??
Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 03:54 PM (iNv61)

When they are cocksure that they can rob the treasury and bugger young children with impunity.

QED.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (mbhDw)

113 Full repeal doesn't get through Senate because Collins, Murkowski, and at least one other GOP Senator. Might not even get through House I suppose.

Posted by: Self-driving car>>Safe space>>Adult coloring books at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (qYCgM)

114 Please stop with the myth that they can blow up the filibuster, a dumb idea, and they can pass a straight repeal vote. They can't.
Posted by: JackStraw

Buy off two of them, and hold massive Trump rallies in Ohio and WV every month.

Posted by: Jean at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (zZb/S)

115 Still think it's funny that so many believe the GOP is somehow against nationalized health care....

Posted by: Anon a mouse... at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (MINbv)

116 The ONLY reason Reid didnt kill the filibuster for SC nominees is not honor, but because Dems can nominate Constitution-Diarhheaing Marxist Assholes all day long and they will ALL get through. Every time.

Posted by: Mega at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (S3q0Y)

117 You have 14 million(or 11 million, or whatever the
exact number is) people whose plans receive government subsidies to
cover the premium. A full repeal with no glide path for those people
means that their plan is not being paid for going forward.

No pay your plan, no plan.

I want you to picture what the Democrats would do with the optics of
that. And frankly, you have people who were told they had to have
insurance or the government was going to fine/penalize them, if they
signed up and were eligible for a subsidy, they would receive it.

So they did.

So now , pull that out from under them three months into their plan.

No, the lesson won't be "don't trust the government to provide for
you". It will be the Republicans and Conservatives screwed over millions
of people , KNOWING they would lose their insurance, and didn't care.

And the screams will cause the Republicans to go ahead with whatever worse plan the Dems. come up with.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 03:49 PM (9z842)

Even a full repeal could fund any current liabilities for this year. Next year, not so much. Since rates got jacked way up this year AND not having insurance does not equal not having access to healthcare, I do not see people being all that upset that they are no longer required to pay exorbitant prices for not much benefit.

Even if they are upset (or even harmed), they are far fewer in number than the people harmed by not repealing... ya know, the ones paying for those subsidies.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (FTXAT)

118 All snark aside, the and best thing that could happen would be simply to allow Obamacare to collapse under its own weight. Not because of the "Democrats take the blame excuse". That will never happen. The media/ DNC will be aghast that th R majority didn't "save" it, which will, of course, because of racism/ sexism/ corporations/ they want grandma to eat dog food/ hate children...

It need to crash and burn and take all its supporters with it so people have a chance to actually learn for a change.

That, of course, will never happen. People here will fret about "losing the majority" and will go along with whatever shit sandwich comes down the pipe. No one in D.C. will part with the "income".

So, Obamacare will be "saved" in one form or another. Eventually "saving" it will require full blow nationalized health insurance and we follow Europe down the rabbit hole.

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (n3oGs)

119 ace, you're assuming any politician has common sense. They don't. They see Obamacare as a source of revenue and power, and they can never relinquish either of those. Doesn't matter whether Dem or GOP, they will never let go of The Precious.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (MZcWR)

120 Trump met with the Freedom Caucus today and they gave him a prolonged standing ovation when he arrived. I think they will get along.

*****************

Everything I read from legitimate sources tells me Trump has been very open and receptive with Rand Paul, the freedom caucus, Cruz, etc, while Paul Ryan has been telling them to get fucked.

Posted by: Captain FartsAStorm at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (NGRTR)

121
Hey..... How come I never see AtC in her webcam??

Posted by: Bob from the NSA at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (8XRCm)

122
Kittehs demanding food.

BBS.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (mbhDw)

123 Outside of their job, so many people, especially Obama and Hillary supporters, are the biggest group of ignorant dumbfucks I have ever experienced in my mumble mumble years on this planet.

They don't know better, they're incapable of knowing any better, and they never will.
Posted by: Country Boy
-----------

I disagree. I don't think that they are incapable of knowing better, it is simply that they have been schooled exclusively by agenda-driven academe and all of the media.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at March 23, 2017 03:58 PM (ZO497)

124 This is totally different than the ACA. For example, we added an H.

It's like, one H longer.

Posted by: Paul Poopyhead Ryan at March 23, 2017 03:58 PM (S3q0Y)

125 Article I, Section 5A:

The Parliamentarian of the Senate shall determine the number of votes necessary for a bill to be considered for a vote or for approval and whether the approval of an outside body, such as the Center for American Progress or the United States Chamber of Commerce, shall be necessary before a bill may be voted upon.

Posted by: The US Constitution, damn it!! at March 23, 2017 03:58 PM (3OAG2)

126 I'm not too smart with the details of this stuff. Could they just sunset the ACA, say until Dec 31, 2018?. Insurance companies could form new plans and anyone could buy the plan they want before the ACA expires? I know there's the whole Medicaid thing, but couldn't that be worked on separately?

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 03:58 PM (lwiT4)

127
The ONLY reason Reid didnt kill the filibuster for SC nominees is not
honor, but because Dems can nominate Constitution-Diarhheaing Marxist
Assholes all day long and they will ALL get through. Every time.

Posted by: Mega at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (S3q0Y)

This...

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:58 PM (FTXAT)

128 These four Senators, Republicans all, sent a letter to McConnell on March 6th saying they would not vote for a bill that did not have a plan to deal with Medicaid expansion.

Honestly, this sounds like a negotiating chip to me, if Republicans actually knew how to negotiate. I think I could leave with a few more people on social services if it meant I could buy real insurance without federal interference.

For that matter, get free market principles back into operation in health care, and the cost of covering people who can't afford necessary care drops considerably, both because absolute costs drop, and because the number of people who can't afford it drops.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (2lndx)

129
*I* use your webcams already.
Posted by: Bob

I'm sure my hairy ass is high on rotation in the vault after management leaves

Posted by: Jean at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (zZb/S)

130 Tax cut legislation should go well though.

Posted by: Born Five Minutes Ago at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (qYCgM)

131 Can a filibuster by the Donks block a repeal bill forever, or just delay it?

If the latter is the case, go ahead and propose a straight repeal bill, zero, zilch, nada in the way of replacement. Let the donkeys filibuster their little hearts out. Maybe some will stroke out on the Senate floor. Eventually, the repeal bill passes.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (WDdjT)

132 >>>87 If we get a full repeal, I will make a Nancy Pelosi and Her Stupid Giant Gavel Flaming Skull.
Posted by: Mega at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (S3q0Y)

Can you go ahead and make it now? To remind people of Nancy Pelosi and her stupid giant gavel?

It would be a great Sabo poster.

Posted by: m at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (3jGss)

133 It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:52 PM (8rNrN)

That reminds me of a scene from the movie the Life and Death of Col Blimp where (quoting from distant memory) Theo Kretschmar-Schuldorff tells Col. Candy you can't fight the Nazis with your rules of fair play because they don't adhere to any rules. Something along those lines.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (493sH)

134 May I then suggest to our President that, instead of threatening the Freedom Caucus, HE THREATEN THESE 4 SCUMBAGS???

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (mbhDw)

JJ, Where are you coming up with this idea that Trump is "threatening" the Freedom Caucus. They reported that they gave Trump a standing ovation at their meeting this morning because he is working with all sides to get them together.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (9z842)

135 ace, you're assuming any politician has common sense...
-------------

Well, now, it depends on what you mean by 'common sense'. My common sense has a lot to do with retaining my office.

Posted by: A Politician at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (ZO497)

136 >>May I then suggest to our President that, instead of threatening the Freedom Caucus, HE THREATEN THESE 4 SCUMBAGS???

What makes you think it's only these 4? Do you think the governors of those states and other who have taken Medicaid expansion aren't pushing just as hard? And these are mostly Republican or Republican leaning governors.

And these are just the ones who went on record. I can assure you Susan Collins would vote with them as well.

The problem in the House right now is that the more Trump and Ryan give the conservative wing, the moderates start to balk.

They are talking about a vote tomorrow morning so this could all be moot.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (/tuJf)

137 106
Joke:

What did one govt employee say to another govt employee on Thursday afternoon?

"Have a good weekend!"

Posted by: iSooth

You joke but I've known fedgov employees who actually did take every other Friday off. Something to do with sick days use em or lose em.

Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (nFwvY)

138
This is what you get when the first bill is already watered down crap with the compromises already built-in.

Nice going, ryan.

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (iNv61)

139 incidentally, don't forget trump in all this. he campaigned on "aca is a disaster. repeal it now."

i don't think he really cares. once he found out health care is "complex, really, really complex", i think he decided just to move it off the legislative calendar so he can get to his tax cut to stimulate the economy.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (WTSFk)

140 The bill has to accomplish two thing sin my view:

It has to help drive down premiums and deductibles faster than a jackrabbit on speed.

It also has to keep active the Obamcare plans people are on now for a temporary period until they can buy affordable insurance on their own. Say two years or a date that puts some distance of the midterms behind them so the dems cant use the optics of 14 million no longer being uninsured, because most will have found another alternative in those two years.

Not sure if any of this is possible, but that's the ideal.

Posted by: Captain FartsAStorm at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (NGRTR)

141 113 Full repeal doesn't get through Senate because Collins, Murkowski, and at least one other GOP Senator. Might not even get through House I suppose.
Posted by: Self-driving car>>Safe space>>Adult coloring books at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (qYCgM)

==================

If McConnell wants it passed, he'll exert whatever pressure he can on any Republican senator who balks. As long as he can get 50, he'll do it, assuming he wants it done.

I'm not worried about individual Republican senators, I'm worried about McConnell.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (mC1ZI)

142 We've been fucking up how we pay for healthcare since WWII. There is no quick and easy fix.

Obamacare is a bomb that will go off. You want the other guy to be holding it when it does.

This first bill was never the end game.

Expect that Trump and Price and others have war-gamed this out knowing that anything Ryan could get through the House won't get past the Senate. It's sub-optimal if it doesn't get out of the House, which is why the Freedom crowd's sticking to principle may not be good.

Is there anyone calling for a straight repeal who has a Big Precondition or a family member who has one. Don't all answer at once.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (SIY7D)

143 Trump met with the Freedom Caucus today and they
gave him a prolonged standing ovation when he arrived. I think they will
get along.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (Om16U)

Trump needs to a align himself with the Freedom Caucus rather than the GOPe. They are much less likely to betray him and they are far more aligned with his voters' interests.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (FTXAT)

144 I just hope we don't get into a situation where the perfect is the enemy of the good.

I also don't think letting this fail while on our watch is going to be a good sales pitch to either voters or the Republican base that sees we can't deliver.

My fear is if this goes down, enough Republicans get scared away to where ObamaCare is here to stay.

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (9cYRJ)

145 Off sock

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (eauMe)

146 Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 03:38 PM (mf5HN)
Empress, with the utmost respect might I propose that your sentence;
"Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who should know better believe it does." be revised as follows:
Because that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works but I get the distinct impression that many people who ~~should~~ know better want others* to believe it does.
Where others*=LIVs

Posted by: random ~~lurker~~ commenter at March 23, 2017 04:02 PM (+tRIN)

147 Doesn't a full repeal put the GOP in a much better bargaining position for any later health care moves?
---
Depends entirely on what their real motivations are.

For those of us who would take the status quo circa 2008, this is the ideal condition, as even if we don't get state lines/tort reform/etc. we're at least not in a worse position since the democrats forced the issue.

And if the Ryan crowd (regardless of whether Trump's actively in it, or just wants to sign *something*) wants to reinstall the 'popular' parts of obamacare, they remain free to do so. I'm sure it would be much easier to pick the necessary votes out of the 200-ish democrats for this, and then they'd get to pat themselves on the back for being bi-partisan.

Oh, I guess that's better in both cases. I guess the Ryan approach didn't make sense from either point of view.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:02 PM (3Liv/)

148 91 At some point they are going to have to face a filibuster like stage 3 of their stupid 3 phase plan. Let obamacare collapse.

Posted by: Biggie Rat at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (ejr6Y)

Let it get so f'ng bad that everyone screams for a full repeal. they way the ignorant GOP will do it now will suck but it will have Repub names on it.. Seriously, are they that stupid?

Posted by: Some moron at March 23, 2017 04:02 PM (Mt8T4)

149 Starting to wonder whether any significant bill is going to get passed under Trump (or anyone for a long time). Dems will oppose it no matter what, and moderate GOP and conservative GOP won't be able to agree on anything.

Posted by: Born Five Minutes Ago at March 23, 2017 04:02 PM (qYCgM)

150 I'm so tired of the calvinball.

Fuck these guys. Repeal the 16th.

Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 04:03 PM (nFwvY)

151 actually, trump should be held most responsible for the failure to repeal. the president leads and sets the agenda.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 04:03 PM (WTSFk)

152 This is what you get when the first bill is already watered down crap with the compromises already built-in.

Yeah, compare Trump's budget with the "repeal". One is clearly made for negotiating, and one is made for capitulating.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:03 PM (2lndx)

153 Cory Gardner is from CO and has turned into a flaming rino.

Posted by: Infidel at March 23, 2017 04:03 PM (uKRys)

154 They had 8 years to come up with a solution, but instead cobbler together this mess based on the various popularity polling of Obamacare initiatives.

