Repeal of Obamacare crashes and burns

[oldjones]

No body had a plan. Still don't. "Repeal" was only a slogan. It couldn't and wouldn't have won the votes it did without the "…and replace" part. But that too was only a slogan. Trouble was, after a decade of "Winning is the Only Thing' Karl Rove/Newt Gingrich the Republicans have forgotten why winning matters: So you can Make America Great.

But winning only by making the other guys lose means one by one you lose every clue what that looks like. And no reality-TV actor, whose sole achievement and skill is lying for money can help you find that vision.

Not that Hillary had much of it, but at least she and her Party weren't solely in the business of tearing visions down. Or repealing them, to use the political term

And the ACA, for all its expedient compromises and weaknesses was a vision, imperfectly realized, that nonetheless made America greater. Which is why the GOP is standing by it, still.

 

[Butler1000]

As said that is because there was no well thought out proposed legislation which met campaign promises.

The remaining chance is for the moderate wing of the Party to work across the isle with the moderates on the other side.

Define moderate. I don't see anyone else who is interested in really saving healthcare. Just getting their payoffs from the lobbyists.

 

[fuji]

Define moderate. I don't see anyone else who is interested in really saving healthcare. Just getting their payoffs from the lobbyists.

If you took the thirty five leftmost Republicans and put them in a room with the twenty five rightmost Democrats you would get a fantastic bill that had the sixty votes needed to pass.

 

[Butler1000]

If you took the thirty five leftmost Republicans and put them in a room with the twenty five rightmost Democrats you would get a fantastic bill that had the sixty votes needed to pass.

You're assuming that not one out of the numbers mentioned accepts money from those opposed to it.

You'd be wrong. Both the National party itself and the individuals take money. Just look up how many and much from campaign funding disclosures. And Super Pac contributors.

The average incumbent Congress person gets probably 1.5 million in campaign contributions. Challengers about 300,000. Due to gerrymandering.

Where do you think that money comes from?

The people you discuss HAVE Been in a room together for Decades now. If they were going to accomplish it, they would have by now.

 

[fuji]

You're assuming that not one out of the numbers mentioned accepts money from those opposed to it.

You'd be wrong. Both the National party itself and the individuals take money. Just look up how many and much from campaign funding disclosures. And Super Pac contributors.

The average incumbent Congress person gets probably 1.5 million in campaign contributions. Challengers about 300,000. Due to gerrymandering.

Where do you think that money comes from?

The people you discuss HAVE Been in a room together for Decades now. If they were going to accomplish it, they would have by now.

You can thank Steve Bannon for that.

I think there are still solutions available that would improve Obamacare that the health insurers would support.

The real fix would be to legislate a cap on damages from malp lawsuits.

Doctors in the US live in fear of lawyers. It's a totally different experience than in Canada. They become very guarded about any potential risk which sometimes makes them hard to discuss openly.

 

[Butler1000]

You can thank Steve Bannon for that.

I think there are still solutions available that would improve Obamacare that the health insurers would support.

The real fix would be to legislate a cap on damages from malp lawsuits.

Doctors in the US live in fear of lawyers. It's a totally different experience than in Canada. They become very guarded about any potential risk which sometimes makes them hard to discuss openly.

Ya. Because Bannon has been in the WH for the last several decades......

And the entire Senate was just elected last year.

But I agree the Tort reform is also on the menu. Although single payer resolves it. Most of the cash rewards are about future medical bills. That disappears with singe payer.

But don't absolve Congress. And remember a lot of them are Lawyers. Partners in firms. Tort reform is low on the list.

 

[fuji]

Ya. Because Bannon has been in the WH for the last several decades......

And the entire Senate was just elected last year.

But I agree the Tort reform is also on the menu. Although single payer resolves it. Most of the cash rewards are about future medical bills. That disappears with singe payer.

But don't absolve Congress. And remember a lot of them are Lawyers. Partners in firms. Tort reform is low on the list.

Bannon was a major player in Citizens United and it was the Citizens United vs FEC decision that removed the limits on corporate election spending.

 

[Butler1000]

Bannon was a major player in Citizens United and it was the Citizens United vs FEC decision that removed the limits on corporate election spending.

Which has little to do with Healthcare. This was a mess long before that decision. They have had decades to deal with this.

When was the last time someone brought forth legislation for single payer that could even muster 25% support?

This mess is basically now trying to use and subsidize the private sector to deliver healthcare WITHOUT setting prices. That's the problem they can't get over and why Obamacare of any other fix won't work. Either the medical/insurance/etc make a profit or they may pick up the ball and go home. Or move to another state. Unless legally it's the only way.

That's the problem. The profit margin. The shareholders share.

There is no fix. Only repeal. And then throw out the incumbents who are on the payroll via the primaries or a new party. Then single payer.

Anything else is doomed to fall apart.

 

[fuji]

Which has little to do with Healthcare.

Well you just said you thought the big corporate dollars were the problem so I pointed out that Bannon and Citizens United are responsible for opening the spigot.

I agree that healthcare has been a problem for a long time but the question is what should be done NOW.

I don't think the Americans will get to an ideal solution in one step but I think there are lots of good improvements that could be made by moderates from both parties if you gave them a chance.

They won't get to single payer but they could make Obamacare significantly better and that would be good for everyone.

 

[Butler1000]

Well you just said you thought the big corporate dollars were the problem so I pointed out that Bannon and Citizens United are responsible for opening the spigot.

I agree that healthcare has been a problem for a long time but the question is what should be done NOW.

I don't think the Americans will get to an ideal solution in one step but I think there are lots of good improvements that could be made by moderates from both parties if you gave them a chance.

They won't get to single payer but they could make Obamacare significantly better and that would be good for everyone.

Keeping anything resembling obamacare only extends the problem. And further entrenched it as a corporate subsidy. You have to get the profit margin out. That's how you deliver affordable healthcare

As to Manon I've said repeatedly he is an ass as well. Never liked him. Not even sure what he does up there. But all citizens united did was bring out in the open what used to be done with brown envelopes. The corporate payoffs and funding was always there. They just made it easier is all.

It needs to somehow be banned as well. But good luck now with the SC decision.

 

[fuji]

Keeping anything resembling obamacare only extends the problem. And further entrenched it as a corporate subsidy. You have to get the profit margin out. That's how you deliver affordable healthcare

As to Manon I've said repeatedly he is an ass as well. Never liked him. Not even sure what he does up there. But all citizens united did was bring out in the open what used to be done with brown envelopes. The corporate payoffs and funding was always there. They just made it easier is all.

It needs to somehow be banned as well. But good luck now with the SC decision.

Single payer is the ideal but it's not going to happen in the near future and in the meantime this isn't an abstract problem. It's real people getting real illness and real families getting really bankrupt.

It's gotten so bad that even the credit reporting agencies are noticing and modifying how they calculate credit scores, downplaying medical collections in recognition of the fact that for many people it's completely beyond their control.

Something needs to be done and until some far future when single payer may come, Obamacare has made a real noticible difference in millions of lives. It's enabled people to buy insurance who otherwise would get shut out.

Now it's not working great, it's got issues, and there are lots of ways it can be improved.

But repealing it's a non starter. It's better to have healthcare than not have it.

If premiums do go up because Trump actively undermines the system, by withholding payments to insurers for example, then the GOP is going to have to answer for that in 2018.

Less than a third of Americans support repeal without replace. People want this fixed. Trump promised them that and they expect it, and they don't expect Trump to "fix"it by taking their healthcare away.