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

[Brittain33]

Billy Long's daughter has cancer so he is "woke" to the pre-existing conditions issue.

[Torie]

Not providing adequate medical care for the sick (those with pre-existing conditions), of limited means, is shocking to the conscience, and voting for this evil bill I hope ends the careers of many. I am just amazed how this is evolving. Anyway, if my congressman Faso votes for this, he's done. He voted for Ryancare and got burned. We shall see if he learned his lesson.

[MasterJedi]

Saw a Libertarian meme from one of our former Louisiana posters saying that giving people the ability to purchase insurance is freedom but providing everyone insurance is "slavery". It's probably a bizarre, widely held belief by libertarians and the right.

[SoLongAtlas]

Saw a Libertarian meme from one of our former Louisiana posters saying that giving people the ability to purchase insurance is freedom but providing everyone insurance is "slavery". It's probably a bizarre, widely held belief by libertarians and the right.

Had a friend who believed the same way. Taxes are evil, a form of slavery but if everyone had the freedom to choose and buy what they want then heck yeah, Merica! Basically these kinds of folks, esp economic libertarians ignore reality. Most ppl in this country can't afford increased premiums and cadillac plans - that's why the subsidies and exchanges were set up. Those are unfortunately failing. At this point, it looks more likely that the next Dem president will go for outright single payer.

[The_Doctor]

Fred Upton (R-Mich.) is a no. It's dead. Ryan can't deliver the House votes.

I can hear the screaming and the sulking from the White House. If they had a shred of competence or an ounce of intelligence, they would have gone with a bill that reformed the worst of the ACA law and called it a day.

[The Other Castro]

Losing Fred Upton is big, but this isn't dead until it's dead. No whip count currently has 23 hard and public Nos, which is what is needed for this to fail.

[The_Doctor]

Losing Fred Upton is big, but this isn't dead until it's dead. No whip count currently has 23 hard and public Nos, which is what is needed for this to fail.

22, with Billy Long (R-Springfield) and a member of the House GOP leadership against it? I mean, it's 90% dead. We'll see, when the vote is tomorrow or whenever. I doubt Ryan lets it go to the floor.

[The Other Castro]

Losing Fred Upton is big, but this isn't dead until it's dead. No whip count currently has 23 hard and public Nos, which is what is needed for this to fail.

22, with Billy Long (R-Springfield) and a member of the House GOP leadership against it? I mean, it's 90% dead. We'll see, when the vote is tomorrow or whenever. I doubt Ryan lets it go to the floor.

It's only mostly dead, 90% dead is slightly alive. Yeah it's almost definitely not going to pass, and if it did there is 0% chance something remotely resembling it passes the Senate, but it'd be great for it to die right now.

[Ebsy]

Upton voting no gives cover to a lot more members to vote no. He must be afraid of losing reelection, even if most of us think he is fairly safe in his district.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Trying to bluff like that seems pointless. If I was a GOP congressman in a competitive district, why would I vote for a terrible bill that would endanger me if it was going to pass anyway?

[The Other Castro]

"House Republicans Weigh Another Health Care Amendment"

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-republicans-health-care-amendment_us_5908e99de4b02655f84197af

[The_Doctor]

None of the moderates on record as a no were sold. However they're trying to get it close enough that Reichart and Paulsen vote yes apparently. Diaz-Balart seemed a no. Fuller (HuffPo) seems like he's tracking the vote the best.

Per Fuller, 20 GOP are locked in as no with 7 GOP leaning no. 13 GOP are undecided. The lean yes number 20 (but could flip to no if it looks like a failed vote). So assuming 193 D, 20 R that's 213 no.  The yes contingent stands at 191. The rest are undecided. 27 Republicans are basically not committed. For perspective, that's 47/238 Republicans not on the yes team (and that's a fifth of the GOP caucus).

McHenry and Ryan would need to win 92% of the undecided and lean yes folks to win 216 votes. I'm a tad skeptical but its in theory possible.

[Matty]

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

[Tartarus Sauce]

None of the moderates on record as a no were sold. However they're trying to get it close enough that Reichart and Paulsen vote yes apparently. Diaz-Balart seemed a no. Fuller (HuffPo) seems like he's tracking the vote the best.

It's entirely against the interests of Reichart and Paulsen to vote in support for this bill. They'd get flambeed in the midterms.  

[The_Doctor]

None of the moderates on record as a no were sold. However they're trying to get it close enough that Reichart and Paulsen vote yes apparently. Diaz-Balart seemed a no. Fuller (HuffPo) seems like he's tracking the vote the best.

It's entirely against the interests of Reichart and Paulsen to vote in support for this bill. They'd get flambeed in the midterms.  

I'll throw up a post here about the undecided votes after doing some research about their districts you're largely right. They're on the list as if the bill is within 3-4 votes. Issa is refusing to say what his vote should be.

[The_Doctor]

Losing Fred Upton is big, but this isn't dead until it's dead. No whip count currently has 23 hard and public Nos, which is what is needed for this to fail.

22, with Billy Long (R-Springfield) and a member of the House GOP leadership against it? I mean, it's 90% dead. We'll see, when the vote is tomorrow or whenever. I doubt Ryan lets it go to the floor.

The reason Long is against it is because his daughter has cancer so he knows what this bill will really do: bankrupt him

Might be or someone saw him as a convenient messenger to shoot the bill. He's not the only House Republican with a family member who had cancer recently. I'm cynical because a ton of other Republicans are no and they're probably in similar situations as Long or have been so in the past.

I don't think he did it entirely from political motives but at the same time politics definitely entered his equation.

[The_Doctor]

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. EDIT: Under my plan, we would probably replace these programs with the 8% premium plan.

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.

[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?

[pbrower2a]

Medicare for all, with some financing through taxes on pollution, sugars, alcohol, and cancerweed products, with deductibles that shrink for income. 

[The_Doctor]

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?

Yes.

This is more or less a market alternative to single payer and with the intent to retain insurance companies in the mix, to head off nationalization of healthcare. It retains a fairly free market framework with adequate coverage and a catastrophic coverage fund so that it covers things like cancer, etc. (Actually a catastrophic coverage fund might not be needed if insurance companies are basically covering everyone).

Everyone would be purchasing health insurance as a family / individually and would be keeping their coverage through that system, so no more employer funded insurance. That's one major step away from our current inefficient model (a lot of economists have called it a bad idea). So, in one key regard, we actually become more free market than we are today.

The idea is to retain the American system's innovation in healthcare solutions (that everyone in the world replicates for far cheaper than us) while creating adequate coverage for our citizens. Obviously my plans would include basic coverage standards and exclude things like abortion services, birth control, and cosmetic surgery.

The 8% of your income is to defray the costs of paying for this system. The denial of access to services if you don't get coverage is a semi-mandate that I find more constitutional.

I would also add my support for a sugar tax because of how damaging obesity can be to our healthcare costs. So that's another thing, going into the pool to help cover the costs of coverage.

There are a few other conservative ideas I'd toss in but that's the gist ...

[Ronnie]

Huey Long and Fred Upton will now vote yes after they included an amendment ensuring more money for high-risk pools:

https://mobile.twitter.com/marykbruce/status/859787094809600001

I imagine it'll probably pass the house now.

[Klartext89]

Maybe you should change the name of the thread? :-D

[ApatheticAustrian]

Maybe you should change the name of the thread? :-D

yes, plz and the new law is so bizarre, i pray it gets passed,.......

it makes it more reasonable NOT to buy insurance and the public is still paying more....

[Dr. Arch]

Republicans won't rest until they kill off everyone who isn't dirty wealthy.

[Ronnie]

Maybe you should change the name of the thread? :-D

I'll change it when it officially passes the house, but someone has to convince me that any bill has a shot at clearing both chambers.