They give no evidence that they even understand what it is that people hate about Obamacare, only that deadbeat millennials really like being on mommy and daddy's health insurance. A pox on them.

Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2017 04:03 PM (+vGDO)

155 >>I'm not worried about individual Republican senators, I'm worried about McConnell.

So McConnell is more powerful than Ryan? He sure doesn't seem to be able to control McCain and Graham. On anything.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (/tuJf)

156 Republicans do not need 60 votes for repeal. ONly the desire to use the nuclear option. Keep in mind that Hairy The Pederast used it three times during the Obama years.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (mpXpK)

157 143
Trump needs to a align himself with the Freedom Caucus rather than the GOPe. They are much less likely to betray him and they are far more aligned with his voters' interests.
Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (FTXAT)

================

That would be kind of amazing.

Making the Freedom Caucus the de facto leaders of the House.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (mC1ZI)

158 At some point they are going to have to face a filibuster like stage 3 of their stupid 3 phase plan. Let obamacare collapse.

Dig up the severability clause and make 404Care fail on it's own.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (eauMe)

159 You can't tear down that house and sink it to the bottom of the ocean and set it on fire, Ace. You would be too mean for destroying the magnificent toy chest that great grandpa Lyndon carved out with the word Medicaid hand etched in to lid. The one he made for the chirrens, donchaknow?

Posted by: Muldoon at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (wPiJc)

160 82 The filibuster will not survive long. If the Republicans cave and let it stand when the Democrats filibuster the court-changing nominee after Gorsuch, the Democrats will undo it themselves when it's THEIR turn to change the court forever.

It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:52 PM (8rNrN)

++++

You are making the mistake of thinking that the senate needs to get rid of the filibuster completely to get Gorsuch through. This is not the case. When Reid eliminated the filibuster for lesser judges and admin positions, it did not apply to SCOTUS nominees or legislation. If the GOP does decide to change the rules to get Gorsuch though, they just need to do the Reid thing for SCOTUS. There is no reason they would need to apply it to legislation, and so they won't.

The legislative filibuster will not be eliminated by this senate. No way, no how. If the Dems force the issue, they probably will get rid of it for SCOTUS nominations, but never legislation.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (R+30W)

161 157

That would be kind of amazing.

Making the Freedom Caucus the de facto leaders of the House.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (mC1ZI)

Seconded.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:05 PM (jxbfJ)

162
Did everyone forget that all this bullshit began because obama and the Democrats said the US has 40 million uninsured??

So they "fixed" that by changing the ENTIRE health care system for EVERYONE.

All the Republicans need to do is give govt health care to the poor AND LEAVE EVERYONE ELSE THE FCK ALONE.

Posted by: iSoothsayer iPro iLX at March 23, 2017 04:05 PM (iNv61)

163 >>>The filibuster will not survive long. If the Republicans cave and let it stand when the Democrats filibuster the court-changing nominee after Gorsuch, the Democrats will undo it themselves when it's THEIR turn to change the court forever.

It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 03:52 PM (8rNrN)

Ace, get real. Why didn't Democrats just nuke the full filibuster after Scott Brown got elected and halted all new SJW wish list items?

Now, they probably WILL do that the next time they have full control of exec & legislative branches, but the GOP is still trying to keep the senate as a cooling saucer. The GOP may nuke the rest of the judicial filibuster for Gorsuch, but that's a call, not a raise, and only because Democrats are leaving them no other option.

Posted by: crrr6 (Hotair refugee) at March 23, 2017 04:05 PM (efDDJ)

164 Yeah, compare Trump's budget with the "repeal". One is clearly made for negotiating, and one is made for capitulating.

Well Trump knows how to negotiate and show strength, they only know how to campaign and raise money.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:05 PM (39g3+)

165 Trump needs to a align himself with the Freedom Caucus rather than the GOPe. They are much less likely to betray him and they are far more aligned with his voters' interests.

********************************

Part of me wonders if Trump is playing a long game and setting up Ryan for a fall here.

Posted by: Captain FartsAStorm at March 23, 2017 04:05 PM (NGRTR)

166 1. Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any fix? Consider: With no federal health care law existing -- and apparently that is too horrible a notion for even many Republicans to contemplate now -- that ups the pressure on Democrats to get on board with a replacement to be passed later.

If they filibuster and block that later replacement, they cannot execute their plan -- blame all of health care problems on Republicans, as they always have -- as cleanly as they'd like.

Doesn't a full repeal put the GOP in a much better bargaining position for any later health care moves?

This makes perfect send. Repeal the entire thing effective at this fall's enrollment period. Then they have 6 months to work it out.

"When a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully." - Dr. Johnson.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (QQ+il)

167 >>>>You have 14 million(or 11 million, or whatever the exact number is)
people whose plans receive government subsidies to cover the premium. A
full repeal with no glide path for those people means that their plan is
not being paid for going forward.

No pay your plan, no plan.

I want you to picture what the Democrats would do with the optics of
that. And frankly, you have people who were told they had to have
insurance or the government was going to fine/penalize them, if they
signed up and were eligible for a subsidy, they would receive it.

So they did.

So now , pull that out from under them three months into their plan.

No, the lesson won't be "don't trust the government to provide for
you". It will be the Republicans and Conservatives screwed over millions
of people , KNOWING they would lose their insurance, and didn't care.

And the screams will cause the Republicans to go ahead with whatever worse plan the Dems. come up with.
.
.
.I brought this very thing up earlier. There is no way on Earth that anyone in Congress is going to take away anything that has been given to people under obamacare, that stuff is permanent and fixed, it is not going away, with the exception of Kentucky.

The Medicaid/Medicare expansion is gong to stay in place and the subsidies are not going away either.

There is no way to "fix" this mess because the law was written in a way that once Federal $$$ started flowing into the Health Insurance market there would be no way to turn that spigot off and everyone should know that by now. obama had six years to solidify this thing into an unkillable mandate and it worked.

There is not gong to be a full repeal, it is not going to happen.

The best we can hope for at this point is for obamacare to collapse.

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (le7jz)

168 My personal opinion is catastrophic insurance plans alone. Everything else you pay out of pocket. I think a huge chunk of medical costs is middleman paper shuffling. Not actual medicine.

List your prices: Tonsils out - Two hundred bucks. Foot amputation for diabetics - Three hundred bucks a piece, or two for $500.

Pay as you go. Costs will go down. Cancer treatment - covered under catastrophic. Sprained ankle - get your checkbook.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (lwiT4)

169 155
So McConnell is more powerful than Ryan? He sure doesn't seem to be able to control McCain and Graham. On anything.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:04 PM (/tuJf)

===================

He's gotten every cabinet post through.

He allowed the theater against DeVos, letting the two R Senators to vote against her, but getting to the DoEd.

In terms of votes, I think he can exert a shocking amount of control when he wants to. The key is that he has to want to.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (mC1ZI)

170 116 The ONLY reason Reid didnt kill the filibuster for SC nominees is not honor, but because Dems can nominate Constitution-Diarhheaing Marxist Assholes all day long and they will ALL get through. Every time.
Posted by: Mega at March 23, 2017 03:56 PM (S3q0Y)
---------

Ding Ding Ding.

Posted by: WisRich at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (hdpay)

171 if trump wanted repeal, ryan or mcconnel or any congressional rep wouldn't matter.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (WTSFk)

172 MFM: Not only will 15 trillion people lose
their health insurance, Trump will kick them out of their homes and
slaughter them in the streets.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 23, 2017 03:44 PM (493sH)

But only after he punches the babies in the dick.

Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt, still loving the Cubs, even though they are WINNERS! at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (8iiMU)

173
May I then suggest to our President that, instead of threatening the Freedom Caucus, HE THREATEN THESE 4 SCUMBAGS???
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (mbhDw)

Might I suggest that PDT is pushing through much of the Freedom Caucuses wish list and if they want it to continue they should stop acting like uncomprimising punks on his first big peice of legislation.

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (lKyWE)

174 It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Exactly. Any sane observer of Democrats has noticed that every 2 years they get more crazy, more determined to use power, less worried about consequences, and more radical. What they would never do two years ago, they routinely do today and will consider insufficient in two years.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (39g3+)

175 >>>Posted by: Born Five Minutes Ago at March 23, 2017 03:59 PM (qYCgM)

heh

Posted by: m at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (3jGss)

176 134
JJ, Where are you coming up with this idea that Trump is "threatening" the Freedom Caucus. They reported that they gave Trump a standing ovation at their meeting this morning because he is working with all sides to get them together.
Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (9z842)

Well, that was what was reported-- never mind.

Feh.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (mbhDw)

177 The problem with any healthcare legislation is the demographic most impacted by healthcare legislation: the elderly, otherwise known as the most powerful voting bloc, bar none, of any other.

In this instance, it's about perceptions: the Republicans desperately don't want to be seen as taking any benefits away from the elderly; meanwhile, the Democrats are equally desperate to make it seem as if they are.

Watch! as granny goes off the cliff, played over and over.

Conservative Republican politicians in safe, conservative districts and states don't give a shit what the perceptions are. Other Republican politicians in not-so-safe districts and states are dancing in a minefield, and know it.

Posted by: troyriser at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (Fw5cQ)

178 Is there anyone calling for a straight repeal who
has a Big Precondition or a family member who has one. Don't all answer
at once.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:01 PM (SIY7D)

I will go first... I have a 20 year old son with Poland's Syndrome who has had to have seven major surgeries thus far to correct problems caused by it (including very major spinal surgery twice). I am for full repeal and will state flat out that neither he nor I believe it is anyone else's duty to cover his healthcare costs. Thus far we have covered it. I cannot say that that will always be the case. What I can say is that neither of us believes it is appropriate to hold a gun to taxpayers' head to force them to do so. If and when we need help, we will ask for help that comes from voluntary donations.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (FTXAT)

179 >>Making the Freedom Caucus the de facto leaders of the House.

One small flaw with that strategy. Well 2.

One, Trump is not a conservative. This is the guy who promised healthcare for all and government would pay, no touching entitlements, no denying coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and kids on their insurance until 26.

The other problem is that there are at least as many moderates as their are conservatives and you do not get to 218 without votes from both camps. So compromise is the only way because you aren't getting any Democrat votes.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (/tuJf)

180 What part of "REPEAL" don't the GOP-e not understand?

Do we need to send each of the GOP Congress Critters a dictionary with the word bookmarked and highlighted?

Throw it all out. Completely. Sunset it two months prior to election day in 2018. You now have the impetus to properly find something to assist those who NEED some type of catastrophic care plan.

But repeal this MOFO immediately.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:08 PM (jxbfJ)

181 know what...? i'm putting this on trump.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 04:08 PM (WTSFk)

182 I'm tired of being screwed by RINOs.
And no one has really explained why they can't do a simple repeal. THEN replace.
Is it the Senate?
Screw those guys too then.

Posted by: Iblis at March 23, 2017 04:08 PM (9221z)

183 Cory Gardner is from CO and has turned into a flaming rino.
*********************

I'll never understand this, Going full RINO alienates Republican voters and the libtards/dems STILL wont vote for you, so what are you gaining exactly?

Posted by: Captain FartsAStorm at March 23, 2017 04:08 PM (NGRTR)

184 173 Might I suggest that PDT is pushing through much of the Freedom Caucuses wish list and if they want it to continue they should stop acting like uncomprimising punks on his first big peice of legislation.
Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (lKyWE)

=================

Isn't that part of the Art of the Deal, though?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:08 PM (mC1ZI)

185 The problem with any healthcare legislation is the
demographic most impacted by healthcare legislation: the elderly,
otherwise known as the most powerful voting bloc, bar none, of any
other.

In this instance, it's about perceptions: the Republicans
desperately don't want to be seen as taking any benefits away from the
elderly; meanwhile, the Democrats are equally desperate to make it seem
as if they are.

Watch! as granny goes off the cliff, played over and over.

Conservative Republican politicians in safe, conservative districts
and states don't give a shit what the perceptions are. Other Republican
politicians in not-so-safe districts and states are dancing in a
minefield, and know it.

Posted by: troyriser at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (Fw5cQ)

Oldsters are very aware they were actually harmed by Obamacare.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:08 PM (FTXAT)

186 108 88 Keep these four names in mind

Rob Portman - Ohio
Shelly Capito - West Virginia
Cory Gardner - Ohio
Lisa Murkowski - Alaska

This is like playing whack-a-mole with only one hole to hammer. But still surprisingly fun. So ... lets see how these four voted on HR 3762. You know - the bill just like the current one only 110 pages shorter ...

Portman - Yea
Capito - Yea
Gardner - Yea
Murkowski - Yea

Now ... I don't know The Process NEARLY as well as Nick Saban, Paul Ryan, or Jack Straw ... but I'd consider dusting off ol' HR 3762 and lettin' her fly again. But that's just me.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (/BTP8)

187 if trump wanted repeal, ryan or mcconnel or any congressional rep wouldn't matter.

While I'm impressed with what he's been able to accomplish, the man does not mind control congress. He cannot force them to do anything, and at least 50% of the rabid, over-the-top anti-Trump lunacy of the press and Democrats is to convince GOP legislators to not go along with him. They believe he really does have 39% approval rating. They really believe he may be impeached soon. Congressmen start out rather dull, and are so surrounded by beltway insider leftists they are isolated from their country an constitutents.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (39g3+)

188 Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:06 PM (lwiT4)

Cash plan with insurance for emergencies is the only thing that makes any sense economically.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (oVJmc)

189 173
May I then suggest to our President that, instead of threatening the Freedom Caucus, HE THREATEN THESE 4 SCUMBAGS???
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 03:55 PM (mbhDw)

Might I suggest that PDT is pushing through much of the Freedom Caucuses wish list and if they want it to continue they should stop acting like uncomprimising punks on his first big peice of legislation.
Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (lKyWE)

And might I counter-suggest that perhaps they are refusing to compromise on stuff like no freebies for illegals? Or 2nd amendment healthcare related BS?

How about that? How about the rest of the GOP-E comprise on the Socialism? You seem to forget who put whom in the Oval office last November and why.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (mbhDw)

190 Dig up the severability clause and make 404Care fail on it's own.
Posted by: rickb223

_____

I'm asking because I honestly want to know.

Does Obamacare "failing" mean the Free Shirt Army stops getting their free ObamaCare subsidies and MediCaid?

Because nothing in the law stops those checks being written even when people that buy their insurance start paying even higher premiums.

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (9cYRJ)

191 "Could also be that my commenters are Big Huge Liars."

Breitbart liked us.....hmpf!

Posted by: Tami at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (Enq6K)

192 AND not having insurance does not equal not having access to healthcare, I do not see people being all that upset that they are no longer required to pay exorbitant prices for not much benefit.
Even if they are upset (or even harmed), they are far fewer in number than the people harmed by not repealing... ya know, the ones paying for those subsidies.
Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 03:57 PM (FTXAT)

Red, have you been to a physician or even an urgent care recently in which you offered to pay cash and not use insurance?

Mr. Jen and I have a giant deductible plan now from his employer thanks to O care and so we get to pay in cash when we visit the doc for anything until we reach that outrageous deductible($8,000 for family). Even with negotiated rates from BC/BS, a yearly check up for Mr.Jen ran a breathtaking $700. Did I mention he has zero health issues other than slightly elevated cholesterol? Oh, but preventative care is free....no it's not. Checking your blood pressure and your heart with stethoscope and five minutes with the doc is free, everything else is charged up the wazoo to pay for illegals and those with no insurance and lawsuits.

Try a few hours in emergency with a kid with a sprained ankle or a friend who got wood chips in the eye, etc. You are talking thousands of dollars because of what has been done to our health care system.

So yes, people without insurance are going to not go to the doctor unless they are basically incapacitated.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (9z842)

193 "There is not gong to be a full repeal, it is not going to happen.The best we can hope for at this point is for obamacare to collapse. "

Yep. I believe Trump will say he did everything he could but that Schumer and the Senate Ds stood in the way.

Why this bill needs to get out of the House

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (SIY7D)

194 We could have 60 senate seats in 2018, although I don't know if that's a likely prediction.

At that point, will they still say: "Sorry folks, I want to give you what you sent me here to do. But politics is a game of inches, that's the reality. We'll beat this thing eventually."

Posted by: BourbonChicken at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (VdICR)

195 Watch! as granny goes off the cliff, played over and over.

==========================

Hey now.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (lwiT4)

196 Want an argument against Obama care?

Life expectancy for whites has decreased since its implementation.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (hqZPQ)

197 The caucus want to eliminate covering children up to 26 and covering pre existing conditions yeah that'll work with their constituents.

They got 75% of what they wanted. But apparently that's not good enough.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (OFxPz)

198
Let's punish the ever-living-hell out of people who can navigate WebMd, practice safe sexual practices, practice self restraint by now eating themselves into Type 2 diabetes, and the myriad other ways to avoid the medical system.

Fucking losers won't support the middlemen in the insurance industry, or help to support trial lawyers, why stop at 50%? Take away their property g-d damn-it.

Posted by: E Depluribus Unum at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (ZFUt7)

199 179
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (/tuJf)

You are right - Trump is and never was a conservative. He has leanings, but certainly isn't a conservative.

But regardless of who is in the WH, there is this tiny little problem called the national debt - well small problem really. Well - $20 TRILLION problem.
This is going to bite us, and within our lifetime. So people better get on board with conservatism or we will become the Venezuela of North America.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (jxbfJ)

200 174 It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

Exactly. Any sane observer of Democrats has noticed that every 2 years they get more crazy, more determined to use power, less worried about consequences, and more radical. What they would never do two years ago, they routinely do today and will consider insufficient in two years.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (39g3+)
---

They need to read Pelosi's book: Know your power.

You guys finally have power, start wielding it like Conan the Barbarian.

Posted by: WisRich at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (hdpay)

201 Jen, there's a whole model of self pay primary care emerging. Basically you pay $50-$100/month to see a PCP whenever you need

Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (+vGDO)

202 >>He's gotten every cabinet post through.

That wasn't so much him as Republicans voting in near lockstep for Trump's cabinet. Before this year, cabinet members got a lot of bi-partisan support.

The Senate is historically much less of a team body than the House when it comes to legislation. Rob Portman for one is a pretty serious guy and if he says he won't vote for the bill I would take him at his word.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (/tuJf)

203 What I can say is that neither of us believes it is appropriate to hold a gun to taxpayers' head to force them to do so.

And even if do we decide that taxpayers should cover such things, it makes no sense to outlaw real insurance to do it. That guarantees higher health care costs and lower quality health care, making it more expensive for taxpayers to cover people who can't afford it themselves, and raising the number of people who need assistance.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (2lndx)

204 One small flaw with that strategy. Well 2.

One, Trump is not a conservative. This is the guy who promised healthcare for all and government would pay, no touching entitlements, no denying coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and kids on their insurance until 26.

The other problem is that there are at least as many moderates as their are conservatives and you do not get to 218 without votes from both camps. So compromise is the only way because you aren't getting any Democrat votes.
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (/tuJf)

====================

If the Freedom Caucus knows how to appeal to Trump best, 1 doesn't matter. He's not writing legislation, but he'll go with them because they treat him well.

Also, the leadership does continue to have power over things like appointments, but it'd be interesting to see them start using that in a way that punishes Trump's allies in Congress.

They wouldn't be actual leaders, but they would be given a whole lot more deference.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (mC1ZI)

205

I will trust the wisdom of the horde; once you reach a consensus.

Posted by: Wilbur Horseman at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (14lwR)

206 In this instance, it's about perceptions: the Republicans
desperately don't want to be seen as taking any benefits away from the elderly; meanwhile, the Democrats are equally desperate to make it seem as if they are.

What they haven't learned, but Trump did, was that the democrats are going to say that no matter what the GOP does, so you go full speed ahead with what you want and intend and then sell it.

The American people may grumble and whine, but once something is in place, they put up with it. Over, and over, and over, and over. That's how the democrats got so much through. Sure they throw a fit for a few years, but then you get back in after a while and ratchet some more, because the Republicans never, ever remove anything. It only goes one way.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (39g3+)

207 Premiums are too eff'n high with this POS bill. Let it fail.

I still don't even see what the hullabaloo is about this repeal/replace crap is anyway.. O'Care private market covers about 3% of the population.

They could probably tweak it through Sec'y of HHS directives easier than this stupidity.

But "we ran on repeal!!!1! ZOMG!1!"

Posted by: Quasimodo at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (so+oy)

208 People keep making the mistake that a repeal of Obamacare will make poor people have no health care.

Poor people had healthcare before Obamacare, they just had no "insurance".

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (mpXpK)

209 1. Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any fix?

Yes. Did anyone ever read the whole O'care bill? There's funding in there for Tribes and Universities and whole bunch of sh*t that has nothing to do with cost of insurance. O'care was nothing more than transfer of wealth. Are those programs repealed? Who knows.

The O'care bill was around 2500 pages. Ryancare bill was 66 pages. I'd say there's a lot of crap left on the books that RINO's are OK with.

Posted by: olddog in mo at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (Dhht7)

210 Might I suggest that PDT is pushing through much of the Freedom Caucuses
wish list and if they want it to continue they should stop acting like
uncomprimising punks on his first big peice of legislation.

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (lKyWE)

Not that I have seen, he hasn't (at least not yet).

Also, Trump is not our Lord and Savior and does not have Godlike powers to dictate to people who are the only ones actually listening to their constituents.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (FTXAT)

211 Fuck these idiots in congress.

Posted by: Weasel at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (Sfs6o)

212 You can convince me we should have governmental healthcare when the government can demonstrate beyond a doubt that the VA works for our veterans.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (jxbfJ)

213 "You do not attempt to patch up and
add additions on to a crumbling, rickety house loaded with termites,
asbestos, and mold-borne AIDS."

Don't forget the septic system. Toss maybe 6 sticks of dynamite in that sucker as well.

Posted by: Miley, the Duchess at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (tHwdc)

214 that part is untrue. Ryancare says if you do not keep up insurance, you
can be hit with a 30% overcharge when you do re-sign up for it. That's
not a mandate -- that's a penalty you pay for gaming the system, which
is probably what a lot of people are going to do. (That is, don't buy
health insurance, then sign up for it when they get sick -- a 30%
overcharge in premium is barely a slap on the wrist for doing that. I'd
like to see a 50% penalty for up to five years, not just a 30% penalty
for one year.)
---
How about, I don't know, just *not* covering preconditions.

That would solve most of the cost problems obamacare created.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (3Liv/)

215 As an addendum to my previous post, the safe play for Ryan and the other wonks would be to expand Medicare and kill Obamacare altogether. This brings most conservatives on board and reassures elderly voters that they're not about to get hammered by any new healthcare schema.

Posted by: troyriser at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (Fw5cQ)

216 PQ)

197 The caucus want to eliminate covering children up to 26 and covering pre existing conditions yeah that'll work with their constituents.

They got 75% of what they wanted. But apparently that's not good enough.
Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (OFxPz)

At the risk of angering some people, we're in the driver's seat, and frankly I am not in favor of that no matter how politically toxic it might be to take away freebies. Once we go down that road it's a burned bridge.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (mbhDw)

217 Might I suggest that PDT is pushing through much of the Freedom Caucuses wish list and if they want it to continue they should stop acting like uncomprimising punks on his first big peice of legislation.
Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (lKyWE)

On the other hand, I would bet Trump admires the fact they aren't folding easily and are hammering away at negotiations. I'm sure he respects that and therefore is interested in accepting their point of view.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (9z842)

218 >>They wouldn't be actual leaders, but they would be given a whole lot more deference.

Who do you think is holding up this process right now? The Freedom Caucus.

I'm good with them holding out to get some of what they want, that's the legislative process, but if they overplay their hand and this goes down in flames they won't have much influence on anything.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (/tuJf)

219 I'm asking because I honestly want to know.

Does Obamacare "failing" mean the Free Shirt Army stops getting their free ObamaCare subsidies and MediCaid?

I believe 404Care yes. Medicaid is a different program funded differently.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (eauMe)

220 The American people may grumble and whine, but once something is in place, they put up with it. Over, and over, and over, and over. That's how the democrats got so much through. Sure they throw a fit for a few years, but then you get back in after a while and ratchet some more, because the Republicans never, ever remove anything. It only goes one way.
.................
The old ladies in the nursing homes only because of Medicaid expansion are going to "live with it"?

The fucking sob stories will be a permanent nightly feature on all the news broadcasts.

Posted by: Quasimodo at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (so+oy)

221 Big Fat Meanie, correct. The money spent on healthcare has gone up by huge amounts every year for the last ?4? years. The average lifespan of Americans has gone down this year, for the first time since the stat has been measured 77 years ago.

All of this was painfully easy to predict in 2010.

Posted by: BourbonChicken at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (VdICR)

222 The caucus has been freed to "vote their consciences ". Whatever that means. But I bet the phones are lighting up.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (OFxPz)

223 The caucus want to eliminate covering children up to
26 and covering pre existing conditions yeah that'll work with their
constituents.

They got 75% of what they wanted. But apparently that's not good enough.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:10 PM (OFxPz)

They ran on repeal... only repeal is good enough.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (FTXAT)

224 213 "You do not attempt to patch up and
add additions on to a crumbling, rickety house loaded with termites,
asbestos, and mold-borne AIDS."

Don't forget the septic system. Toss maybe 6 sticks of dynamite in that sucker as well.
Posted by: Miley, the Duchess at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (tHwdc)

Of note: the lot is on the worst street in East St. Louis, IL.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (mbhDw)

225 I will trust the wisdom of the horde; once you reach a consensus.
Posted by: Wilbur Horseman at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (14lwR)

You need to have a good long hard think about all your life choices if you're trusting the wisdom of the Horde.

I mean, distributed Horde knowledge will build us the yugest, classiest, most bigly compound once the ZA comes but distribued Horde knowledge will also keep caught up in knife fights over shag vs. hardwood so, you know.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (mf5HN)

226 217
On the other hand, I would bet Trump admires the fact they aren't folding easily and are hammering away at negotiations. I'm sure he respects that and therefore is interested in accepting their point of view.
Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (9z842)

====================

Trump is not the guy who starts from a middle position, as we all know.

Does he respect the people who do that and he walks all over them, or the people who start from their own extreme and argue inward?

I bet I know which way he goes...

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (mC1ZI)

227 Poor people had healthcare before Obamacare, they just had no "insurance".

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (mpXpK)

Yup!

Everyone in America has healthcare. Imagine the front page news if one wetback were denied care for a hangnail....

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (rF0hx)

228 "The other problem is that there are at least as many moderates as their are conservatives and you do not get to 218 without votes from both camps. So compromise is the only way because you aren't getting any Democrat votes.
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:07 PM (/tuJf)"

How did they manage to pass it 7-8 times with Obama and not now?

Some combination of gutless and playing the rubes.

Posted by: spoonfeed me at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (bcDxW)

229 Gwenneth Paltrow is posting about butt stuff

Doesn't she sell vagina rocks?

Posted by: Yo! at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (GwIKd)

230 187: but as far as i have seen, trump has shown absolutely zero initiative for repeal. if he did we'd certainly be closer to that possibility.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 04:15 PM (WTSFk)

231 this seems like some more cowardly gop bullshit, like there's a coterie of advisors saying they could lose the 2016 election if they push too hard.

trump's gonna be prez for at east 4 years, may as well take things slow on healthcare while focusing on shutting the border.

Fuck, the news here said unescorted child minors, like Guatemalian 19 year olds who need to be in class with your 12 year old daughters, are showing up by the hundreds.

Also, the judiciary has declared war on trump, may want to get on that soon.

Posted by: Joe Inaugurating 45 in DC at March 23, 2017 04:15 PM (55//3)

232 " Well - $20 TRILLION problem.
This is going to bite us, and within our lifetime. "

Bigger issue is GDP growth. World of difference between 3.5% versus 1.0% run out over a decade or two

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (SIY7D)

233 227 Poor people had healthcare before Obamacare, they just had no "insurance".

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (mpXpK)

Yup!

Everyone in America has healthcare. Imagine the front page news if one wetback were denied care for a hangnail....

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (rF0hx)

"Wetback" is a charged word. Suggest changing to Dry Front.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (mbhDw)

234 218 Who do you think is holding up this process right now? The Freedom Caucus.

I'm good with them holding out to get some of what they want, that's the legislative process, but if they overplay their hand and this goes down in flames they won't have much influence on anything.
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:13 PM (/tuJf)

==================

That's a reasonable assumption of what happens next.

But I think that since Democrats won't cooperate on anything, there's a chance that the Freedom Caucus could end up with a larger place at the table next time.

They've shown their ability to tank the bill. Ryan better take their concerns into account next time or it'll happen again.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (mC1ZI)

235 The old ladies in the nursing homes only because of Medicaid expansion are going to "live with it"?

You don't seem to have a clue what I'm saying here. Feel free to scroll up and read previous posts for context and information.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (39g3+)

236 Favorite quote from the post: "Raze it to the foundation"

Posted by: Draki at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (MX8/Z)

237 That would solve most of the cost problems obamacare created.
Posted by: Methos
.............
at the cost of some people being squeezed out of being able to get any insurance.. I'm sure that's OK with most of you guys here. cuz.. fuck 'em.. ain't my fault the bitchez got cancer...

Posted by: Quasimodo at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (so+oy)

238 Of note: the lot is on the worst street in East St. Louis, IL.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (mbhDw)

All the better!

Posted by: Miley, the Duchess at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (tHwdc)

239 "There is not gong to be a full repeal, it is not
going to happen.The best we can hope for at this point is for obamacare
to collapse. "

Yep. I believe Trump will say he did everything he could but that Schumer and the Senate Ds stood in the way.

Why this bill needs to get out of the House

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (SIY7D)

No it doesn't.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (FTXAT)

240 Maybe we should just have someone trip Ginsburg down the SCOTUS stairs and get another mandate challenge back in the courts.

Posted by: crrr6 (Hotair refugee) at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (6GiCM)

241 Hey you do realize that some of the ideas in Obamacare were Republican. Oh yeah and popular with people. Like the coverage up to age 26. I don't get why that's controversial. I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.

But yeah. Full repeal or nothing! Even if it means repeal is a fig leaf for something we will put in our new bill.

Give me a break.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (OFxPz)

242 235 The old ladies in the nursing homes only because of Medicaid expansion are going to "live with it"?

You don't seem to have a clue what I'm saying here. Feel free to scroll up and read previous posts for context and information.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (39g3+)

==================

Old ladies in nursing homes wouldn't already be eligible for Medicare?

Who knew?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (mC1ZI)

243 232 " Well - $20 TRILLION problem.
This is going to bite us, and within our lifetime. "

Bigger issue is GDP growth. World of difference between 3.5% versus 1.0% run out over a decade or two
Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (SIY7D)

Considering that govt. expenditures are part of GDP and that we are $20 trillion in deficits and +$200 trillion in debt, growth is not the issue. It's the endless borrowing/stealing from our children and grandchildren that will collapse the society.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (mbhDw)

244 "Wetback" is a charged word. Suggest changing to Dry Front.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton

Aqua reverse?

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (eauMe)

245 Favorite quote from the post: "Raze it to the foundation"
---------------------------------------

I was stunned to discover that Ace knows where I live.

Posted by: Wilbur Horseman at March 23, 2017 04:18 PM (14lwR)

246 I just don't understand why health insurance is a government thing at all. At all.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:18 PM (lwiT4)

247 236 Favorite quote from the post: "Raze it to the foundation"
Posted by: Draki at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (MX8/Z)

===================

I love the word raze.

I've always wondered if people who don't know the word were confused when Gandalf said, "They will raze Minas Tirith to the ground!" in The Return of the King.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:18 PM (mC1ZI)

248 "Wetback" is a charged word. Suggest changing to Dry Front.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (mbhDw)

Illegal invader?

Alien soldier?

Gate-crashing rapist drug-dealer?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 23, 2017 04:18 PM (rF0hx)

249 ... it's presidential leadership. trump campaigned on repeal as much as a wall and jobs.

if he put the pressure on congress for repeal, ryan and mcdonnell and the rest would have less influence.

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (WTSFk)

250 >>How did they manage to pass it 7-8 times with Obama and not now?

Because as has been said many times they knew it would be vetoed. What it was, what Ryan said at the time, was a proof of concept that they could, through budget reconciliation which is the process they are doing now, get a bill to begin repealing Obamacare.

And that was all it was which is why there was none of this negotiating and grandstanding.

And they only got it through the Senate a grand total of 1 time so the idea that they have done this 7 or 8 times before is wrong.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (/tuJf)

251 244
Aqua reverse?
Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (eauMe)

Aqua Vulva. For Gwyneth.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (mbhDw)

252 So are we agreed that if Republicans don't do anything to fix/repeal ObamaCare in the next two years, we're not voting for any of them in 2018?

I mean, heck. Obama's proven you can rule by EO if you're President, and I think we've all gotten over the notion that we still live in a country governed by the Constitution, so why not let Trump do the same? Who cares what happens to Congress?

Posted by: T at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (IKdzI)

253 Just take an aspirin.

Posted by: Dr. Deplorable at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (Tyii7)

254 0 174 It's amusing but a little bit sad that some of you still seem to think the Democrats are willing to treat you with honorable behavior if you show it to them.

I never did understand why charlie brown didn't just kick Lucy's teeth down her throat

Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (nFwvY)

255 How about, I don't know, just *not* covering preconditions.

That would solve most of the cost problems obamacare created.
Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (3Liv/)

Here's the thing about preconditions, what do you do about, say, diabetics?

Children born with congential problems that then age out of parental coverage?

Hell, what do you do about me and my thyroid problems that will never go away and thus will always be a precondition?

There's the devil's advocate part about needing some type of precondition coverage provision.

The rest of me says dude the whole have to be on the policy for a year before coverage kicked in thingy seemed to work fine before and then the HIPAA "fix" that if you maintain coverage without more than a time period I am too lazy to look up it wasn't a "precondition" seemed to work okay too.

The thing is that there will never, ever, ever be a perfect solution to any of this so what's a not quite so horrible option.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (mf5HN)

256 Steny Hoyer on Cavuto. Someone get the hook.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (PY9jH)

257 Considering that govt. expenditures are part of GDP and that we are $20 trillion in deficits and +$200 trillion in debt, growth is not the issue.

It's the $230 trillion in unfunded liabilities, (pensions at the state, county, & local level), that will cause this country to go tits up.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (eauMe)

258 Jen, there's a whole model of self pay primary care emerging. Basically you pay $50-$100/month to see a PCP whenever you need
Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (+vGDO)

Yes, I know, I have a friend who is a member of one of those types of practices and she likes it. She also was paying huge premiums every month for insurance until she was eligible for Medicare and is still paying for secondary insurance to cover what Medicare doesn't cover. Her Primary care concierge service doesn't cover hospital visits and outside lab charges.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (9z842)

259 248 Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 23, 2017 04:18 PM (rF0hx)

You are the last person I expected to not get my humor.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (mbhDw)

260 This whole "wait till it collapse" argument is one that I honestly would like a wonk to explain to me.

This idea that there's going to be an official "it's done and we go back to how it was before" is not how government programs work.

Isn't basically every entitlement a "collapsed" government program?

If it collapses, the same dynamic of scared Republicans saying "we can't throw people off their healthcare!!" will be there. And then there's serious talk of single payer and just bailing everyone out.

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (9cYRJ)

261 Hey you do realize that some of the ideas in Obamacare were Republican. Oh yeah and popular with people. Like the coverage up to age 26. I don't get why that's controversial. I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.

Posted by: Marcus T
...............
most people think it's giving something away for free, It's not.. you still gotta pay to have your kid on your insurance... and it can be expensive. It's not a freebie..

Posted by: Quasimodo at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (so+oy)

262 Who names a boy "Steny"?

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (PY9jH)

263 Some houses cannot be repaired. They have to be razed to the foundation. Then, the foundation needs to be jackhammered into nothingness. Then the dirt that surrounded the foundation has to be dug out, set inside a large weighted steel globe filled with air, dropped to the bottom of the ocean, and then set on fire at the bottom of the ocean.

That's what they did to the local Burger King. The one built in in place also became nasty is a short time. Repeal, stop, do not replace.

Posted by: Lurking Moron at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (1L9V9)

264 253 Just take an aspirin.
Posted by: Dr. Deplorable at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (Tyii7)

Where, to the movies?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (mbhDw)

265 209 1. Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any fix?

Yes. Did anyone ever read the whole O'care bill? There's funding in there for Tribes and Universities and whole bunch of sh*t that has nothing to do with cost of insurance. O'care was nothing more than transfer of wealth. Are those programs repealed? Who knows.

The O'care bill was around 2500 pages. Ryancare bill was 66 pages. I'd say there's a lot of crap left on the books that RINO's are OK with.

Posted by: olddog in mo at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (Dhht7)

++++

I haven't read either bill, but theoretically, it takes a lot less room to repeal something than enact it. For example, if pages 232-239 of Obamacare are about funding for tribes, it only takes a simple paragraph to say sections this, that, and the other are hereby repealed.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (R+30W)

266 The other problem is that there are at least as many moderates as their
are conservatives and you do not get to 218 without votes from both
camps. So compromise is the only way because you aren't getting any
Democrat votes.
---
What exactly have the 'moderates' compromised on?

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (3Liv/)

267 You joke but I've known fedgov employees who actually did take every other Friday off. Something to do with sick days use em or lose em.
Posted by: Lord Sir x at March 23, 2017 04:00 PM (nFwvY)

Yup. I ranted about this yesterday. We have literally become a society built on the idea of inventing reasons to pay people not to work.

It's also not limited to the public sector.

Call me crazy, but foosball tables, gyms, etc. are not incentives for me to work somewhere. Skip the crap and pay me. I'm here to work. The more I produce, the more money we earn. When we're not earning money, I will go home, go to the gym, or play foosball on my own time.

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (n3oGs)

268 Old ladies in nursing homes wouldn't already be eligible for Medicare?

Who knew?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:17 PM (mC1ZI)
======================

Old ladies in nursing homes are likely to be on Medicaid, not Medicare. Medicare does not cover nursing home care. Nursing homes will charge you $9000 per month until they've spent you down to nothing, at which point Medicaid steps in and covers your care.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (lwiT4)

269 Like the coverage up to age 26. I don't get why that's controversial. I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.

-----

My policy covering me, my wife and my two sons the last year before they got out on their own cost me more monthly than my mortgage payment.

Im guessing youre employer funded.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (8XRCm)

270
And might I counter-suggest that perhaps they are refusing to compromise on stuff like no freebies for illegals? Or 2nd amendment healthcare related BS? How about that? How about the rest of the GOP-E comprise on the Socialism? You seem to forget who put whom in the Oval office last November and why.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (mbhDw)

2nd Amendment healthcare related BS ? I don't know what you mean.But do you think the establishment GOP really wants the wall built or government agencies slashed or massive budget cuts or immigration reform? How does that get done if the Freedom Caucous poisons the well with the president?

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (lKyWE)

271 >>>246 I just don't understand why health insurance is a government thing at all. At all.
Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:18 PM (lwiT4)

The government understands. As Saul Alinsky said, control the people's access to health care and you control the people.

Posted by: T at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (IKdzI)

272 You ever wonder if, back in 2016, Obama called McConnell and said something like this ?

"Mitch, you old bastard. Go on and pass the damn thing ... you know I've got your back and will veto it. But you owe me, you hog-jowled cocksucker ... and don't you forget it !!!"

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (/BTP8)

273
Let it burn to the floor. Let the insurance companies die. Let the trial lawyers live in squalor.

Until they lose, we all lose.

Posted by: E Depluribus Unum at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (ZFUt7)

274 268 Old ladies in nursing homes are likely to be on Medicaid, not Medicare. Medicare does not cover nursing home care. Nursing homes will charge you $9000 per month until they've spent you down to nothing, at which point Medicaid steps in and covers your care.
Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (lwiT4)

==================

Damn me for screwing up with my own snark...

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (mC1ZI)

275 262 Who names a boy "Steny"?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 04:20 PM (PY9jH)

He's Danish. Father's name was Steen and "Steny" is a nickname.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (mbhDw)

276 More winning! Shia LaBologna doesn't feel safe in Trump's America, flees to Britain where all he has to worry about is kill-crazy Muslims.

http://tinyurl.com/kjzhzwj

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks. Now worse than Hitler! at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (Nwg0u)

277 >>What exactly have the 'moderates' compromised on?

Same thing as the conservatives so far, nothing.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (/tuJf)

278 "I will trust the wisdom of the horde;"

Many posters here see the World as they want it, not as it is. This is especially true of ultra-Conservative and ultra-Libertarian positions which are dead on arrival politically, because you can't turn back the clock.

Healthcare is a case in point. Ideally I'd go back to where we were before WWII, but we can't. The Obamans gave us an Alien face hugger.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (SIY7D)

279 Bury this stinking rotten Obamacorpse already.

It's like hearing gossip from Charlie Sheen that he knows other anonymous people in Hollywood who have HIV.

Posted by: Fritz at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (5zYqI)

280 Who names a boy "Steny"?

It's not so bad.

Posted by: Anus King at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (Tyii7)

281 You are the last person I expected to not get my humor.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (mbhDw)

Oh....that was a joke?

Sorry.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (rF0hx)

282 194
We could have 60 senate seats in 2018, although I don't know if that's a likely prediction.

At that point, will they still say: "Sorry folks, I want to give
you what you sent me here to do. But politics is a game of inches,
that's the reality. We'll beat this thing eventually."

Posted by: BourbonChicken at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (VdICR)

60 seats won't do it - despite the GOP betters telling us that's what they need. Because you'll always have the squishy GOP types (Gramnesty, etc.)Honestly, they got all they should get. We played their game. We gave them the house when they asked. We gave them the senate and kept the house when they asked. Yet even this wasn't enough. They wouldn't even put legislation on TFG's desk to force him to veto it. They wanted the WH. Well - we gave him Trump. And they STILL can't do anything.Common link here - is the same GOP-e. So screw them. Time to find fresh blood.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (jxbfJ)

283 He's Danish. Father's name was Steen and "Steny" is a nickname.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:22 PM (mbhDw)

That's just precious. Bless his heart.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (PY9jH)

284 I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.

And I don't want to be forced to cover my kids until age 26. Why not let us both purchase the insurance coverage we want?

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (2lndx)

285 Old ladies in nursing homes are likely to be on Medicaid, not Medicare. Medicare does not cover nursing home care. Nursing homes will charge you $9000 per month until they've spent you down to nothing, at which point Medicaid steps in and covers your care.
Posted by: grammie winger
...........
Yes. They are on both, actually.. but Medicaid picks up the tab for the nursing care.

Posted by: Quasimodo at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (so+oy)

286 About the unfunded liabilities & pensions?
I'm on the ass end of the baby boomer generation. (54)
I have 11 years left working. Sometime between now and then, a huge bulk of us are gonna retire. With 1/3 of the workforce currently out of work, doom.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:24 PM (eauMe)

287 They don't know better, they're incapable of knowing any better, and they never will.
Posted by: Country Boy
-----------

I disagree. I don't think that they are incapable of knowing better, it is simply that they have been schooled exclusively by agenda-driven academe and all of the media.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at March 23, 2017 03:58 PM (ZO497)

I will acknowledge rare exceptions, but for the overwhelming majority of them, they are content with their ignorance and would never accept GOP/conservative issues even if Jesus was President.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 04:24 PM (Jcg9Q)

288 270
And might I counter-suggest that perhaps they are refusing to compromise on stuff like no freebies for illegals? Or 2nd amendment healthcare related BS? How about that? How about the rest of the GOP-E comprise on the Socialism? You seem to forget who put whom in the Oval office last November and why.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (mbhDw)

2nd Amendment healthcare related BS ? I don't know what you mean.But do you think the establishment GOP really wants the wall built or government agencies slashed or massive budget cuts or immigration reform? How does that get done if the Freedom Caucous poisons the well with the president?
Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (lKyWE)

Well I guess this is the issue we knew was coming and perhaps ignored because we prevented Hillary.

The GOP is the real enemy. They are seat warmers for the Democrats and will do nothing that we want and need because we are not their constituents.

I suppose I can bitch all day but I am not happy with them at all. I am happy that the Freedom Caucus is in there protecting what I thought I voted for.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 23, 2017 04:24 PM (mbhDw)

289 Hey you do realize that some of the ideas in Obamacare were Republican. Oh yeah and popular with people.

Concern:

[ ] Not Noted
[x] Noted

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:24 PM (39g3+)

290 >>>>Jen, there's a whole model of self pay primary care emerging. Basically you pay $50-$100/month to see a PCP whenever you need

Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (+vGDO)

Yes, I know, I have a friend who is a member of one of those types
of practices and she likes it. She also was paying huge premiums every
month for insurance until she was eligible for Medicare and is still
paying for secondary insurance to cover what Medicare doesn't cover. Her
Primary care concierge service doesn't cover hospital visits and
outside lab charges.
.
.
.We are actually looking for something like that. When we moved to rural Texas we found out our Navy Tricare Prime was not accepted by anyone within 75 miles so that put us on Tricare Standard. That is pretty much the 80/20 Medicare plan which sucks because we can't buy any supplements. That plus the fact there are tons of Doctors that won't take any new medicare patients.

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at March 23, 2017 04:24 PM (le7jz)

291 We should copy Peruvia's system. They expanded their Peruvicaid to cover everybody up to age 40. Then they lowered the Peruvicare enrollment age to 41. Their private insurance market only applies to people between their 40th and 41st birthdays.

Posted by: Muldoon at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (wPiJc)

292
Bigger issue is GDP growth. World of difference between 3.5% versus 1.0% run out over a decade or two
Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:16 PM (SIY7D)

Its actually less growth than that... the Fed Res Bank and Deficit spending are not factored out of the Growth numbers...

Deficit of 564 Billion.... is WAY more than 1% of a 18 Trillion Economy.... in fact its over 3%....

So the REAL economy has been contracting... a bit under the rate of our Trade Deficit... of 531 Billion....

Funny how those numbers work!

1% growth... minus Deficit spending of 3%... so real growth of about -2%... while we export 3% of our wealth...

Posted by: Don Q. at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (NgKpN)

293 2nd Amendment healthcare related BS ? I don't know what you mean.

No guns for mentals. And everyone that sees a doctor is mental.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (eauMe)

294 And I don't want to be forced to cover my kids until age 26. Why not let us both purchase the insurance coverage we want?
............
no one forces you to cover them. It's only if you elect to do so. They are perfectly free to buy their own coverage.. under RyanCare, it should probably be cheaper to do so.

Posted by: Quasimodo at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (so+oy)

295 257 Considering that govt. expenditures are part of GDP and that we are $20 trillion in deficits and +$200 trillion in debt, growth is not the issue.

It's the $230 trillion in unfunded liabilities, (pensions at the state, county, & local level), that will cause this country to go tits up.
Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (eauMe)

Bah! The Treasury Dept has a printing press and a phone.

And remember, there is no inflation. Milk always cost $2.99 for a half gallon.

We're not a banana republic where people will need wheelbarrows of cash to buy toilet paper. We have ATM cards.

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (n3oGs)

296 think about this. If you are still caring for your children up to age 26, it's cheaper to have them covered on your policy, as they have been for the previous 26 years, instead of them getting their own policy, which is more expensive, that you will probably pay for them anyway if they are unmarried and at home. Or maybe you just do it to ease their financial burden.

I don't see the argument not to do this. Except Freedom CAucus! Like some fucking William Wallace battle cry.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (OFxPz)

297 How about, I don't know, just *not* covering preconditions.

That would solve most of the cost problems obamacare created.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:12 PM (3Liv/)

++++

One problem is that insurance is connected to employment. So, if you come down with a serious illness, like cancer, you get locked into your employer. If you change jobs, move, get laid off, etc. you now have to apply for new insurance at the new job. And, they won't cover you because you already are being treated for cancer and they don't want to pay.

Before Obamacare. some states dealt with this problem by saying that as long as you kept your insurance paid up, they had to cover you. That fixed the problem of the so-called "free riders" who would go without insurance until they got sick, and would then want to buy full coverage.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 04:26 PM (R+30W)

298 And they only got it through the Senate a grand total of 1 time so the idea that they have done this 7 or 8 times before is wrong.
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (/tuJf)

Let's not forget that the House voted to repeal O Care somewhere around 45 times . At one point, they were voting to repeal it once a week.

It would go to the Senate and die.

It was all symbolic because they knew it wasn't going to be enacted.

Now, whatever they enact will be on them. And this is how actual real legislation that has consequences once it passes gets created, there are fights and showdowns and everyone has forgotten that. Anything the Dems put forth when they were in power was voted for en bloc because the Dems are nothing more than a group of sheep who all vote as one.

The Republicans at least try to represent the consitituency that put them in power in their district. And some of those districts are conservative and some aren't. So the moderates are fighting the conservatives and vice versa.

Do you think McCain would be elected in say, Kansas? Do you think Justin Amash would be elected in upstate New York?

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:26 PM (9z842)

299 About the unfunded liabilities & pensions?
I'm on the ass end of the baby boomer generation. (54)
I have 11 years left working. Sometime between now and then, a huge bulk of us are gonna retire. With 1/3 of the workforce currently out of work, doom.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:24 PM (eauMe)

I'm 56, and barring a major turnaround the next several years, "only" working 9 more years is a pipe dream.

Even being 11 years away from some partial payments at 67, I still don't think I'll ever see a dime. It's gonna blow before then.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 04:26 PM (Jcg9Q)

300 Before Obamacare. some states dealt with this problem...

-----

Most states dealt with it in one manner or another.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (8XRCm)

301 Why not let us both purchase the insurance coverage we want?

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (2lndx)
===========================

Stop sounding like an American.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (lwiT4)

302 >>>"Who names a boy "Steny"?

Parents who don't love their child.

That would explain a lot, actually.

Posted by: T at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (IKdzI)

303 most people think it's giving something away for free, It's not.. you still gotta pay to have your kid on your insurance... and it can be expensive. It's not a freebie..

Posted by: Quasimodo

Absolutely. It's a big nothing-burger. One check, one envelope gets mailed versus two. The entire concept of 'group insurance' is economy of scale. One business covers 100 employees with 1 check. WTF is wrong with that?

Then keep subtracting. At what point does it lose some benefit to all concerned?

Posted by: E Depluribus Unum at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (ZFUt7)

304 270 2nd Amendment healthcare related BS ? I don't know
what you mean.But do you think the establishment GOP really wants the
wall built or government agencies slashed or massive budget cuts or
immigration reform? How does that get done if the Freedom Caucous
poisons the well with the president?

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (lKyWE)

From morning news links:

RINO Ryan's Repubocare bill contains stealth gun control measures. What else does it have in it?

http://tinyurl.com/kevtcdo

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (mpXpK)

305 >>>... under RyanCare, it should probably be cheaper to do so.
....

Does this magical cost reduction show up with the Skilttle Shitting unicorn?

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (n3oGs)

306 Short version. We must repeal Obamacare completely so we can have our own bill that includes some of the same things.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (OFxPz)

307 Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (OFxPz)

If its a popular option, then insurance companies could offer it ON THEIR OWN...

It does not need to be a FEDERAL Law...

Congress just needs to stay out of the whole damn thing... let the market and people decide...

Posted by: Don Q. at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (NgKpN)

308 225
I will trust the wisdom of the horde; once you reach a consensus.

Posted by: Wilbur Horseman at March 23, 2017 04:11 PM (14lwR)

You need to have a good long hard think about all your life choices if you're trusting the wisdom of the Horde.

I mean, distributed Horde knowledge will build us the yugest,
classiest, most bigly compound once the ZA comes but distribued Horde
knowledge will also keep caught up in knife fights over shag vs.
hardwood so, you know.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 04:14 PM (mf5HN)

Not to mention Ginger or Maryanne? 9mm or 45ACP?

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:27 PM (jxbfJ)

309 Modify the Ryan bill enough to at least get the ball rolling on this and get it passed. We have to face reality that a full repeal ain't gonna happen. Do that, get Gorsuch confirmed, cut taxes, and the first year will have been pretty good by any political standard.

And the closer to mid-terms the other items on Trumps agenda (like phase II of throwing away Ocare) get, the more chance of getting a few dems to go along too.

Posted by: Soona at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (Fmupd)

310 I still don't think I'll ever see a dime. It's gonna blow before then.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 04:26 PM (Jcg9Q)
==========================

You're right. I've already spent your share on shoes.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (lwiT4)

311 All I know is, if you're negotiation how much the government should be involved in health insurance, you've already lost the conservative fight. That whole camel is coming in the tent sooner than later.

The government's job here is to find ways to craft laws and regulations that reduce costs and expand opportunity, not control and run things. If you are at any point arguing for government control of health care at any slightest level you are not conservative on this issue and I am suspecious of your positions on anything whatsoever.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (39g3+)

312 Many squishy repubs will not repeal or start over, because they do not like the (manufactured) stories of millions of people dying from the lack of health care .

Posted by: Baboo the Oceleot at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (2CG5J)

313 Uh, under the new bill you will be purchasing only the coverage you want. Obamacare was one size fits all. That was one of the first things eliminated.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (OFxPz)

314 I don't see the argument not to do this. Except Freedom CAucus! Like some fucking William Wallace battle cry.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (OFxPz)

Here is the argument, and it works with pretty much everything else coming out of DC:

I AM SICK AND FVCKING TIRED OF BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO. I AM SICK AND FVCKING TIRED OF GOVERNMENT MANDATES THAT REQUIRE ME TO BEHAVE A CERTAIN WAY.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (rF0hx)

315 at the cost of some people being squeezed out of being able to get any
insurance.. I'm sure that's OK with most of you guys here. cuz.. fuck
'em.. ain't my fault the bitchez got cancer...
---
Yes, that's pretty much the central point. In 2008 there was no real national problem. Individual sob cases just had to deal with the fact that life isn't fair.

But the government decided everyone of them had to be covered, and therefore created an untenable problem for EVERYONE. The way to fix it is to undo the government meddling.

If that makes you feel bad, go start a charity.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (3Liv/)

316 I want healthcare insurance totally divorced from employment.
Like car insurance.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (Om16U)

317 >>Now, whatever they enact will be on them. And this is how actual real legislation that has consequences once it passes gets created, there are fights and showdowns and everyone has forgotten that. Anything the Dems put forth when they were in power was voted for en bloc because the Dems are nothing more than a group of sheep who all vote as one.

Yep. As I've been saying for some time, and I'll say it again just because I know it irritates the hell out of Scogg, this is the regular order legislative process people have been whining they wanted for years. Now we have it and people are pissed that this is exactly how legislation is supposed to be done.

There's a reason the old saying you don't want to watch sausage making and legislation is still an old saying, it's a messy, nasty process to get to compromise.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (/tuJf)

318 think about this. If you are still caring for your
children up to age 26, it's cheaper to have them covered on your policy,
as they have been for the previous 26 years, instead of them getting
their own policy, which is more expensive, that you will probably pay
for them anyway if they are unmarried and at home. Or maybe you just do
it to ease their financial burden.

I don't see the argument not to do this. Except Freedom CAucus! Like some fucking William Wallace battle cry.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (OFxPz)

We have thought about this, Marcus for 7 long years. We are not in the mood to compromise on full repeal. 26 year old are not "children" they are grown ass men and women who are responsible for themselves. And most don't need or want insurance.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (FTXAT)

319 You realize for a long time there have been federal regulations on the insurance industry- right?

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (OFxPz)

320 Also I know that if you mock the idea of freedom, you're probably in the wrong country and certainly are no conservative in any slightest sense of the word.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (39g3+)

321 Two Koch groups are starting a 'seven-figure' reserve fund to protect bill opponents from political harm

Politico:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/kveuowo

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (4w/6s)

322
No guns for mentals. And everyone that sees a doctor is mental.
Posted by: rickb223 at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (eauMe)

That has to go.

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (lKyWE)

323 I just think ObamaCare is here to stay. And we're not going to get mileage out of running against it anymore.

You're going to have the TruCon caucus that won't give an inch (and so will have nothing), the moderates that live in purple districts, the GOPe that gets the insurance checks, and even Trump with the populist "we are so rich we can give healthcare away!!"

And so it will be this Gordian knot and one step closer to Single Payer

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:30 PM (9cYRJ)

324 I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.

And I don't want to be forced to cover my kids until age 26. Why not let us both purchase the insurance coverage we want?
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM (2lndx)

And I don't want to pay for anybody's kids.

I remember when I graduated from undergrad that a couple of weeks before graduation my college held an open house type dealie where many insurance companies showed up to sell catastrophic care coverage to the about to be college graduates who were going to be kicked off their parents' policies. It was fairly cheap and it was all people needed. Hell, that's what I got and I was able to find a primary physician who gave me a break on my doctor's visits because I paid cash and then I found a lab that would do a big discount because I was uninsured and also paid cash and then I found where to get the cheapest prescription because hey no paperwork and did I mention paying cash?

As I understand it, Kids These Days don't have that option. It's full bore coverage or nothing. That's insane.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 04:30 PM (mf5HN)

325 I still don't think I'll ever see a dime. It's gonna blow before then.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 04:26 PM (Jcg9Q)
==========================

You're right. I've already spent your share on shoes.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (lwiT4)

Are they size 13? 'Cause then I could borrow them once in a while.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 04:30 PM (Jcg9Q)

326 Dang, missed this one, sort of, as usual.

Ace, looks like pixy is on life support, too (wiiiiiiiiiide margins until I clik on "Comments").

Anyways, probably already covered above, but some of us have been saying more or less, exactly what ace says here.

* ram through "clean" reconciliation repeal (i.e. parts originally enacted through reconciliation are repealed that way)

* House sends Senate bill to repeal that which was passed through free-standing legislation (and a lot of the most toxic stuff was passed that way, a fact so many here seem to refuse to remember or accept)

* House quickly thereafter sends "replacement" bill to Senate (which does literally nothing that O-care did, and addresses many things it didn't)

* THEN let the Senate Dems (esp. the 10-12 up in '18 from Trump states) filibuster either or both of those things.

It's called "politics", mutha****er, do you speak it?

Posted by: rhomboid at March 23, 2017 04:30 PM (QDnY+)

327 Hell, what do you do about me and my thyroid problems that will never go away and thus will always be a precondition?

The thing about preconditions on insurance is that either your insurance premiums need to be enough to cover your bills at 100%, or you need to force other customers of the insurance company to cover your bills.

If you're going to force other customers of the insurance company to cover your bills, that's going to mean less people can afford insurance, and, in the long run, more pre-existing conditions.

Forcing other people to pay for pre-existing conditions should be handled through taxes and other programs, not by outlawing real insurance.

Imagine if this were about homeowners insurance. Your house burns down, and insurance companies are required to sell you coverage at, at most, a 30% markup. This will inevitably make homeowners coverage far too expensive for the average homeowner, who will then put off buying coverage until they have a pre-existing condition.

It isn't sustainable. And it isn't insurance.

If we want to pay for things that people can't afford but that we have decided are necessary to be paid for, it needs to be through some mechanism other than outlawing insurance.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:30 PM (2lndx)

328 "261 Hey you do realize that some of the ideas in Obamacare were Republican. Oh yeah and popular with people. Like the coverage up to age 26. I don't get why that's controversial. I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.

Posted by: Marcus T
...............
most people think it's giving something away for free, It's not.. you still gotta pay to have your kid on your insurance... and it can be expensive. It's not a freebie.."

It means that young healthy people aren't buying their own plans. Most family plans don't charge by the kid so keeping Jr and your minor kids costs no more or less than keeping only the young kids.

Young healthy people buying in is the only way the Ponzi scheme stays afloat if you can't turn away anyone with preexisting conditions.

Keeping the young people on their parents' plan makes RyanCare as unsustainable as Obamacare.

You can't do both.

Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2017 04:31 PM (+vGDO)

329 We should copy Peruvia's system. They expanded their Peruvicaid to cover everybody up to age 40. Then they lowered the Peruvicare enrollment age to 41. Their private insurance market only applies to people between their 40th and 41st birthdays.

Posted by: Muldoon at March 23, 2017 04:25 PM (wPiJc)

Yeah, that looked good to me too but I noticed on page 30 something called Carousel that you must participate in. Odd it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Rodgers and Hammerstein

Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 23, 2017 04:31 PM (493sH)

330 316 I want healthcare insurance totally divorced from employment.
Like car insurance.
Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (Om16U)

And what you spend on Health insurance should be a tax write off for everyone...

Not just those who get it through work...

Posted by: Don Q. at March 23, 2017 04:31 PM (NgKpN)

331 I want healthcare insurance totally divorced from employment.

Like car insurance.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (Om16U)

Me too... the system now distorts both wages and the healthcare market. I suggest you call you r congressman and express that opinion.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:31 PM (FTXAT)

332 People need to stop lying and acting like before 2014 when the ACA went fully active, there was some kind of gargantuan human rights crisis in the USA with people dying in the streets.

That was just under 3 years ago. We remember it. It was just like now, but without the tax penalties for refusing to sign up to the ACA.

You can lie all you want about how popular the ACA is (it is not) or how horrific things would be without it (it wasn't) but it has not been long enough to convince anyone sane.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:31 PM (39g3+)

333 And as I have told you over and over and over, they don't even have 50 votes for a straight repeal vote.
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:43 PM (/tuJf)

They do. They just don't want to do what it takes to make it happen.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 23, 2017 04:32 PM (J70i0)

334 The notion that 26 year old men and women need to be taken care of by the efforts of their parents is sad. And kind of demeaning. What does that say to a 26 year old? It says you are not a responsible adult. The bubble-wrap generation.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:32 PM (lwiT4)

335 I just don't understand why health insurance is a government thing at all.

Perhaps you missed all the numbers involved that end in *illion.

Posted by: DaveA at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (FhXTo)

336 Why not let us both purchase the insurance coverage we want?

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:23 PM

Crazy talk. Next thing you know, you'll be suggesting we simply pay our doctor directly and cut out the millions of insurance company and government union employees from their hard work, 200 PTO days per year, and lifelong pensions from the simple transaction of exchanging equal value.

Worse, you'll suggest people can save money on their own foe their own future needs and don't need the government to deduct money from their check and hand it to the generation before them.

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (n3oGs)

337 >>They do. They just don't want to do what it takes to make it happen.

Neither do most people here because it requires supporting Medicaid expansion which, get this, lots of Republicans took and now support.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (/tuJf)

338 You can lie all you want about how popular the ACA is (it is not) or how horrific things would be without it (it wasn't) but it has not been long enough to convince anyone sane.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor
____

I really do think the Republican Governors are much to blame over this meme.

Even our "conservative" Governor in AZ is screaming about getting MediCaid taken away.

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (9cYRJ)

339 If you want a good, honest opinion on the ACA, talk to people who work in or run a health clinic or a hospital. Its a ghastly disaster for them, with sinister Orwellian undertones of information collection. I know, I've done it.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (39g3+)

340 "House sends Senate bill to repeal that which was passed through free-standing legislation"

I'm skeptical that the Senate will pass anything, given Shumer, filibuster, and a few R Senators will flake on voting for any House bill or nuking the filibuster.

What am I missing?

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (SIY7D)

341 Old ladies in nursing homes are likely to be on Medicaid, not Medicare. Medicare does not cover nursing home care. Nursing homes will charge you $9000 per month until they've spent you down to nothing, at which point Medicaid steps in and covers your care.
Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:21 PM (lwiT4)

Which is another reason Medicaid expansion and extra money was a siren song for some governors. The amount of money states spend on Medicaid coverage for the elderly in nursing homes is spectacular. It wasn't just the coverage being available to more poorer people, it was extra dollars to cover the ever expanding nursing home costs.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:33 PM (9z842)

342 no one forces you to cover them.

If the law requires insurance companies to cover kids until age 26, then yes, I am forced to pay for that coverage.

There's no checkbox that says "I don't have to pay for what Obamacare/RyanTrumpCare mandates you provide."

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at March 23, 2017 04:34 PM (2lndx)

343 Put off till Friday, 9 A.M., then it's pushed till noon, then 3 P.M., and soon it becomes buried in the Friday news dump.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 04:34 PM (4w/6s)

344 >>Even our "conservative" Governor in AZ is screaming about getting MediCaid taken away.

See.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:34 PM (/tuJf)

345 Are they size 13? 'Cause then I could borrow them once in a while.

Posted by: Country Boy at March 23, 2017 04:30 PM (Jcg9Q)
===================

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure if they make women's shoes in size 13. Could you squeeze into an 8?

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:35 PM (lwiT4)

346 They do. They just don't want to do what it takes to make it happen.

Exactly. Guys like Tom DeLay knew how to get stuff like this done. Its about will, technique, and sales. You strongarm who you have to and you appeal to who you have to, you make deals and you work it out. But you have to want to.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:35 PM (39g3+)

347 nood

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at March 23, 2017 04:35 PM (mpXpK)

348 What it was, what Ryan said at the time, was a proof of concept that they could, through budget reconciliation which is the process they are doing now, get a bill to begin repealing Obamacare.

Oh ... so they were just practicing. Like me and Little Suzy Rottencrotch in the back of my 78 LTD after Junior Prom. They didn't really mean it. They was just practicing.

OK ...

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 23, 2017 04:35 PM (/BTP8)

349 Even our "conservative" Governor in AZ is screaming about getting MediCaid taken away.

That's because states are sucking at the teat like a starving litter of piglets. They are using the ACA as life support to stave off pension disaster just a little bit longer, so they don't have to make the tough choices.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at March 23, 2017 04:36 PM (39g3+)

350 I haven't read either bill, but theoretically, it takes a lot less room to repeal something than enact it. For example, if pages 232-239 of Obamacare are about funding for tribes, it only takes a simple paragraph to say sections this, that, and the other are hereby repealed.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 04:20

-----

Ok, that makes sense. But it frustrates me when the repeal bill says it strikes/changes some public record number that I have no idea what it means. I know it's designed to keep me in the dark and "shut up, listen to your betters."

Posted by: olddog in mo at March 23, 2017 04:36 PM (Dhht7)

351 You know what would be less painful and probably more enlightening than this thread?

Sticking my penis in a C-clamp.

(I'm guessing, not having any first hand experience with this option)

Posted by: Muldoon at March 23, 2017 04:37 PM (wPiJc)

352 >>Oh ... so they were just practicing. Like me and Little Suzy Rottencrotch in the back of my 78 LTD after Junior Prom. They didn't really mean it. They was just practicing.

And I bet you got vetoed too.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:37 PM (/tuJf)

353 >>> I want to cover my kids as long as I can without them being made to purchase a policy.
......

You are welcome to pay your chIldrens expenses for as long as you like. I object, however, to your forcing me to pay to subsidize them or use them to prop up subsidies for others.

Posted by: Damiano at March 23, 2017 04:38 PM (n3oGs)

354
Uh, under the new bill you will be purchasing only the coverage you
want. Obamacare was one size fits all. That was one of the first things
eliminated.

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:28 PM (OFxPz)

That is as much a lie as "this bill eliminates the mandates". Whatever coverages named by the government would still have to be purchased. It kinda doesn't matter if Trump and Price promise to lower those coverages because he was not elected emperor for life and will be out of therein 8 years AT MOST.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:38 PM (FTXAT)

355 One possible strategy:

Pass bill that simply states that is repeals Obamacare with two provisos: People on Obamacare are grandfathered in (if you like your plan then you really will be able to keep your plan) and phase it in over a period of time.

Combine this with a loosening of regulations, &c., at the Federal level and the state level that prevent doctors, hospitals, &c. from coming up with and implementing their own solutions.

In effect, while Obamacare is being phased out, the free market will be given the freedom and the time to adapt and meet consumer needs. This allows for real alternatives to organically spring into being and demonstrate that they work.

If Senate Democrats block this, then the GOP runs on getting a filibuster proof Senate majority by selling people on the idea of both freedom from government and the security of government simultaneously.

Posted by: The Political Hat at March 23, 2017 04:38 PM (rUIbB)

356 Here's the thing about preconditions, what do you do about, say, diabetics?

Children born with congential problems that then age out of parental coverage?

Hell, what do you do about me and my thyroid problems that will never go away and thus will always be a precondition?
---
I don't.

If you have insurance and develop a condition that was covered by the contract, then the insurance company covers claims related to that condition up to whatever limits are set in the contract. They may or may not allow coverage beyond that point, or on other future conditions, *if* you and they agree on a price and terms for a contract when the current one expires.

It is unacceptagle for an insurance company to agree to cover someone with preconditions, because that is no longer insurance, but instead it's simply you robbing the company's other customers.

This notion that clinging on to life is worth robbing your neighbor has been around a long time. It's the main reason that stable societies historically have punished thievery with death rather than make excuses for the thief.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:39 PM (3Liv/)

357 This is *not* complicated, despite what many on the Hill (and some here) keep insisting.

Posted by: rhomboid at March 23, 2017 04:40 PM (QDnY+)

358 I haven't read either bill, but theoretically, it
takes a lot less room to repeal something than enact it. For example, if
pages 232-239 of Obamacare are about funding for tribes, it only takes a
simple paragraph to say sections this, that, and the other are hereby
repealed.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 23, 2017 04:20

-----

Ok, that makes sense. But it frustrates me when the repeal bill says
it strikes/changes some public record number that I have no idea what
it means. I know it's designed to keep me in the dark and "shut up,
listen to your betters."

Posted by: olddog in mo at March 23, 2017 04:36 PM (Dhht7)

I have read both bills and Ryancare repeals nothing (although I agree that a true repeal would be very short... one to 10 pages would do).

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:40 PM (FTXAT)

359 That has to go.
Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (lKyWE)

the "no guns for mentals' is not accurate. What I believe the poster is talking about is that there is no prohibition in the bill against your physician asking if you have guns in the house. As there shouldn't be a fricking prohibition on that question or any question your health care professional feels they should ask.

If you want the govt. out of health care, then don't demand they dictate what exactly your doctor can ask you about. You are free to not answer. Your doc should be able to be free of govt. interference in what he professional asks you.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:40 PM (9z842)

360 And I bet you got vetoed too

No ... it passed with bi-partisan support. But I didn't try no 120 page line of bullshit. Kept my proposal to a simple eight pages.

And told the Parliamentarian to mind his own damn business.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 23, 2017 04:40 PM (/BTP8)

361 334
The notion that 26 year old men and women need to be taken care of by
the efforts of their parents is sad. And kind of demeaning. What does
that say to a 26 year old? It says you are not a responsible adult. The
bubble-wrap generation.

Posted by: grammie winger at March 23, 2017 04:32 PM (lwiT4)

Well the ACA was marketed to them with Pajama Boy.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:41 PM (jxbfJ)

362 Keep these four names in mind

Rob Portman - Ohio
Shelly Capito - West Virginia
Cory Gardner - Ohio
Lisa Murkowski - Alaska
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (/tuJf)

The biggest squealers are the biggest FedTitSuckers.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 04:41 PM (4w/6s)

363 That is as much a lie as "this bill eliminates the mandates". Whatever coverages named by the government would still have to be purchased. It kinda doesn't matter if Trump and Price promise to lower those coverages because he was not elected emperor for life and will be out of therein 8 years AT MOST.
Posted by: redbanzai
____________

Didn't Ace have a rundown on this?

I thought his take was you were allowed to "not buy insurance" its just that the insurance companies were allowed to penalize you for it if you signed back up to discourage people with preexisting conditions from gaming the system

To me, that's a HUGE difference

The government fining you through the IRS is a whole different ballgame

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:41 PM (9cYRJ)

364
Here's the thing about preconditions, what do you do about, say, diabetics?

Children born with congential problems that then age out of parental coverage?

Hell, what do you do about me and my thyroid problems that will never go away and thus will always be a precondition?
---

I would say that it is every individual's responsibility to care for themselves... then after that it is their family's... then after that they should rely on the help that those in their community are willing to voluntarily give.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:43 PM (FTXAT)

365 Find your rep:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

Then write using the contact form. I wrote this: Repeal the ACA. No replacement until it is repealed.

That should find your house rep. Look up your Senators and write both of them. Not surprisingly Ted Cruz has a much more responsive site than John Cornyn.

For a bonus, since Marchant is my rep, and he is head of the Tax Committee, I asked him why Koskinen is still in charge of the IRS.

Doing what I did would take you no more than ten minutes.

Posted by: davedavedavarf at March 23, 2017 04:44 PM (BLayO)

366 The thing is that there will never, ever, ever be a perfect solution to any of this so what's a not quite so horrible option.

Posted by: alexthechick - rrraaawwwrrr at March 23, 2017 04:19 PM (mf5HN)

I prefer the old you must maintain coverage or wait one year. And then some sort of pool for chronic conditions.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 23, 2017 04:44 PM (J70i0)

367 362 Keep these four names in mind

Rob Portman - Ohio
Shelly Capito - West Virginia
Cory Gardner - Ohio
Lisa Murkowski - Alaska
Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 03:53 PM (/tuJf)

That all voted FOR HR 3762. But ... oh yeah ... that don't count, right ? They was all just "practicing".

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 23, 2017 04:44 PM (/BTP8)

368 I think they should shelve it and move on to tax reform. Let Obamacare fester and rot some more until 2018 when the people get to see the full effect of what the Dems did. Maybe moderate Dems will get on board with replacing the crap sandwich.

Posted by: beck at March 23, 2017 04:46 PM (CcIgv)

369 It's just sad. Because you will see this same my way or the highway stance across The entire agenda. Then when nothing gets done and people are pissed we will all get treated to how the Congress is not conservative enough. Yeah I'm sure that will work out well

Posted by: Marcus T at March 23, 2017 04:48 PM (OFxPz)

370 Preconditions: If you have insurance covering your condition from Traveller's and want to switch to Aetna you can.

If you have no insurance covering your condition or you develop a condition and then desire to purchase insurance they may deny you coverage.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 04:49 PM (4w/6s)

371 There's a reason the old saying you don't want to
watch sausage making and legislation is still an old saying, it's a
messy, nasty process to get to compromise.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (/tuJf)
---Nobody is complaining about the process.

We're complaining because the obvious end state doesn't involve anything that fits the definition of 'repeal'.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:49 PM (3Liv/)

372 Didn't Ace have a rundown on this?

I thought his take was you were allowed to "not buy insurance" its
just that the insurance companies were allowed to penalize you for it if
you signed back up to discourage people with preexisting conditions
from gaming the system

To me, that's a HUGE difference

The government fining you through the IRS is a whole different ballgame

Posted by: Maritime at March 23, 2017 04:41 PM (9cYRJ)

If Ace said that, he is wrong. The mandates that require you to buy insurance remain under the Ryancare bill (you can look yourself...the only changes made to the mandate sections are on page 84 of Ryan's bill).
They are zeroing out the penalties but leaving in the penalty language and everyone is still required BY LAW to have required coverages.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:50 PM (FTXAT)

373 Preconditions: If you have insurance covering your condition from Traveller's and want to switch to Aetna you can.

If you have no insurance covering your condition or you develop a
condition and then desire to purchase insurance they may deny you
coverage.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 04:49 PM (4w/6s)

Why should you be able to force Aetna to enter into a contract with you that they do not agree to?

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:53 PM (FTXAT)

374 Neither do most people here because it requires supporting Medicaid
expansion which, get this, lots of Republicans took and now support.
---
How many votes do Governors get in Congress these days?

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:55 PM (3Liv/)

375 "Poor people had healthcare before Obamacare, they just had no "insurance". Posted by: Vic

right ... and 11 million Obama claims have "health care" thanks to him, were never allowed to "die in the streets". And putting them on Medicaid is not health care, many doctors won't take it. They may have to keep thos on Medicaid.

Maybe even subsidize the other 6 million getting the subsidies, but let them pay the same rate and put them on the Medicaid roles, don't fund them through the regular "like my plan keep my plan" people.

But surely they could kill the illegals, from the plans. Obama promised no illegals ("you lie"). And any chance of tort reform getting 50 votes? (some say that is not a national level issue, but at least for nationally funded Medicaid, stop the million dollar jackpots, take what free stuff you can get)

Posted by: illiniwek at March 23, 2017 04:56 PM (BrMft)

376 371
There's a reason the old saying you don't want to

watch sausage making and legislation is still an old saying, it's a

messy, nasty process to get to compromise.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 23, 2017 04:29 PM (/tuJf)
---Nobody is complaining about the process.

We're complaining because the obvious end state doesn't involve anything that fits the definition of 'repeal'.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:49 PM (3Liv/)

You don't want to watch sausage being made, but the finished product is delicious.
Legislation being made is similar to making sausage, except the finished product is the end product of when you have finished digesting the sausage.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:56 PM (jxbfJ)

377 There should be no government that comes between me and my doctor. Given that, why should there be any g'ment involvement in my health insurance?

Subsidized and mandated health insurance is simply welfare and that goes under the column of 'How Much Will it Cost?" which trumps the "How Can I Pay for That?"

Posted by: DanMan at March 23, 2017 04:56 PM (XTiHL)

378 Look, I know I'm really late to the party here, but do I understand this correctly?

For 7-years these Profiles in Courage swore to us, repeatedly, they would repeal Obamacare.

Repeal.

They used that precise word. Over and over again.

For 7-years.

They even passed a couple of bills to do just that. They were vetoed.

Predictably.

Now, these same Profiles in Courage won't even put repeal up for a vote and can't muster the votes to pass their lame-ass "replacement" bull either.

And that, brothers and sisters, is why I stopped voting for - and supporting with my time, talent and treasure - the GOPe.

Posted by: DocJ at March 23, 2017 04:56 PM (NYS7S)

379 374
Neither do most people here because it requires supporting Medicaid

expansion which, get this, lots of Republicans took and now support.
---
How many votes do Governors get in Congress these days?

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 04:55 PM (3Liv/)

And those federal subsidies for the Medicaid expansion don't last forever. It is a like taking candy from the dude in a van. Sure you get a nice piece of candy, but later on................

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at March 23, 2017 04:57 PM (jxbfJ)

380 Why should you be able to force Aetna to enter into a contract with you that they do not agree to?
Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:53 PM (FTXAT)

Because unlike people who fail to realize it, health insurance is not standard insurance but more along the lines of risk pools. You might wish it to be like car insurance, but it's not. If what you wanted happened then if you had health insurance through work and had a chronic condition, you're stuck. You can't change jobs, nada unless you don't want covered. In which case you're doomed because you'll never get insurance and you'll be living on the street. If you're in the individual market, they'll just price you off the policy or drop your policy at the end of the year when it gets too expensive.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 23, 2017 05:00 PM (J70i0)

381 Because unlike people who fail to realize it, health
insurance is not standard insurance but more along the lines of risk
pools. You might wish it to be like car insurance, but it's not. If
what you wanted happened then if you had health insurance through work
and had a chronic condition, you're stuck. You can't change jobs, nada
unless you don't want covered. In which case you're doomed because
you'll never get insurance and you'll be living on the street. If
you're in the individual market, they'll just price you off the policy
or drop your policy at the end of the year when it gets too expensive.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 23, 2017 05:00 PM (J70i0)

Again insurance != healthcare. Even if I do not have insurance, I can still get healthcare by either paying for it myself or appealing to other people to voluntarily help me. What I do not morally have the right to do is force other people to pay my expenses... whether that be an insurance company or the taxpayers.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 05:05 PM (FTXAT)

382 I think it is very possible Trump is punking Ryan. Ryan was anti-Trump. That tape of Ryan proved it.

Trump has already said publicly that he thinks that they could get a much better deal by waiting until Obamacare is on the ropes. Ryan is in charge of bill scheduling in the House. If Ryan is asserting his privilege as speaker and not playing ball with the WH, then a lot of these shenanigans make more sense as Trump may be setting Ryan up for a big goose egg.

Posted by: Not Bobby Fisher at March 23, 2017 05:06 PM (uBIfu)

383 via zerohedge (maybe this has something to do with why Ryancare is leaving the table)

A Quinnipiac University poll found that people disapprove of the GOP
legislation by 56 percent to 17 percent, with 26 percent undecided.
Trump's handling of health care was viewed unfavorably by 6 in 10.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 05:06 PM (3Liv/)

384 Good Job, GOPe.

You're not even three months into the year and you've burnt away all of your political capital.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 05:08 PM (3Liv/)

385 >>>If Ace said that, he is wrong. The mandates that require you to buy insurance remain under the Ryancare bill (you can look yourself...the only changes made to the mandate sections are on page 84 of Ryan's bill).
They are zeroing out the penalties but leaving in the penalty language and everyone is still required BY LAW to have required coverages.

funny, that's not what grassley's staff said in its critical analysis panning the bill.

You don't have to keep buying insurance. But if you want to keep the same premium, then you do. If you let insurance lapse, the company can add a 30% surcharge above the normal premium.

This isn't a mandate. This is the cost for attempting the game the system. You can game it if you like, but this is the (small) penalty you pay as the price for doing so.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 05:08 PM (8rNrN)

386 This isn't a mandate. This is the cost for attempting the game the system. You can game it if you like, but this is the (small) penalty you pay as the price for doing so.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 05:08 PM (8rNrN)

What system? I thought we were ditching the system? Why is the government specifying an insurance surcharge for not buying insurance?

Posted by: Not Bobby Fisher at March 23, 2017 05:10 PM (uBIfu)

387 Red, have you been to a physician or even an urgent care recently in which you offered to pay cash and not use insurance?

Mr. Jen and I have a giant deductible plan now from his employer
thanks to O care and so we get to pay in cash when we visit the doc for
anything until we reach that outrageous deductible($8,000 for family).
Even with negotiated rates from BC/BS, a yearly check up for Mr.Jen ran a
breathtaking $700. Did I mention he has zero health issues other than
slightly elevated cholesterol? Oh, but preventative care is free....no
it's not. Checking your blood pressure and your heart with stethoscope
and five minutes with the doc is free, everything else is charged up the
wazoo to pay for illegals and those with no insurance and lawsuits.

Try a few hours in emergency with a kid with a sprained ankle or a
friend who got wood chips in the eye, etc. You are talking thousands of
dollars because of what has been done to our health care system.

So yes, people without insurance are going to not go to the doctor unless they are basically incapacitated.

Posted by: Jen at March 23, 2017 04:09 PM (9z842)

I actually have been without insurance at all before and I had three young asthmatics to take care of at the time. I got really good at calling around and negotiating discounts. Also, I got good at negotiating with hospitals for emergency room visits. They will make payment plans and negotiate huge discounts so long as you eventually pay them what you promised to.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 05:12 PM (FTXAT)

388 "This isn't a mandate. This is the cost for attempting the game the system. You can game it if you like, but this is the (small) penalty you pay as the price for doing so."

it's still a way to game the system which only results in raising costs. I will put aside $20,000, pay cash for my concierge doctor and plunk down the premium + 30% when the day comes that I need it. If I go two years without paying for these jacked up premiums we are seeing I'm ahead of the game already.

Posted by: DanMan at March 23, 2017 05:16 PM (XTiHL)

389 The bottom-line for me is that so long as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) - signed by none-other than Ronald Wilson Reagan - remains the law of the land then all of this is bluster and fury signifying nothing.

Socialized Medicine came to the country in 1986 with that law, and until that law is undone we're stuck with this Frankenstein Monster of a "healthcare" "financing" "system" - until it collapses and the proggies get what they've been agitating for since the at least the mid-60's... single payer.

Posted by: DocJ at March 23, 2017 05:17 PM (NYS7S)

390 This could have been done on day 1. Clean repeal.

But this motherfucker Ryan pulls this bullshit out of his ass instead.

We fucking stomped the left last election and we can't even do anything without victory.

OPEN COMPETITION AMONG ALL 50 STATES!

It will drive costs down and cost the government NOTHING!

Posted by: Duncan Macleod, The Highlander at March 23, 2017 05:18 PM (NAv1Q)

391 If Ace said that, he is wrong. The mandates that
require you to buy insurance remain under the Ryancare bill (you can
look yourself...the only changes made to the mandate sections are on
page 84 of Ryan's bill).

They are zeroing out the penalties but leaving in the penalty
language and everyone is still required BY LAW to have required
coverages.

funny, that's not what grassley's staff said in its critical analysis panning the bill.

You don't have to keep buying insurance. But if you want to keep the
same premium, then you do. If you let insurance lapse, the company can
add a 30% surcharge above the normal premium.

This isn't a mandate. This is the cost for attempting the game the
system. You can game it if you like, but this is the (small) penalty you
pay as the price for doing so.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 05:08 PM (8rNrN)

No the insurance 30% is not a mandate but the mandate is. I have given the page number here numerous times but I will give it again. Page 84 of Ryan's bill (from the PDF that you linked to when it was first released) has the ONLY changes that are being made to mandate language. ALL they are doing is reducing the penalty to 0 dollars and 0%. The Mandate that requires you to have coverage remains so you are still breaking the law if you do not have coverage.

The mandate remains and them reducing the penalty to 0 does not change that. Hell, current law does not allow the IRS to really collect the penalty. So effectively, we are no worse off mandate wise under current law that we would be under Ryancare. In fact we are worse off because that 30% will be fully collectable.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 05:19 PM (FTXAT)

392 Make that with OUR victory.

Posted by: Duncan Macleod, The Highlander at March 23, 2017 05:19 PM (NAv1Q)

393 funny, that's not what grassley's staff said in its critical analysis panning the bill.

You don't have to keep buying insurance. But if you want to keep the
same premium, then you do. If you let insurance lapse, the company can
add a 30% surcharge above the normal premium.

This isn't a mandate. This is the cost for attempting the game the
system. You can game it if you like, but this is the (small) penalty you
pay as the price for doing so.

Posted by: ace at March 23, 2017 05:08 PM (8rNrN)

Also, and to be completely accurate, that would be Grassley being wrong not you:-P

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 05:21 PM (FTXAT)

394 via zerohedge (maybe this has something to do with why Ryancare is leaving the table)

A Quinnipiac University poll found that people disapprove of the GOP

legislation by 56 percent to 17 percent, with 26 percent undecided.

Trump's handling of health care was viewed unfavorably by 6 in 10.

Posted by: Methos, back to Let It Burn at March 23, 2017 05:06 PM (3Liv/)

Hopefully, they are listening.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 05:23 PM (FTXAT)

395
I think it is very possible Trump is punking Ryan. Ryan was anti-Trump. That tape of Ryan proved it.

Trump has already said publicly that he thinks that they could get a
much better deal by waiting until Obamacare is on the ropes. Ryan is in
charge of bill scheduling in the House. If Ryan is asserting his
privilege as speaker and not playing ball with the WH, then a lot of
these shenanigans make more sense as Trump may be setting Ryan up for a
big goose egg.

Posted by: Not Bobby Fisher at March 23, 2017 05:06 PM (uBIfu)

Well Ryan IS eminently punkable.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 05:25 PM (FTXAT)

396 "I got good at negotiating with hospitals for emergency room visits. They will make payment plans and negotiate huge discounts so long as you eventually pay them what you promised to. Posted by: redbanzai

yes ... they will charge maybe triple, but I hear that can be negotiated down at least to what the insurers would have paid. But it is an outrageous system that they charge triple up front for those that pay cash on the spot.

20 years ago I asked a friend what she learned from her experience (major operation on her young daughter) and she said "that what they charge is not necessarily the price".

Posted by: illiniwek at March 23, 2017 05:34 PM (BrMft)

397 Why should you be able to force Aetna to enter into a contract with you that they do not agree to?

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 04:53 PM (FTXAT)
***********************

It works out across the board. There will be no gaming of the system.The gamers will be disallowed.

Most people over 45 have some condition or other. There is a massive number of people/customers buying insurance products moving from one vendor to another. That will balance the load evenly amongst insurers and will allow portability to honest customers.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 05:40 PM (4w/6s)

398 "Isn't it better to just do a full and clean repeal before attempting any fix?"

Yes. Full stop. Go nuclear if we must, but just repeal the damn law. This is not brain surgery, rocket science or the Grand Unified Theory. "Just repeal it!" Should be our battle cry!

Posted by: Locke Common at March 23, 2017 06:04 PM (W7UK3)

399 Ryan told Trump he'd get a bill to the Oval office. He is failing. Now Trump will have to fix it. Win for Trump. Loss for establishment RINGs.

Posted by: Cosda at March 23, 2017 06:13 PM (T3EoD)

400 It works out across the board. There will be no gaming of the system.The gamers will be disallowed.

Most people over 45 have some condition or other. There is a massive
number of people/customers buying insurance products moving from one
vendor to another. That will balance the load evenly amongst insurers
and will allow portability to honest customers.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 05:40 PM (4w/6s)

Pre-existing conditions are uninsurable and should not be part of the insurance discussion. They should be paid for out of pocket until and unless they are covered as part of an contract that all contract participants voluntarily agree to. You have no more right to force insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions than they have to force you to buy their product.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 23, 2017 06:26 PM (FTXAT)

401

The way I interpret the way it should be is for example:
If one is insured and develops a malady he remains insured. If he changes employment and his new employer has a different insurance company that company must accept his malady and also must not penalize him.

If one is self-employed, insured and develops a condition he remains insured. If he chooses to purchase insurance from a new insurer they must accept his condition.

This put all insured people in the same basket and will not put an extra burden on the insurance companies.

Being insured and developing a malady is not a precondition and does not cancel one's insurance. Therefore that malady cannot be considered a precondition if the person chooses to purchase from a different company.

Posted by: gNewt at March 23, 2017 06:53 PM (4w/6s)

402 Ƶ

Posted by: NJ Mobster at March 24, 2017 12:06 AM (/ZEVC)

403 Ƶ

Posted by: NJ Mobster at March 24, 2017 12:07 AM (ZO497)

404 "Doesn't a full repeal put the GOP in a much better bargaining position for any later health care moves?"

Yes. That's why I want to see them immediately pass a bill that, in the future, completely repeals Obamcare.

For example: the "Make Insurance Legal Again" Act - Effective July 1, 2018, the ACA is repealed in its entirety.

If that bill is passed:

A - all negotiations about the future of healthcare in America start from the standpoint that Obamacare is gone, and politicians can focus on what to add, not how to modify/salvage the POS that is ACA

B - Congress has time to pass new laws, like allowing insurance to be sold across state lines, and all sorts of other good stuff, because the repeal is not effective until July 2018. Democrats won't have much incentive to filibuster once the ACA is gone - people will look to them almost as much as to the GOP for leadership in what comes next. They will have to take ownership OR admit that they are irrelevant & worthless.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at March 24, 2017 12:23 AM (BHpB+)

405 A full repeal will require 60 votes in the Senate to invoke cloture if the Dems filibuster. The GOP can't get there. This whole thing has been about doing what they think can be done under reconciliation.

I wouldn't mind if the House passed a stronger bill, it's going to get worked over in the Senate, anyway, and if the Senate passes anything, it'll go to Conference... so, just pass something to get it started.

But all this flip talk about "just repeal it" is silly. "Merely" repealing Obamacare still requires you to enact a law.

Posted by: mhj at March 24, 2017 01:44 AM (ogtwj)

406 "A full repeal will require 60 votes in the Senate to invoke cloture if the Dems filibuster."

Or they can use 51 votes (or 50 + pence) to do any of the following:
1 - abolish the filibuster
2 - modify the rules re filibuster including going back to the early version where people actually have to keep talking non-stop to filibuster
3 - make a finding re the rules of the house that the repeal bill can be passed via reconciliation (if Obamacare could be passed through reconciliation, why can't it be repealed the same way?)

"But all this flip talk about "just repeal it" is silly. "Merely" repealing Obamacare still requires you to enact a law."

A 1-sentence law that says the ACA is repealed.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at March 24, 2017 08:37 AM (BHpB+)

Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0565 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0208 seconds, 415 records returned.
Page size 272 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.