• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dems push bill on health care, drug prices through House

American said:
William Barr is smarter than the entire Intelligence subcommittee put together. He's no one's toadie, because you clearly don't know his background. What you can't stand is that he's now doing a full cavity search on the Obama administration's Russia investigation. Something has been stinking about it for over 2 years, and he's going to find out what it is.
Click to expand...

You're wrong and for two reasons. As the Attorney General of the United States, he put his hand on the Bible and took an oath to serve the PEOPLE of the United States, NOT to do the president's bidding. He has no reason to insert the Dept of Justice into an ongoing legal case in the courts. He was asked by Congress not to interfere, specifically by Republican Susan Collins. Yet, he did and he even went further by taking the opinion that pre-existing conditions under the ACA should be illegal. That's just despicable and outrageous.

Here's what I can't stand, I can't stand an Attorney General that's playing partisan politics. I can't stand that our Attorney General doesn't give a crap about taking away the safety net for millions of people with pre-exicsting conditions. I can't stand that the Attorney General of the United States is BREAKING THE LAW by being in contempt of a Congressional subpoena. You said it yourself, "What does the attorney general have to do with healthcare".
 
Greenbeard said:
The GOP has left a trail of dozens of recorded roll call votes in their wake. Their objectives are all out in the open.
Click to expand...

And what? All those votes were "against healthcare for the people"? Is that what their bills said? I don't think so.

I think you are spinning and spouting hyperbole. In fact, what you are doing is tantamount to outright lying.

btw, I am not part of the GOP. So they are not my "lot".
 
Mycroft said:
And what? All those votes were "against healthcare for the people"? Is that what their bills said? I don't think so.

I think you are spinning and spouting hyperbole. In fact, what you are doing is tantamount to outright lying.

btw, I am not part of the GOP. So they are not my "lot".
Click to expand...

Yes. They voted against covering pre-existing conditions, which punishes folks for things they have absolutely no control over. For the party of "personal responsibility" you sure do ignore that some people are born with conditions they cannot take responsibility for.

Truly pathetic.
 
Greenbeard said:
As long as the GOP opposes protecting folks with pre-existing conditions that will be tough. There’s not much middle ground with their nihilistic “burn the entire health system down” position. They couldn’t even support the inoffensive, banal legislation this thread is about. This is the easy stuff, the low-hanging fruit.
Click to expand...

So long as democrats refuse to have a rational discussion on pre-existing conditions, and produce rhetoric like that, it's going to be difficult to have a discussion. You can't have a real solution on this without addressing cost - something democrats refuse to do.
 
Obscurity said:
Yes. They voted against covering pre-existing conditions, which punishes folks for things they have absolutely no control over. For the party of "personal responsibility" you sure do ignore that some people are born with conditions they cannot take responsibility for.

Truly pathetic.
Click to expand...

Whether an insurance company covers preexisting conditions or not, people who need heathcare can still get healthcare. So no...that kind of vote is NOT "against healthcare for the people".

Do me a favor...take your spin, your hyperbole...your lying...and bother someone else with that nonsense.

You are dismissed.
 
HumblePi said:
You're wrong and for two reasons. As the Attorney General of the United States, he put his hand on the Bible and took an oath to serve the PEOPLE of the United States, NOT to do the president's bidding. He has no reason to insert the Dept of Justice into an ongoing legal case in the courts. He was asked by Congress not to interfere, specifically by Republican Susan Collins. Yet, he did and he even went further by taking the opinion that pre-existing conditions under the ACA should be illegal. That's just despicable and outrageous.

Here's what I can't stand, I can't stand an Attorney General that's playing partisan politics. I can't stand that our Attorney General doesn't give a crap about taking away the safety net for millions of people with pre-exicsting conditions. I can't stand that the Attorney General of the United States is BREAKING THE LAW by being in contempt of a Congressional subpoena. You said it yourself, "What does the attorney general have to do with healthcare".
Click to expand...

Everybody in the government takes that oath, not just elected officials and appointees. The entire House Intelligence committee did too, and look at what going on there. They want grand jury information for their witch hunt to make hay for the 2020 election season. Everything they're doing is pure politics; because they are never going for impeachement. If they were, they'd have a valid reason. But Pelosi has been squelching impeachment chatter. So basically Barr is calling them on their bull****. He's not the quiet pushover the Sessions was, and the Dems are having a temper tantrum over it. He's a man, has a spine, and is smart as hell; and they don't have a prayer in hell. He's also started a full blown investigation into the Obama Russia investigation, to include cavity searches, and I hope 3am FBI raids complete with amphibious vehicles (think Roger Stone).
 
Mycroft said:
Whether an insurance company covers preexisting conditions or not, people who need heathcare can still get healthcare. So no...that kind of vote is NOT "against healthcare for the people".

Do me a favor...take your spin, your hyperbole...your lying...and bother someone else with that nonsense.

You are dismissed.
Click to expand...

No spin. You lot want to force these folks to pay through the nose for something they have no control over.

You are lying. You are spinning. You are spewing hyperbole.

Spare me your bull****, Mycroft.
 
American said:
Everybody in the government takes that oath, not just elected officials and appointees. The entire House Intelligence committee did too, and look at what going on there. They want grand jury information for their witch hunt to make hay for the 2020 election season. Everything they're doing is pure politics; because they are never going for impeachement. If they were, they'd have a valid reason. But Pelosi has been squelching impeachment chatter. So basically Barr is calling them on their bull****. He's not the quiet pushover the Sessions was, and the Dems are having a temper tantrum over it. He's a man, has a spine, and is smart as hell; and they don't have a prayer in hell. He's also started a full blown investigation into the Obama Russia investigation, to include cavity searches, and I hope 3am FBI raids complete with amphibious vehicles (think Roger Stone).
Click to expand...

......more justification and whatabout-isms
 
HumblePi said:
......more justification and whatabout-isms
Click to expand...

Whataboutism is the best thing that could ever happen. The Hypocratic Party needs to be slugged to death with it.
 
Mycroft said:
And what? All those votes were "against healthcare for the people"? Is that what their bills said? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Their bills said to eliminate the protections that give millions of people access to coverage and care. So yes, that’s what their bills said.

That’s also what their lawsuits say. They won’t rest until they’ve stripped tens of millions of their coverage.

dcsports said:
So long as democrats refuse to have a rational discussion on pre-existing conditions, and produce rhetoric like that, it's going to be difficult to have a discussion. You can't have a real solution on this without addressing cost - something democrats refuse to do.
Click to expand...

The ACA has numerous provisions addressing cost. And health care cost growth over the past decade has been the lowest on record.
 
Greenbeard said:
Their bills said to eliminate the protections that give millions of people access to coverage and care. So yes, that’s what their bills said.

That’s also what their lawsuits say. They won’t rest until they’ve stripped tens of millions of their coverage.



The ACA has numerous provisions addressing cost. And health care cost growth over the past decade has been the lowest on record.
Click to expand...

The ACA had little attempt to reduce cost, and it's key provisions increased it. Despite having 'affordable' in the title, the primary goal was to increase the number of people covered, which it did, but mostly through brute force medicaid expansion.
 
dcsports said:
Good point. One that those on the left need to hear.
Click to expand...

See you just proved my point again, your biased and dishonest views are part of the problem :)
 
Torus34 said:
This patient observer is still awaiting the Republican replacement for the ACA. They have yet to provide a date when it will be ready for the American public to read it.
Click to expand...

Trump claims he's going to release his big, beautiful healthcare plan after the 2020 election.

And I'm sure a lot of drooling idiots actually believe him.
 
dcsports said:
The GOP was not against healthcare reform. They advocated for it. There was a lot in the ACA (estimates of 90% of the bill) that had strong bipartisan support, regarding quality measures, communication standards, etc. They could have passed this and had a big win, then moved on with a discussion on addressing coverage and cost. Democrats instead pushed forward and refused to cooperate on real fixes.

The ACA crippled itself - the exchange plans were designed poorly. It really has to be fixed before we can move forward with any significant changes. Yet rather than try to work together, Democrats are passing show bills and trying to use this as, yes, a wedge issue.
Click to expand...
The GOP plan to cripple the ACA was centered around defunding the taxes on the rich that paid for subsidies and weakening the individual mandate, which makes covering preexisting conditions possible.

I see no evidence that the ACA had "strong bipartisan support. In the Senate, the bill was passed with a total of 60 votes -- 58 Democratic Party votes and 2 Independent Party votes. The House passed the legislation with 219 Democratic votes. The Affordable Care Act received 39 votes against it in the Senate, all from Republicans. One senator abstained from voting.

The only thing that would make the ACA better (e.g. an improvement) would be bigger subsidies. Instead, the GOP, with full control of the House, Senate and White House tried to shove their version of "reform" that raised the cost to unaffordable levels on tens of millions of Americas, and overall made coverage worse.
 
tres borrachos said:
Trump claims he's going to release his big, beautiful healthcare plan after the 2020 election.

And I'm sure a lot of drooling idiots actually believe him.
Click to expand...

You mean the one where he specifically promised Universal Healthcare paid for by the government, and even admitted it was an "UnRepublican thing" for him to say? Hmmm, surely you jest...;)
 
Puigb said:
You mean the one where he specifically promised Universal Healthcare Care paid for by the government, and even admitted it was an "UnRepublican thing" for him to say? Hmmm, surely you jest...;)
Click to expand...

That's the one. :mrgreen:
 
Torus34 said:
This patient observer is still awaiting the Republican replacement for the ACA. They have yet to provide a date when it will be ready for the American public to read it.
Click to expand...

They've been talking about this so called "replacement" since 2010. Nine years counting...
 
Torus34 said:
This patient observer is still awaiting the Republican replacement for the ACA. They have yet to provide a date when it will be ready for the American public to read it.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Trump said on Feb. 27, 2017 that Republican health care will be special.



This is what they actually produced:

 
MTAtech said:
The GOP plan to cripple the ACA was centered around defunding the taxes on the rich that paid for subsidies and weakening the individual mandate, which makes covering preexisting conditions possible.

I see no evidence that the ACA had "strong bipartisan support. In the Senate, the bill was passed with a total of 60 votes -- 58 Democratic Party votes and 2 Independent Party votes. The House passed the legislation with 219 Democratic votes. The Affordable Care Act received 39 votes against it in the Senate, all from Republicans. One senator abstained from voting.

The only thing that would make the ACA better (e.g. an improvement) would be bigger subsidies. Instead, the GOP, with full control of the House, Senate and White House tried to shove their version of "reform" that raised the cost to unaffordable levels on tens of millions of Americas, and overall made coverage worse.
Click to expand...

Several issues here:
1) No GOP plan to 'cripple the ACA' - only to remove its more damaging aspects. It was built to fail from the start
2) Taxes on the rich? It's taxes on the middle class. And it didn't make the plans work
3) I said there was 'a lot in the ACA' that had strong bipartisan support. There were also several VERY problematic and VERY expensive measures added in -- which caused concern among conservatives (and others). Democrats refused to discuss or work on these.
4) Throwing more money can fix a lot of problems -- but unfortunately there isn't a magic money tree.
 
The Senate should pass a bill with the parts they like and toss it back to the Democrats in the House.
 
dcsports said:
Several issues here:
1) No GOP plan to 'cripple the ACA' - only to remove its more damaging aspects. It was built to fail from the start
2) Taxes on the rich? It's taxes on the middle class. And it didn't make the plans work
3) I said there was 'a lot in the ACA' that had strong bipartisan support. There were also several VERY problematic and VERY expensive measures added in -- which caused concern among conservatives (and others). Democrats refused to discuss or work on these.
4) Throwing more money can fix a lot of problems -- but unfortunately there isn't a magic money tree.
Click to expand...
Oh really...

7 ways Trump and the Republicans are sabotaging Obamacare
One of those "damaging aspects" was the special taxes on the wealthy.

From the article, here are the 7:

1. Ending the individual mandate
2. Cutting off funding for the law
3. Eliminating coverage for pre-existing conditions
4. Offering bare-bones insurance
5. No help for you -- Funding for navigators -- individuals to help Americans sign up for health insurance -- has been slashed by the Trump administration.
6. Doing away with cost-sharing payments
7. The fallout from Trump's immigration policy
 
MTAtech said:
Oh really...

7 ways Trump and the Republicans are sabotaging Obamacare
One of those "damaging aspects" was the special taxes on the wealthy.

From the article, here are the 7:

1. Ending the individual mandate
2. Cutting off funding for the law
3. Eliminating coverage for pre-existing conditions
4. Offering bare-bones insurance
5. No help for you -- Funding for navigators -- individuals to help Americans sign up for health insurance -- has been slashed by the Trump administration.
6. Doing away with cost-sharing payments
7. The fallout from Trump's immigration policy
Click to expand...

Again, not taxes on the wealthy -- middle class. Again, the plan was poorly assembled to begin with - some of those aren't about 'sabotage' as much as 'limiting the damage of'. The last is is just silly.
 
dcsports said:
Again, not taxes on the wealthy -- middle class. Again, the plan was poorly assembled to begin with - some of those aren't about 'sabotage' as much as 'limiting the damage of'. The last is is just silly.
Click to expand...
Your assertion is only thing that is silly.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lion-annually-to-poor/?utm_term=.a7c9e36e0640

JDSLOFU3JUZIZB7CCMHIAJZKNQ.jpg
 
Master Debator said:
Republicans weren't going to sign anything that strengthened Obamacare but they might of signed a standalone bill that addresses rising drug costs. So why didn't they pass a standalone bill on drug pricing? Well the first sentence of the second paragraph tells you why. Obamacare isn't just Obama's biggest victory it's also Nancy Pelosi's. Pelosi still hasn't come to terms with the fact that Obamacare is dead. The Republicans want to kill it and the Democrats want to replace it with Medicare for all. The only people still desperately trying to save it are the corporate beholden Democrat establishment.
Click to expand...
All you did was point out how the Republicans are trying to score points. I asked which provision were the Democrats using to score points?

Was it increasing protection for people with pre-existing conditions? The Republicans say they want to protect them.

All that article says is Republicans objected because.....Obama!!!

It looks like it's the Republicans who are playing politics with a worthy bill
 
Which is why not one right winger can identify any provision that is meant to "score points "

All they have is "because......Obama!!!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom