Support NeoGAF

[Sweeney Tom]

Imagine having a bill so bad LePage is speaking out against it.

And Fox News is outright posting stuff like this

 

[Anoregon]

It would probably be Hatch. Ugh.

Yeah that wouldn't be unlikely.

 

[Tovarisc]

And Fox News is outright posting stuff like this

It's kinda amazing that they have managed to create such garbage bill that their co-workers and loyal supporters don't want anything to do with it.

 

[Sobriquet]

me when I can't even get double digit votes

*"Hello Darkness, My Old Friend"*

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

It would probably be Hatch. Ugh.

He is President Pro Tempore , could be still be that and Majority Leader?

 

[Sobriquet]

He is President Pro Tempore , could be still be that and Majority Leader?

Majority Leader would be a downgrade. And it would be a terrible job to take right now.

 

[Kusagari]

There's no way in hell Hatch would accept the position.

It would probably be, ughh, Cornyn.

 

[kirblar]

For you young'ns who can't remember 2005 - https://www.brookings.edu/research/...tive-failed-and-what-it-means-for-the-future/

 

[Grizzle_Dat]

It's kinda amazing that they have managed to create such garbage bill that their co-workers and loyal supporters don't want anything to do with it.

Their supporters want it repealed and not replaced

 

[Latvian Hitman]

Sen @RandPaul sends letter to McConnell with his proposed fixes to the health care bill:

https://twitter.com/frankthorp/status/880084046780526592

"This continues the top-down approach that has led to increased premiums and has not changed the behavior of the young and healthy who are priced out of the market,
and those who game the system to purchase insurance after they become sick."

This is the kind of shit that infuriates me. Someone who gets "sick"- (and that doesn't mean they have the flu, it means cancer, leukemia, heart conditions, etc.- you know, shit that will kill you if left untreated), are the ones to blame because they're "gaming the system."

No- they're trying to FUCKING SURVIVE the fucking system. It's not their fault the system is corrupt and evil to begin with.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

Rand Paul goes on the list.

 

[Saint Gregory]

It's kinda amazing that they have managed to create such garbage bill that their co-workers and loyal supporters don't want anything to do with it.

It"s actually been proven by multiple polls that if you show even diehard, blood red Republicans what's in the ACA without calling it "Obamacare" they love it. In fact one of the most successful ACA exchanges existed in Kentucky, McConnell's home state, until voters there elected a Republican governor who ran on a platform of destroying it. We should have realized then how bad the Stockholm Syndrome is between Republican voters and their leadership.

 

[Tovarisc]

It"s actually been proven by multiple polls that if you show even diehard, blood red Republicans what's in the ACA without calling it "Obamacare" they love it. In fact one of the most successful ACA exchanges existed in Kentucky, McConnell's home state, until voters there elected a Republican governor who ran on a platform of destroying it. We should have realized then how bad the Stockholm Syndrome is between Republican voters and their leadership.

Is it awful of me to say that Republicans love ACA, but hate Obamacare because it's health care plan by black man? With one they don't really can tell who is behind it while with another branding it's obvious.

 

[Zolo]

Is it awful of me to say that Republicans love ACA, but hate Obamacare because it's health care plan by black man? With one they don't really can tell who is behind it while with another branding it's obvious.

It's more tribalism. Republicans hate Liberals more than almost any other group.

 

[conpfreak]

Is it awful of me to say that Republicans love ACA, but hate Obamacare because it's health care plan by black man?

Nope, it isn't. The Republicans really need to embrace the ACA and then just work from there. Public opinion will never be on their side because the standards have been raised with the ACA and no one wants to lose that. They want to control costs, yes, but people expect the government to play a role in ensuring affordable access to health care. Conservatives lost that argument years ago.

 

[AndyD]

This is the kind of shit that infuriates me. Someone who gets "sick"- (and that doesn't mean they have the flu, it means cancer, leukemia, heart conditions, etc.- you know, shit that will kill you if left untreated), are the ones to blame because they're "gaming the system."

No- they're trying to FUCKING SURVIVE the fucking system. It's not their fault the system is corrupt and evil to begin with.

I would disagree with you on "doesn't mean they have the flu". May people without coverage do not generally treat simple conditions such as flu and let them progress to the point where emergency room is their only solution. So in a way they gamble with their own health by not paying for insurance and not even seeing a doctor out of pocket even for minor ailments, and sometimes they lose that gamble and develop pneumonia or advanced cancer or whatnot that might have been prevented if detected or treated early. That's one of the reasons for the term "young invincibles." They think nothing will happen to them, so they don't contribute and hence gamble. Some lose.

The argument is that they are consciously violating the social construct of society by choosing not to contribute all along (pay insurance even if able) and expecting to be taken care of when in need (dire sickness). This is why they are blamed. Whether we should let them be gamblers and still take care of them (let them game the system), versus forcing them into participating (mandates) or ridiculing them or penalizing them (delays in coverage), that's a whole another discussion. But the reality is that this behavior in part causes healthcare to be expensive and unsustainable.

 

[Latvian Hitman]

I would disagree with you on "doesn't mean they have the flu". May people without coverage do not generally treat simple conditions such as flu and let them progress to the point where emergency room is their only solution.

Which wouldn't be a factor if our healthcare system was focused around preventative care and access instead of profits. People shouldn't have to make those choices in the first place. You catch my drift?

 

[AndyD]

Which wouldn't be a factor if our healthcare system was focused around preventative care and access instead of profits. People shouldn't have to make those choices in the first place. You catch my drift?

Oh I agree.

But that's not the Republican reality currently. We don't play by ideal rules, but the real ones in front of us.

 

[Ernest]

The Senate Finance Office is tallying calls from people who want a public hearing on the healthcare bill. Call them at 202-224-4515 and tell them you'd like to be added to the tally for a public hearing on the healthcare bill, and they will take it down and ask you for your zip code. I had to call a few times to get through as the line was busy at first and their voicemail box is full, but even with that it took less than five minutes total. I urge everyone to call to be added to the tally. Even if you support the GOP bill, a public hearing is in everyone's best interest, except of course McConnell's.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

1) We're $18 trillion in debt. 2) Trump's plan INCREASES medical spending on the poor by about 34% over current levels over the next decade

http://reason.com/archives/2017/05/29/trumps-medicaid-cuts-actually-increase-f

The reason we're talking about a drastic cut is because medical costs are skyrocketing as are the populations of people who need those programs (Obama's plan would have nearly doubled Medicaid spending) so even that massive growth means millions will be pushed out of coverage.

But either way, the trend is that government spending for these social welfare programs has exploded - it's the blue part of the first graph here:

http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/06/2...-understand-the-extent-of-republican-failure/

It's not defense that's eating up the budget - it's this. "Entitlement" spending is what we call spending for programs for the elderly, disabled, unemployed, impoverished etc. and entitlements have been growing as a share of the federal budget at a terrifying rate. The Republicans say that we're choosing between cruelty or more cruelty - that the current system of spending will eventually collapse the system like in Greece.

I don't happen to agree with their exact plan (they are using their cuts to fund tax cuts for the rich) but they have plenty of economists on their side saying this trajectory isn't sustainable. Costs HAVE to come down at some point - you can't just keep printing money. When are we going to make those choices?

They're saying we either make those cuts now, or else the system will collapse and then millions truly will die.

This is the more reasonable version of the republican's position. If you read slatestarcodex, though, you'll know it's not just health care skyrocketing - education, both private and public, infrastructure spending, and almost anything that isn't a durable good has suffered from cost disease. I do t k ow how to fix it...

...But I do know that BCRA isn't a good faith effort to fix it. For one thing, you can't really claim fiscal sustainability is your watchword while cutting 800 billion dollars in taxes. This occupies a bafflingly small amount of your thinking on the matter. It completely obliterates the good the bill hoped to accomplish. It no more fixes the problem than Obamacare - the overall effect on the deficit is pretty paltry.

More importantly, the bill does not ask people from all walks of life to bear their part of the burden. Rich people are not asked to pay higher taxes. Middle class people's tax deduction for employer-provided health care is as safe as their social security. But no one gives a shit about poor people, so they're the ones that get kicked out of this particular lifeboat.

The bill, as written, has about as much to do with fixing spiraling health care costs as a the congressional softball game. It is class warfare, pure and simple, leaving tens of thousands of poor and sick people to die so the rich can enjoy a tax break.

I mean, you mention Greece - but none of the austerity measures, controversial as they might have been, pissed their savings down the toilet so the upper classes can afford better yachts. This bill doesn't even deserve the dubious distinction of being called an austerity measure.

 

[cameron]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/880175585418465284


ABC News: Fact check: The Senate health care bill's effect on Medicaid

But does the Senate Republican health care bill actually cut Medicaid funding and coverage?

While the estimated government spending on Medicaid would increase under the Senate health care bill gradually over time, it will spend less each year on the program than what the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, currently allots.

If Obamacare remains intact, the government would spend an estimated $415 billion next year on Medicaid, and $624 billion by the year 2026, according to the review of the bill from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

If the Senate bill is passed and goes into effect in 2018, the government would spend an estimated $403 billion on Medicaid that fiscal year. That number increases to $466 billion by the year 2026, according to the CBO.

The CBO also estimated that federal spending on Medicaid from now until 2026 would be $772 billion less than what is projected to be spent under the current law. The Senate bill, however, leads to more government spending on Medicaid in that amount of time than the House GOP bill.

The CBO's latest analysis was done using its March 2016 baseline.

States that opted into Medicaid expansion under the ACA by March 2017 would see government funding reduced starting in 2021.

The bill phases out funding at a lower rate for Medicaid expansion under Obamacare by 2024.

If the current version of the Senate GOP bill becomes law, states can choose whether to receive funds by a per capita cap, determined by the number of people enrolled, or a block grant.

The CBO report makes one thing clear: the amount of federal revenues collected and the amount of spending on Medicaid “would almost surely both be lower than under current law," and the number of uninsured people under the Senate health care bill “would almost surely be greater than under current law.”

 

[ShadowSwordmaster]

Fuck Off, Trump.

 

[Steel]

So, crossposting from another thread:

So, umm... Trump's going even further off the deep end:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
If Republican Senators are unable to pass what they are working on now, they should immediately REPEAL, and then REPLACE at a later date!
3:37 AM - 30 Jun 2017

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...37163247267840

I wonder what the chances are that a clean repeal will be blocked. They'd definitely get Rand Paul's vote, at least. And probably most tea partiers.

 

[DrForester]

How did I find myself in a weeks old thread...

Sorry for the bump.