• 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!

CBO "score" on AHCA is out.

Greenbeard said:
Actually there is. Today's CBO score, for instance:
Click to expand...

The CBO said Obamacare would have insured 23 million new people by now; there are only 12 milliom insured because of Obamacare.

Let's don't pretend that the CBO is always right, because it bkew the call on Obamacare.

Now, if you want to claim that the CBO says that government health insurance laws are bull****, then we can agree.
 
apdst said:
The CBO said Obamacare would have insured 23 million new people by now; there are only 12 milliom insured because of Obamacare.
Click to expand...

Actually:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention publishes data on health insurance status from the National Health Interview Survey, conducted by the Census Bureau with a sample size of approximately 35,000 households.

The latest report shows that an estimated 28.4 million Americans of all ages were uninsured for January through June 2016. The number of the uninsured in 2010, the year the ACA was enacted, was 48.6 million. That’s a decrease of 20 million people.
Click to expand...
 
Greenbeard said:
Actually:
Click to expand...

As usual, the Obama regime rigged the data.

One of the key questions surrounding Obamacare is just how many people have been newly insured under the law. The answer is clouded by the fact that the White House and others have changed some rules of math for making these assessments.

For example, several years ago, the Obama administration fiddled with the Census Bureau’s definition of what it means to be “uninsured.” The new parameters, which were looser than the old factors, make it hard to construct comparisons between today’s figures for the total number of uninsured and the historical trends.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...many-people-has-obamacare-really-insured/amp/
Click to expand...
 
Vetplus40 said:
What do you mean "If"? Wasn't REPEAL and REPLACE a staunch Republican campaign promise? If the R's can't repeal and replace (with something better) with both Houses and the WH, then they cant govern. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I still mean if.

Democrats have saddled us all with a huge mess and it's Republicans responsibility to cleanup on aisle nine.

It's not fair but it is what it is.

Another option is to allow Obamacare to run its ill planned course and implode.

Perhaps the most politically expedient thing to do is not touch it and let that albatross hang around the necks of democrats for two generations.

No matter what it's all getting ugly.
 
akyron said:
Yeah. I still mean if.

Democrats have saddled us all with a huge mess and it's Republicans responsibility to cleanup on aisle nine.

It's not fair but it is what it is.

Another option is to allow Obamacare to run its ill planned course and implode.

Perhaps the most politically expedient thing to do is not touch it and let that albatross hang around the necks of democrats for two generations.

No matter what it's all getting ugly.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that ObamaCare might have been a genuine idea that simply didn't work out very well?
 
Vetplus40 said:
Do you believe that ObamaCare might have been a genuine idea that simply didn't work out very well?
Click to expand...

If both isles actually worked together instead of having a vendetta against one another Obamacare would easily be successful.
 
akyron said:
If they fully repeal it they will own it. Right now its some mutant bs.
Click to expand...

That is probably true. However to anyone who actually loses their healthcare or has to pay more it will be trumpcare.
 
Vetplus40 said:
Do you believe that ObamaCare might have been a genuine idea that simply didn't work out very well?
Click to expand...

No. It was a weapon used to destabilize the country. Reasonable people like good ideas and discuss them.

This was a monumental scam.

This was not the case. No reasonable person supported this.

Anytime someone thinks it's a good idea to take their money through taxes and give it to another group of people run for the hills as tyranny has begun.

Al Franken was excoriating the education secretary recently over making charter schools accessible.

Guess where he went to school?
Guess where his kids go to school?

You guessed it. Charter school.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

I may be able to accept any health care plan that comes out of congress that has one requirement. They and their families and every government agency MUST use it.
Such was not the case with Obamacare and therefore it sucked.
 
Hari Seldon said:
That is probably true. However to anyone who actually loses their healthcare or has to pay more it will be trumpcare.
Click to expand...

That's why it would be politically easier to just let it implode so the well deserved blame lands squarely upon democrats.


