The Affordable Care Act II - Because Mr. Obama Loves You All

[Rockpile233]

I know, that would be so undemocratic.

 

It's as if memory banks are completely wiped out after 8 years.

Keep trying to paint my argument in a leftist color, it's not and I've explained it several times. The FC are just progressives turned on their heads. Fierce individualists and idealouges, a.k.a people unbearable to work with.

 

The snowflakes got their way and EHB's are up for repeal, but we'll see what the moderates do.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Rockpile233

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

TyTT, lets be real here. You, nor most of these guys were all that familiar with the Byrd Rule and what could or could not be permitted through budget reconciliation. Not only were they not familiar with the legislative process but they lack complete awareness of the political realities. Or the fact that once it passes the house then it has to go to the senate and it will be changed once it gets there. Then if it were to pass the Senate then it would go to conference where more changes would be made. Plus, the way the bill would be crafted it would provide broad discretion to the HHS to make regulatory reforms, reforms that wouldn't be able to be implemented under budget reconciliation.

 

So to believe that voting for this bill is representative of what a final product would look like is simply put, pure ignorance.

 

If they can't get this done, the Republican party would prove the Democrats right, which is that they aren't fit to lead. They make one hell of an opposition party, but when it comes to forming consensus, they struggle. There are more middle of the Road Republicans than there are staunch ultra conservatives and advancing what the Freedom Caucus wants is a non starter for a number of these politicians and same vice versa.

 

I think enough Freedom Caucus and some of the more moderate voices will end up getting this through to the house, but if they can't.....

 

Well, Obamacare could stay. What would Trump do? Probably look to get tax reform done and then possibly may decide to go a totally different route, which is to then work with Democrats, not by repealing Obamacare but portions of it and adding some Republican ideas. He probably would get as many Democrats on board as Republicans to push through legislation, and all they would need is 50 votes because no filibuster would be used.

 

It doesn't matter that I did not know the intricacies of the Byrd Rule, and the limits of what can be achieved through reconciliation. Every single one of us is ignorant of, or has a misunderstanding of, far more than we have expertise in. The fact that I am now educated about the extent of the Byrd Rule has no bearing, however, on my position.

 

The fact that a full Freedom Caucus replacement of the ACA could not be implemented that way does not mean that the Freedom Caucus should abandon it's principles, and adopt or accept a big government position. It's not for the Freedom Caucus to conform to your views on what is pragmatic, scraping the desires of their constituencies, and their own beliefs. They were elected by the people the represent to do a job, and by not acquiescing to big government Republicans they have done so.

 

If big government Republicans decide to run to the left now, they'll have to defend their actions to their own constituencies, given that they have been campaigning on a repeal for the last 8 years; while the Freedom Caucus will be able to campaign on their success in defeating Obamacare 2.0.

 

The libertarian surge in this country is a very real thing, and when big government types like yourself try to marginalize us, we will make it impossible for you to govern.

 

As I've been saying for years, give me something I can support, or expect me to upend the table. We aren't going anywhere.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

As I've been saying for years, give me something I can support, or expect me to upend the table. We aren't going anywhere.

 

Then prepare to be stuck with the ACA.

 

That's the tradeoff for your principle.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Then prepare to be stuck with the ACA.

 

That's the tradeoff for your principle.

The ACA is going to fall apart on it's own. It's already in it's death spiral. I'm more than content to hang that around the necks of those who passed it while it burns.

 

Remember your talking to a person whom has voted for Democrats as a protest vote (in every election but this last one), because Republicans have not given me a libertarian leaning candidate that I can support, and advocates other libertarians do the same.

 

Give me something I can support, or don't expect my support. I'm more than willing to take hostages here.

[B-Man]

The ACA is going to fall apart on it's own. It's already in it's death spiral. I'm more than content to hang that around the necks of those who passed it while it burns.

 

 

 

QFT.

[B-Man]

Members of the House Freedom Caucus have shown they want the moon, or nothing, when considering reform of health-care policy. They aren’t going to get the moon, so what they should do is nothing. If they won’t vote “yes,” they also should not vote “no” and not vote “present” either. Just put out a press release making all their usual assertions that everybody else is a weak-kneed coward unwilling to stand on principle, and then, in a great show of moral purity, walk out of the House chamber in protest just as the vote is being called.

That way, they will be able to signal their disgust without actually killing the only extant vehicle to replace Obamacare with something that tremendously improves Medicaid, expands health-savings accounts, re-introduces market forces into the system, repeals numerous taxes, and reduces the federal debt (compared to current law) bytens or even hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade.

For the bill to pass the House at this stage, it does not need a majority of all elected House members; it needs a majority of those present and voting. So for every two congressmen who walk out in protest, the number of votes needed for passage drops by one. A walk-out thus would signal that they strongly disapprove of the bill as currently constituted and that they will oppose it when it comes back from the Senate unless it has been substantially improved. But it wouldn’t undermine their leadership and a new administration of their own party, poke a finger in the eye of fellow conservative Republicans trying sincerely to navigate difficult legislative terrain, or relegate 320 million Americans to a continuation of an unimproved Obamacare system that is a job-killing, choice-destroying, premium-hiking nightmare.

What the Freedom Caucus must understand is that this vote today essentially amounts to a procedural ballot. It merely provides a blueprint from which the Senate can work. The Senate will probably take several months, if the bill is sent its way, to re-mold it and fix any flaws while the Freedom Caucus weighs in from across the Capitol, knowing that its block of votes eventually will be crucial. When the Senate has done its work, the bill will go back to the House — and then, not before, will come the vote on final passage at which time the Freedom Caucus can decide once and for all if the new legislation well serves the American public.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/446062/freedom-caucus-health-care-bill-house-republicans

Edited March 24, 2017 by B-Man

[Magox]

 

What the Freedom Caucus must understand is that this vote today essentially amounts to a procedural ballot. It merely provides a blueprint from which the Senate can work. The Senate will probably take several months, if the bill is sent its way, to re-mold it and fix any flaws while the Freedom Caucus weighs in from across the Capitol, knowing that its block of votes eventually will be crucial. When the Senate has done its work, the bill will go back to the House — and then, not before, will come the vote on final passage at which time the Freedom Caucus can decide once and for all if the new legislation well serves the American public.

 

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/446062/freedom-caucus-health-care-bill-house-republicans

 

 

 

Hello, I've been saying this.

 

Essentially all you are doing by voting for it is you are voting to advance the ball. It's going to change dramatically once it gets to the Senate, and if it passes the Senate, which will have much more rigorous debate then it still goes to conference. Which then party leaders have to negotiate with their members what they are willing to vote for.

 

There is a lot of ignorance displayed by people in the media, the hucksters, politicians, social media and here on this board regarding this process.

The ACA is going to fall apart on it's own. It's already in it's death spiral. I'm more than content to hang that around the necks of those who passed it while it burns.

 

 

 

No, it's not. This statement shows that you really don't understand the insurance markets. Yes, some markets are in a death spiral, but virtually all urban areas where higher populations exist are no where near in any sort of a death spiral. Waiting for it to fall apart is a fool's errand. You would have to wait years and years for it to be an overall state of a death spiral.

 

This is what we are dealing with, people run off with ideas that they hear politicians and other hucksters say and then they run with it passing it off as fact, when in reality it is a lot more complicated than these inaccurate claims. If people truly had an understanding of the process and reality then we would have a much more reasoned debate.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Magox

[Tiberius]

 

 

Hello, I've been saying this.

 

Essentially all you are doing by voting for it is you are voting to advance the ball. It's going to change dramatically once it gets to the Senate, and if it passes the Senate, which will have much more rigorous debate then it still goes to conference. Which then party leaders have to negotiate with their members what they are willing to vote for.

 

There is a lot of ignorance displayed by people in the media, the hucksters, politicians, social media and here on this board regarding this process.

 

No, it's not. This statement shows that you really don't understand the insurance markets. Yes, some markets are in a death spiral, but virtually all urban areas where higher populations exist are no where near in any sort of a death spiral. Waiting for it to fall apart is a fool's errand. You would have to wait years and years for it to be an overall state of a death spiral.

Yes, it will change into a form which is even more distasteful to the Freedom caucus. You don't think they know that?

[Magox]

Yes, it will change into a form which is even more distasteful to the Freedom caucus. You don't think they know that?

 

Yes, but they know that in order for it to pass the Senate, it has to go through guys like Tom Cotton, Cruz, Lee and Paul. Then if it passes through them then it goes back to the House.

 

You didn't know that?

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

No, it's not. This statement shows that you really don't understand the insurance markets. Yes, some markets are in a death spiral, but virtually all urban areas where higher populations exist are no where near in any sort of a death spiral. Waiting for it to fall apart is a fool's errand. You would have to wait years and years for it to be an overall state of a death spiral.

 

This is what we are dealing with, people run off with ideas that they hear politicians and other hucksters say and then they run with it passing it off as fact, when in reality it is a lot more complicated than these inaccurate claims. If people truly had an understanding of the process and reality then we would have a much more reasoned debate.

I understand insurance markets better than most people on the planet. It's a major part of the industry that I work in.

 

In order for the law to fall apart, all that is required is for markets to break apart across a large portion of the country. It doesn't need to fall apart in urban areas. When half the country doesn't have access, it's done.

 

Libertarians don't have to wait until it's dead in New York City. We just have to wait until it's dead in the Mid West, the South West, and the Bible Belt.

Edited March 24, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker

[B-Man]

 

Hello, I've been saying this.

 

Essentially all you are doing by voting for it is you are voting to advance the ball. It's going to change dramatically once it gets to the Senate, and if it passes the Senate, which will have much more rigorous debate then it still goes to conference. Which then party leaders have to negotiate with their members what they are willing to vote for.

 

There is a lot of ignorance displayed by people in the media, the hucksters, politicians, social media and here on this board regarding this process.

 

 

Yes, I essentially posted it for you, since you had previously pointed it out.

 

Ignore Gator, his inconsistency is his only predicable trait...........

 

house and senate are filled with right-wingers, but if they get to work on it additionally it will become more liberal.......

[Magox]

I understand insurance markets better than most people on the planet. It's a major part of the industry that I work in.

 

In order for the law to fall apart, all that is required is for markets to break apart across a large portion of the country. It doesn't need to fall apart in urban areas. When half the country doesn't have access, it's done.

 

Libertarians don't have to wait until it's dead in New York City. We just have to wait until it's dead in the Mid West, the South West, and the Bible Belt.

 

 

Well, then it is a bit confounding that you don't seem to have a grasp on this matter. My argument isn't that it wouldn't eventually get to an overall "death spiral", because at this rate it would. My argument is that in order for the markets to implode as you and others suggest, would take many years to occur, which I've state on this board on numerous occasions.

 

Let's play devils advocate, when would the entire market collapse, as you define it "half the country wouldn't have access"?

 

This year?

 

Next year?

 

2 years?

 

How long?

[Tiberius]

 

Yes, but they know that in order for it to pass the Senate, it has to go through guys like Tom Cotton, Cruz, Lee and Paul. Then if it passes through them then it goes back to the House.

 

You didn't know that?

Tom Cotton? You mean this Tom Cotton?

 

Cotton, however, warned fellow Republicans in the House not to acquiesce to a plan they don’t support.

“I would say to my friends in the House of Representatives with whom I serve, ‘Do not walk the plank and vote for a bill that cannot pass the Senate and then have to face the consequences of that vote,’” he said.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/cotton-obamacare-repeal-235967

 

Sure sounds like he wants that chunk of sh it of a bill to come his way

[TakeYouToTasker]

It's starting this year, with insurers no longer receiving back end subsidies through reinsurance. It will come to a head when the states lose their federal subsidies.

[B-Man]

When you declare that the public has an unlimited right to someone else’s labor, big problems follow. http://bit.ly/2nPIPpl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Dem solution is simple but bad: Pay doctors less than they say procedures cost & revoke licenses if they refuse. http://bit.ly/2nPQL9U

 

[IDBillzFan]

Looks like the bill is off the table for now.

 

I respect and appreciate the problem with this, but the silver lining for me is that it's nice to see some people with a spine.

 

The left caved to pass ACA faster than a Barack Obama red line in the dirt, and they have Macungie to show for it.

[GG]

Looks like the bill is off the table for now.

 

I respect and appreciate the problem with this, but the silver lining for me is that it's nice to see some people with a spine.

 

The left caved to pass ACA faster than a Barack Obama red line in the dirt, and they have Macungie to show for it.

 

Good. Tax reform is a much bigger priority anyway.

[Spurna]

https://twitter.com/DavidCornDC/status/845361857774931968

 

David Corn‏Verified account @DavidCornDC

Follow

More

Costa on MSNBC: Trump says bill won’t be coming back in near future & he’ll see if the Dems want to work with him on healthcare.

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

 

Good. Tax reform is a much bigger priority anyway.

 

Completely agree. The egg will sit on their faces for a week, Trump will tweet something about Anthony Weiner, and everyone will chase the new squirrel.

[Tiberius]

Good. Tax reform is a much bigger priority anyway.

Ha ha, that should be fun, too