Welp, that's one way to force a government shutdown.
Crazy to think that we're heading to a shutdown when one party controls congress and the presidency.
What a bunch of clowns.
Welp, that's one way to force a government shutdown.
Americans like to play ping pong with the president's party. It doesn't matter who is running or the recent history of the parties, Americans will generally vote for the opposite party after a two term presidency. The same for midterms. Americans, in general, do not like when one party has full power, so, no matter what the party is or how successful they are, they vote in the opposite of the president's party because Americans generally believe bipartisanship leads to better legislation (probably because they are taught this in school).
NEW: House leadership to White House: there won't be a healthcare vote on Wednesday
Just kidding about taking the shot next week guys!
https://twitter.com/axios/status/855128428609249285
Great, waste more time and capital trying to make a plan with 17% approval even worse.
AARP Advocates (@AARPadvocates)
New proposal, same old bad bill that eliminates protections for people w/ pre-existing conditions.
How do you imagine it passing the Senate assuming it possibly could pass in the House?
I'm actually surprised it didn't pass the first time, people forget it barely didn't have enough votes, all this talk about republican politicians scared to answer to their "angry constituents" is not a real issue for most of them.
We will see that we should've hoped that first bill was passed once they reveal what this new freedom caucus approved bill is
Oh don't mind me, just making sure the final nail in this coffin is in there NICE AND DEEP
https://twitter.com/AARPadvocates/status/855103435565387776
Just kidding about taking the shot next week guys!
https://twitter.com/axios/status/855128428609249285
I...what?Oh don't mind me, just making sure the final nail in this coffin is in there NICE AND DEEP
https://twitter.com/AARPadvocates/status/855103435565387776
I'm actually surprised it didn't pass the first time, people forget it barely didn't have enough votes, all this talk about republican politicians scared to answer to their "angry constituents" is not a real issue for most of them.
We will see that we should've hoped that first bill was passed once they reveal what this new freedom caucus approved bill is
They don't want to upset their base and make enemies with talk radio
People cheered when the last bill flopped, but they didn't realize it flopped because it wasn't extreme enough. Ryan doesn't need the moderate republicans to pass this if he has the freedom caucus on board
This bill WILL go through, then the burden is the republican senate to keep Obamacare alive lol
You have no idea what you're talking about. They could have gotten the Freedom Caucus on board easily. What they could not do is both get the Freedom Caucus to support it without losing moderates. That dynamic hasn't changed.
These assholes need to get over undoing Obama and look forward.
Not really. The GOP agenda is incompatible with modern America. They'll still be relevant as a political party but I doubt they will ever win the WH after Trump.
On CNN now! US looking to arrest Assange!
These assholes need to get over undoing Obama and look forward.
We're gonna have a government shut-down over whether or not to fund obamacare, aren't we?
He really is going to try again, heard on CNN as early as next week. God, he has no idea what he is doing.
Ryan won't reveal the bill till he knows he has the votes to prevent further embarrassment
... Which is what any competent human being would have done the first time.
Still, I have little faith that he can draft something awful enough to get FC support and still somehow get moderates to sign off in the Senate.
Republicans heading for another embarrassing defeat, though I imagine this would will be much less public.
Blame the Democrats when the vote fails instead of their own in-fighting? That's all I got.
Oh don't mind me, just making sure the final nail in this coffin is in there NICE AND DEEP
https://twitter.com/AARPadvocates/st...03435565387776
.@PressSec on healthcare: "It is not our official position to get this done next week"
So this is formally dead guys. Least for next week, down the line we'll see, but they'll have their hands full with federal spending next week.
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/855445603421171713
So this is formally dead guys. Least for next week, down the line we'll see, but they'll have their hands full with federal spending next week.
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/855445603421171713
Robert Costa (@costareports)
confirmed by a person close to Freedom Caucus: Meadows, Jordan, Labrador are now supportive of the changed HC bill, have told WH
Haley Byrd (@byrdinator)
reliably told the HFC board is meeting tonight to discuss negotiated AHCA changes and the full group will meet tomorrow to see the text
Robert Costa (@costareports)
Here's the agreement, per sources: Meadows + MacArthur have an amendment that gives states the option of opting out of some Title 1 regs
This might be back on... maybe?
https://twitter.com/costareports/status/856992876324061184
https://twitter.com/byrdinator/status/856995688890150913
https://twitter.com/costareports/status/856997166170198016
MacArthur of the Tuesday Group moderates and Meadows of the HFC (fringe right conservatives).
Wasn't MacArthur already for the original version?
Haley Byrd‏@byrdinator ·
House Freedom Caucus member Andy Biggs tells me he's "leaning no" on AHCA with MacArthur amendment. Says he still has many problems with it.
Why yessir, he has been one of the dudes beating this dead horse for a minute now.
Apparently some HFC cats still aren't convinced anyway.
They likely never will be
https://twitter.com/byrdinator/status/857001611671080962
The new plan would let states decline to require insurers to offer a minimum set of benefits and provisions allowing health plans to charge people more based on their age and health status. States can also opt out of enforcing a 30 percent surcharge for people who dont maintain insurance coverage but later seek to get covered again, according to a brief update sent to Energy and Commerce members. Thats the policy that the Republicans would use to replace the Obamacare individual mandate.
In exchange, states would have to set up a high-risk pool, presumably to push back on expected criticisms that the GOP plan would not help people with pre-existing conditions.