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

[Dr. Arch]

It was never going to be voted on this week, and anyone who said it would be was being silly. The House will pass it next week or the week after. The Senate is the real battlefield.

You underestimate how unpopular this ridiculous healthcare law s.

[Virginiá]

Get it through the house, let the moderates do what they want with it in joint committees, and be done with it.

I just don't understand why, if it has little chance of passing the Senate, does the House GOP want to have its members on record voting for a major healthcare reform package that the public hates (including many Republican voters)? What does this accomplish? Are GOP leaders hoping that the ability to go to their voters and say they tried will outweigh the fact that they voted on a bill that would boot millions off their insurance and effectively get rid of a number of provisions people actually liked? That seems a little misguided imo, but whatevs I guess.

[The_Doctor]

Why are people here saying it "died". Am I missing something? It's a regular occurence not to put something on the floor if you don't have enough votes.

There are 19 no votes and enough undecideds that if half vote for it, it will be enough.

There are 21. More likely, more than 21. It's dead, most likely. They keep trying to put it on the floor and it keeps not getting there. Do you understand, out of curiosity, why this isn't going to pass the Senate, let alone go to conference? If they pass it out of the House, the Senate will gut it like a fish.

[Devout Centrist]

Why are people here saying it "died". Am I missing something? It's a regular occurence not to put something on the floor if you don't have enough votes.

There are 19 no votes and enough undecideds that if half vote for it, it will be enough.

We don't even have a solid whip count, so the no's are probably higher.

All I am saying is that it's not an uncommon occurrence to delay legislation. The ACA was delayed 6 times in the house, and IIRC, TARP was delayed twice.

This is a much better position now than a month ago.

Get it through the house, let the moderates do what they want with it in joint committees, and be done with it.

This isn't a better position at all, I mean this is what happens when you gut Congressional procedures and try to herd cats.

[Matty]

Why are people here saying it "died". Am I missing something? It's a regular occurence not to put something on the floor if you don't have enough votes.

There are 19 no votes and enough undecideds that if half vote for it, it will be enough.

There are 21. More likely, more than 21. It's dead, most likely. They keep trying to put it on the floor and it keeps not getting there. Do you understand, out of curiosity, why this isn't going to pass the Senate, let alone go to conference? If they pass it out of the House, the Senate will gut it like a fish.

Do you not understand what a joint committee is? You think the legislation that passes the house is the same legislation the senate votes on?

Why don't you go back and look at the ACA bill initially passed by the house.

[The_Doctor]

[

Do you not understand what a joint committee is? You think the legislation that passes the house is the same legislation the senate votes on?

Why don't you go back and look at the ACA bill initially passed by the house.

Its not called a joint committee. It's called Conference committee in the first place.

You do understand that the Conference Committee usually has to reconcile the bills that command majority support in both chambers and usually the point is to create a bill that has that level of support. Now if the House and Senate have wildly diverging bills they don't pass squat.

What you're not grasping is that the ACA wasn't wildly divergent in both chambers when it passed in 2009-2010. There was enough overlap that both chambers passed the law and Obama signed it.

The problem, as you clearly don't understand, is that Republicans don't want to pass a bill in the first place that threatens benefits. There is no amount of moderates negotiating that changes this essential fact. Go look at the opposition and why it's happening. Go look at the releases -- do some research.  A ton of the Republicans have a problem because AHCA would limit the Medicaid expansion, threaten current benefits, and millions would lose measurable benefits. So of course people like Tom Cotton and Rand Paul all come out against it. Ditto Steve Daines and Susan Collins and a ton of other Republicans.

Even if the current AHCA passes the House, somehow, the Senate can't water it down so significantly that they can pass a bill that keeps all the benefits and call it a repeal with a straight face.

the whole “let the moderates” negotiate it isn't even the issue. The moderates want to keep the law functionally!

[7,052,770]

Why are people here saying it "died". Am I missing something? It's a regular occurence not to put something on the floor if you don't have enough votes.

There are 19 no votes and enough undecideds that if half vote for it, it will be enough.

We don't even have a solid whip count, so the no's are probably higher.

All I am saying is that it's not an uncommon occurrence to delay legislation. The ACA was delayed 6 times in the house, and IIRC, TARP was delayed twice.

This is a much better position now than a month ago.

Get it through the house, let the moderates do what they want with it in joint committees, and be done with it.

You realize that if the moderates change it enough in the "joint committee" to where they could vote yes, the Freedom Caucus will be back to voting no?

There simply is no way to set this up to get 218 yes votes with the current House

[The Other Castro]

What is dead may never die.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

ACT III
Scene 1

Friends, lawyers, congressmen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Trumpcare, not to praise it.
The evil that laws do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Trumpcare. The noble Ryan
Hath told you Donald was ambitious:
If it were so, it were a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Donald answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Ryan and the rest —
For Ryan is an honorable man;
So are they all, all honorable men —
Come I to speak at Trumpcare's funeral.
It was a bill, bigly and promising:
But Ryan says it was ambitious;
And Ryan is an honorable man.
It would throw many millions from their care
Whose premiums our donors' pockets fill:
Did this in Trumpcare seem ambitious?
When the people hath died, Trumpcare hath laughed:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Ryan says it was ambitious;
And Ryan is an honorable man.
You all did see that by the hundredth day
We thrice presented them a bigly bill
Which they did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Ryan says it was ambitious;
And, sure, he is an honorable man.
I speak not to disprove what Ryan spoke,
But here I am to speak what I do know.
You did elect him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you, then, to vote with him?
O judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men hath lost their reason. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Trumpcare;
And I must pause 'til it come back to me.

[Dr. Arch]

Supposedly, the votes are there:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My lord. They should just let it die. If they don't want to help the people, then STOP PUSHING THIS POS. 3 more years of this madness.

[The Other Castro]

They do not have the votes.

[ApatheticAustrian]

i know linking it proves how much out of touch i am with the common folks, but watching the clusterfick this whole healthcare disaster has become, this scene just crawls into my mind every other day.....

https://youtu.be/nZCyyPhyGl8?t=158

[Ronnie]

Based on this Politico article, it really does seem like crunch time now.  I think its current iteration may well pass in the house, but the salient question remains - will house Republicans be able to reconcile their bill with whatever senate Republicans put out in a way that's palatable for both houses?  We are still quite a ways from here to there.

[7,052,770]

If they're still drastically raising premiums for old people (both by cutting subsidies and increasing the age variation from 3:1 to 5:1), this bill is certainly DOA.

[Stranger in a strange land]

If they're still drastically raising premiums for old people (both by cutting subsidies and increasing the age variation from 3:1 to 5:1), this bill is certainly DOA.

The only possible explanation for this is that Trump is a con-man who sees his voters as marks to be taken advantage of. The GOP is damned if they do and damned if they don't on this.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

ACT III
Scene 1

Friends, lawyers, congressmen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Trumpcare, not to praise it.
The evil that laws do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Trumpcare. The noble Ryan
Hath told you Donald was ambitious:
If it were so, it were a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Donald answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Ryan and the rest —
For Ryan is an honorable man;
So are they all, all honorable men —
Come I to speak at Trumpcare's funeral.
It was a bill, bigly and promising:
But Ryan says it was ambitious;
And Ryan is an honorable man.
It would throw many millions from their care
Whose premiums our donors' pockets fill:
Did this in Trumpcare seem ambitious?
When the people hath died, Trumpcare hath laughed:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Ryan says it was ambitious;
And Ryan is an honorable man.
You all did see that by the hundredth day
We thrice presented them a bigly bill
Which they did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Ryan says it was ambitious;
And, sure, he is an honorable man.
I speak not to disprove what Ryan spoke,
But here I am to speak what I do know.
You did elect him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you, then, to vote with him?
O judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men hath lost their reason. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Trumpcare;
And I must pause 'til it come back to me.

[Ebsy]

Rep. Long of Missouri (R-Springfield) is a no. Wasn't on any whip list.

[ApatheticAustrian]

his district voted trump + 46 points (!) and he has voted for AHCA in the committee.

this thing is DED.

[The_Doctor]

22 no votes, based on the Hill. Pence was bluffing to try to get moderates on board to make it appear that Trump had the votes and they would be left behind.

And since Trump committed to making the co-pays as part of the budget deal, the Affordable Care Act is now ... the GOP's responsibility.

Barack Obama KO the GOP, in other words. Watch the GOP modify it but leave 80-90% of it on the books. Probably means a more limited tax reform deal incoming too.

EDIT: As long as the exchange subsidies are untouched, ditto Medicaid and Medicare, and possibly community ratings for women's breast cancer and stuff like that, the GOP CAN pass something. Unfortunately, they keep running headlong into the brick wall and expecting the bricks to tumble, which is ... not happening. This is why Billy Long of Springfield is opposed to the law. I know, I know, Missouri doesn't have a Medicaid expansion but the exchanges and subsidies and so on are helpful for the residents. So if Billy is opposed, imagine the GOP representatives from PA, MI, WI, OH, and WV?

[The_Doctor]

Jason Chaffetz is being rushed out foot surgery and summoned to the House to try and shore up votes

But what if he sticks his foot in his mouth again? Will that require more reconstructive surgery?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jason Chaffetz is being rushed out foot surgery and summoned to the House to try and shore up votes

Seriously?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Jason Chaffetz is being rushed out foot surgery and summoned to the House to try and shore up votes

Seriously?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/01/politics/jason-chaffetz-back-in-dc/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Wow. Never underestimate republican loyalty to Trump, but maybe ObamaCare really is safe.

[Maxwell]

The problem is Team Trump are such bad negotiators because they a) don't know the product and b) they like to threaten and not much else. This is going to fail here or fail in the Senate if the GOP somehow musters enough support for a bill that had 17% support and now is getting worse not better.

[The_Doctor]

Billy Long is retweeting articles highlighting his opposition to the law and being quite vocal. He's from a (PVI) R+23 district and is a Trump ally. Is it possible he's giving moderates cover to oppose the bill this week? His behavior is a tad odd for someone who's a Trump man and he's in no danger at all of losing re-election.

It's not on the up and up which makes me think he's providing cover to other House Republicans who want to oppose the law as well as imply to the White House it's dead.

With 19-22 defections it suggests strongly that there are dozens of House Republicans who want to vote no but need political cover to defy the president. They need in essence a Trump ally who the president has been reliant on to do the back-stabbing.

If true the law probably has 30-40 House Republicans voting no.  That's a minimum of 230 No's in the House.