The more human thing to do would be the dangerous task of replacing it.
 
akyron said:
I may be able to accept any health care plan that comes out of congress that has one requirement. They and their families and every government agency MUST use it.
Such was not the case with Obamacare and therefore it sucked.
Click to expand...

That is the case for members of Congress under Obamacare.

Before January 1, 2014, Members and congressional staff were eligible to participate in FEHB, like other federal employees. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA; P.L. 111-148, as amended) requires that Members and congressional staff receive ESI through a plan or exchange created under ACA.
Click to expand...
 
akyron said:
That's why it would be politically easier to just let it implode so the well deserved blame lands squarely upon democrats.


The more human thing to do would be the dangerous task of replacing it.
Click to expand...

They are giving the insurance industry billions much like Bush gave the pharmaceutical industry billions. All on the backs of the middle class.
 
Vetplus40 said:
The R's now own healthcare. This will be VERY interesting to watch.
Click to expand...

over 50 million uninsured after it goes into effect and they act like no one will notice and it wouldn't lead directly to single payer. If it passes it could be the greatest gift to dems imaginable, and even to the poor in the end...although the latter will face a lot of suffering in the meantime
 
justabubba said:
the fellow who has made a living naming his creations after himself does not want this to be known as tRumpcare
Click to expand...

Well then he better get his veto pen ready
 
Thread: CBO "score" on AHCA is out.
Click to expand...

Have you ever know the CBO to score anything accurately?
 
Greenbeard said:
That is the case for members of Congress under Obamacare.
Click to expand...

They use this.

https://archive.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/INDEX.ASP

The Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program can help you and your family meet your health care needs. Federal employees, retirees and their survivors enjoy the widest selection of health plans in the country. You can choose from among Consumer-Driven and High Deductible plans that offer catastrophic risk protection with higher deductibles, health savings/reimbursable accounts and lower premiums, or Fee-for-Service (FFS) plans, and their Preferred Provider Organizations (PPO), or Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO) if you live (or sometimes if you work) within the area serviced by the plan.
 
apdst said:
Makes you wish the Democrats wouldn't have passed that ACA turd, huh? You have them to thank for anything ****ed up, that happens from here on out.
Click to expand...

They aren't going to pass this bill unless they drastically change it. If we hadn't passed the ACA we'd still have 20 million plus people uninsured and no one talking about. Where as now the talk is about how Republicans are stealing peoples health insurance. I'd say that your side should be the ones worried right now, lol.
 
akyron said:
They use this.

https://archive.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/INDEX.ASP

The Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program can help you and your family meet your health care needs. Federal employees, retirees and their survivors enjoy the widest selection of health plans in the country. You can choose from among Consumer-Driven and High Deductible plans that offer catastrophic risk protection with higher deductibles, health savings/reimbursable accounts and lower premiums, or Fee-for-Service (FFS) plans, and their Preferred Provider Organizations (PPO), or Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO) if you live (or sometimes if you work) within the area serviced by the plan.
Click to expand...

No, they don't. Members of Congress were made ineligible for FEHBP by the ACA. If they get employer-sponsored coverage as part of their service as members of Congress, it has to be through an ACA exchange.
 
Greenbeard said:
No, they don't. Members of Congress were made ineligible for FEHBP by the ACA. If they get employer-sponsored coverage as part of their service as members of Congress, it has to be through an ACA exchange.
Click to expand...

maybe so but factcheck says they can use either or both. Must be nice.

Congress Is Getting A Special Exemption From ObamaCare--And No, It's Not Legal



Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that unnamed officials who administer benefits for Congress made clearly false statements when they originally applied to have the House and Senate participate in D.C.’s “SHOP” Exchange for 2014. Notably, they claimed the 435-member House had only 45 members and 45 staffers, while the 100-member Senate had only 45 employees total...

Making a materially false or fraudulent statement as part of a claim against the U.S. Treasury is a separate federal crime, as is wire fraud. Ordinary citizens who violate these laws face fines of up to three times the amount drawn from the Treasury and/or up to 20 years in prison. They might also face prosecution for health care fraud (10 years), violating the Sarbanes-Oxley ban on falsifying documents (20 years), conspiracy to commit such offenses (5 years), and other crimes under federal and D.C. law.

