The TrumpCare comes back from the dead (...and lives!) thread

[Person Man]

Even if they can ram something through by 1 vote in the house and Pence in the Senate, they still have a lot to do here:



If they're really going all out here, don't expect to see tax reform passed this year.

That will give us 60 seats in the House and probably allow us to gan in the Senate.
And Reconcilation may or may not be an option by the end.

[Person Man]

Trump Toys With Sabotaging Obamacare To Bring Dems To The Table On Repealing It

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"I don't want anybody to get hurt.  Just do as I say, and nobody's gonna get hurt."

Well, there goes the debt ceiling.

[Person Man]

just out of curiosity TD, what type of replacement bill would YOU want?

1. Not this abortion of a bill.
2. I doubt very much you do either.
3. The most conservative bill that can pass the House and Senate and has popular support. I'm not insane. I don't go jumping off cliffs with flags flying. Government being involved in our healthcare is now a settled question. I don't like Social Security and Medicare but guess what? That ship has long since sailed and we deal with that fact. Just write up a solid bill, sell it to the public, and call it a win. Ryan is deluded in his bid to replace the ACA w/ the AHCA. So is the GOP.  Romney was the last real chance to stop it.

But since you asked --

a. Repeal ObamaCare. Break up the HMOs state by state, do decent drug patent reforms, guarantee catastrophic coverage through Medicaid, mandate everyone cover insurance personally up to 8% (more based on their health and any behaviors like weight or smoking), of their income and then the government would subsidize the rest, allow States to negotiate market rates, allow people to be charged premiums based on past health and weight (in the sense a smoker or overweight person should pay more than a healthy person). The exchanges would stay without subsidies.

Obviously birth control woud be covered out of pocket as would minor issues like the flu and regular checkups (see more on this below). We want people to use their coverage for really big issues like mammograms, cancer, heart attacks, and strokes.

Ideally a doctor visit would come down to a reasonable cost that can be paid out of pocket and we would end the employer sponsored health insurance market with a shift to everyone purchasing individual and family plans (one way to do it is ending the tax break for employers to cover their employees). They would see the charges and one of the biggest problems we face is that a lot of these charges aren't transparent. We need to really change that and that's one way to bend the cost curve.

Medicaid and Medicare reforms would need to be part of the package as well. I personally think there are people on these programs that shouldn't be there and we need to assess that appropriately. I certainly believe ex smokers and overweight people should pay a premium to these programs to get on it.

All of this is pretty similar to the Swiss model, one of the more conservative European healthcare models. I'd like to think my plan is a sellable conservative solution to healthcare.

EDIT: You could refuse healthcare coverage, actually, under my plan but you would be denied entry into any kind of subsidised healthcare for any reason if you let your coverage lapse. You would need to pay up the full price and pay a Medicaid and Medicare premium if you opted in.

Basically, everyone would be expected to pay everything they could afford, but no more. Am I right?

[Person Man]

I can just hear her a annoying trembling voice right now "Iii aaam oopen toooo phaaasinggg ooutt mmeeedicareee ooverrr sssevennnn yearssss".

You're aware that's a medical condition she has?

Why be empathetic about the medical conditions of a woman whose about to send 23 million people off of health care?

My thoughts too, but I did delete that since it's probably not in the best taste if she indeed does have a condition.

But seriously, her whole fake moderate routine is just too predictable at this point.

If this disgrace passes the Senate 50-50, and Susan Collins votes for it, then Maine's odd obsession with Republican faux moderates is the cause for 23 million losing their health care.

Hopefully, she gets a decent challenger from there.

[Person Man]

I can just hear her a annoying trembling voice right now "Iii aaam oopen toooo phaaasinggg ooutt mmeeedicareee ooverrr sssevennnn yearssss".

You're aware that's a medical condition she has?

Why be empathetic about the medical conditions of a woman whose about to send 23 million people off of health care?

My thoughts too, but I did delete that since it's probably not in the best taste if she indeed does have a condition.

But seriously, her whole fake moderate routine is just too predictable at this point.

If this disgrace passes the Senate 50-50, and Susan Collins votes for it, then Maine's odd obsession with Republican faux moderates is the cause for 23 million losing their health care.

Hopefully, she gets a decent challenger from there.

Rumor has it she's leaving the Senate after 2018. She's basically sending millions of Americans to an early grave then ditching the scene of the crime.

A real lowlife Collins is

With NV, AZ, and maybe Cruz, that makes the senate possible.

[Person Man]

Probably more than 23 million will lise care. Republicans think they are locked in and that they have their own ethnic bloc now to abuse and get away with heinous corruption to boot. Wouldn't surprise me if they caught running drugs or prostitutes out of their offices at this rate. Eventually abortions when they enable personhood.

[Person Man]

Trumpy being silent is the biggest tell the Senate GOP isn't planning to care about the AHCA. The power of the presidential pulpit is needed to sell the bill to the public if it became law. That's how it works. Trump isn't even messaging about it even on a cursory basis. He's let the opposition consume the air waves and all the talk to define the ACA and the AHCA this year.

Is it possible they are just using the Trump-Russia scandal as cover? They are doing all their work in secret, and the scandals are allowing that to happen without as much of a fuss as there normally might be.

I'm just wondering if Senate passage would be enough to get attention on it, and if the House could actually agree on something. Or is the point that Mitch won't let the bill pass, even if it could?

Sorry, I meant to do my usual monologue of three long winded posts but I went to shower and forgot.

It's not, in my view, really possible to pass a major law, even with a scandal like Russia, in total secrecy. It affects 1/6th of the economy and tens of millions of people. Voters, in fact, consistently rank healthcare ahead of Russia on their list of concerns. So, eventually, any bill passed would undergo heavy scrutiny, if not outright condemnation. You'd have the GOP being attacked for a year for killing the expansion, threatening the Medicaid status of people, and weakening the healthcare markets. Even if they passed and signed a law, there would be a strong outcry.

No Congressman or Senator wants to deal with that crap. I think if I were McConnell, I'd kill the law, and then immediately push tax reform through and try to send people home in September with that win under the GOP's belt.

I'm not really sure the GOP wants to go into 2018 with Russia and healthcare around their necks along with a weakening economy and undisciplined President. I don't think Mitch McC wants to either so I think a lot of this is him trying to minimize the outrage, get something up for a vote, and then get on with life.

Could McConnell be trying to pass something but have Schumer and Co agree to push for amendments on a 'bipartisan fix'? No, I don't think so, because the Democrats would have the public on their side and they would push hard for restoring the ACA.

Remember, the ACA was a live issue for Democrats for eight years. Why would the GOP want to create a long running live issue that simply motivates Democrats to vote?

Because they think it doesn't matter because no one thinks they are going anywhere.The election today, if Handel wins, will solidify the notion that Republicans have a locked in electorate because of their feudal party machine.

[Person Man]

Said “feudal machine” isn't good enough. 46% of the Presidential vote and 49% of the House vote sucks. I would be willing to wager that number drops a couple of points in 2018 if Donnie stays at 40% or below.

I still don't see how Republicans don't figure they can make a primary challenge and general election problem go away if they fix the ACA and take that off the table. Base activists don't get that much leeway to toss a senator on endorsing a popular fix.

It's always darkest before Don, right? No president since FDR won two terms and still kept congress...and amazingly, no Republican.

[Person Man]

My new policy on anything related to the GOP mindset is to just listen to TD

And he's right. The GOP has been laying groundwork for tax reform like crazy. Not a peep about HC

He is worth listening to if the next month comes to pass without a HC bill on OO desk.

[Person Man]

U Can't Handel This.


I suspect an amazing victory in GA-06 will result in Yuge Trumpmentum to pass Obamacare repeal.

Good luck getting affordable health insurance that covers your pre-existing conditions of herpes

Only losers depend on chance.

Who needs luck when you have skill, gerrymandering, a great map for the US Senate, and President Trump?

but you? Not so much? I unxerstand the comforts of the vicarious life.

Never thought I would live to see the day an American bragged about rigging elections, though.

[Person Man]

but you? Not so much? I unxerstand the comforts of the vicarious life.

Never thought I would live to see the day an American bragged about rigging elections, though.

I do not think Trump or myself needs luck. Trump won with a 2-1 money disadvantage. Trump can always invoke tribal politics, and the left has no counter for their own tactics. This is like 5 time Super Bowl champion Tom Brady going after a rookie safety, and it is so good.

I do not know what election rigging means...Claire McCaskill engaged in a curious tactic known as rat****ing to ensure a desired opponent in the 2012 election. Does that count?

Barry ranted about whining about election rigging in October 2016. Shall I provide the video?
Link


Plenty of folks agree with my take!
Link

Bragging about being ahead is not the same as not letting your opponents vote.


Are you Larry?
Eh, just like a football fan or the girl who doesn't do anything and watches VH1. It appears that all of your analogies to winning is an escape for a life that isn't going so well?

That's what a lot of the Kekistani thing is about. Its a "brand".

An alternative sketch of why this law MIGHT pass. Polarization might be pushed to an all time in American politics, thus overriding other normal factors. It's quite interesting, really. I've constantly ignored polarizaton as a factor in American politics during this time.

So, for example, Republicans in Congress might make the assumption that they're better off passing the law and motivating the Republican base to turn out in 2018. Looking at GA 06 and SC 05, they may make the conclusion it's better to put the law on the President's desk and then motivate Republicans to turn out in 2018. Republicans didn't show up in SC 05 and they need a reason to show up in 2018 (and they showed up in GA 06 through infusions of millions).

I am really skeptical whether they'd really try to attack blue collar voters in WV and KY and elsewhere with this law and phase out the Medicaid expansion and threaten the health care market to the extent this law would. But they may just assume that to push the margins up in 2018, to keep Congress, it's worth it and try to hope for the best beyond 2018.

But I don't think we should foreclose the possibility of passage. EDIT: I definitely want to see what happens next week. GA 06/SC 05 definitely introduce new variables to think about and I still think the law will fail… but I'll wait and see what wins out first, polarization or popularity.

That's what I am thinking. They may now think the Democratic leadership is toxic enough to motivate the base because of the (((Coastal Elite))) leadership of the Democrats hasn't changed beyong Harry Reid leaving and now think Democrats are not going to be a threat because they are now "passing the torch".