Newly unearthed documents suggest these officials knew they were violating the law.

Those new documents include admissions by officials in Congress and D.C.'s small-business Exchange that the House and Senate are in fact not small businesses.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelcannon/2016/04/15/congress-is-getting-a-special-exemption-from-obamacare-and-no-its-not-legal/#104632f67823

On ObamaCare, is there one set of rules for Congress and another for citizens? | TheHill

Members of Congress, congressional staff, and their dependents are now in their third year of receiving health coverage through the Exchange the District of Columbia established for small businesses under the Affordable Care Act. Newly discovered documents illustrate how government officials broke numerous laws to make that happen—laws that apply to you and me, but apparently not to Congress.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that unnamed officials who administer benefits for Congress made clearly false statements when they originally applied to have the House and Senate participate in D.C.’s “SHOP” Exchange for 2014. Notably, they claimed the 435-member House had only 45 members and 45 staffers, while the 100-member Senate had only 45 employees total.

Rather than a good-faith clerical error, this was an intentional falsehood, which makes it a crime under both federal and D.C. law. Knowingly making even a single false statement in a matter concerning congressional compensation is punishable by up to five years in prison.
 
Last edited:
Repeal is fine.

Repeal and replace is still a bunch of garbage entitlements and handouts, just a little less, and the lefties will still whine that with fewer handouts more people have to spend more of their own money or go without... like that's a complicated concept... when government shouldn't be spending one dime on this sort of thing ever to begin with.


The bill is a modest improvement I suppose.

Hell Onamacare made the kind of basic catastrophic coverage insurance that most people should have illegal in the first place and makes all kinds of bull**** coverage folks couldn't possibly use mandatory... repeal and replace with nothing would be such an upgrade.
 
Last edited:
akyron said:
maybe so but factcheck says they can use either or both. Must be nice.
Click to expand...

They cannot. They do, however, get to decide which of their staff members are required by the ACA to get coverage through the exchange and which can stay on the FEBHP. But for members of Congress themselves there is no question that they cannot get FEHBP benefits. Again, back to that CRS overview from a few weeks ago:

Coverage for Members and Staff

As of January 1, 2014, all Members of Congress, including representatives of the U.S. Territories, and their designated staff must purchase “health plans offered by an appropriate SHOP as determined by the Director [of OPM] ...” in order to receive an employer contribution toward the coverage.6 OPM has indicated that Members and staff must use the District of Columbia’s SHOP exchange, known as DC Health Link (the “DC SHOP”). Section 1312(d)(3)(D) of the ACA defines Members of Congress as “any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate” and congressional staff as “all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.”

OPM delegates to the employing office of the Member the responsibility to make the determination as to whether a congressional staff member meets the statutory definition of being employed by an “official office.” OPM notes, “[n]othing in this regulation limits a Member’s authority to delegate to the House or Senate Administrative Offices the Member’s decision about the proper designation of his or her staff.”8 OPM indicates that it will not interfere in the process by which a Member or its designee determines the designations of their staff.

The employing office of a Member (or its designee) is required to designate staff for the plan year during the month of September of the preceding year (or at the time of hiring for individuals whose employment begins during the year).9 The designation is made annually, and individuals maintain their designations for the entire plan year, so long as they continue to be employed by the same Member.10 Congressional staff who do not receive a designation of being employed by an official office retain the ability to enroll in a health plan offered under FEHB.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean every member of Congress is getting commercial insurance through the exchange. Most of these geezers are Medicare-eligible.
 
roughdraft274 said:
They aren't going to pass this bill unless they drastically change it. If we hadn't passed the ACA we'd still have 20 million plus people uninsured and no one talking about. Where as now the talk is about how Republicans are stealing peoples health insurance. I'd say that your side should be the ones worried right now, lol.
Click to expand...

If the Obamacare turd hadn't been passed the system wouldn't be the cluster **** that it is.

How many of those 20 million people were uninsured by choice?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom