• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Who's To Blame for ACA Repeal Fail?

calamity

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Trump wants to blame Mitch. But, let's face it, it ain't Mitch's fault the repeal went down the toilet. Actually, if you ask me, the GOP never intended to repeal ACA, it was all just a ploy...and, that includes Don Cheeto.

If Don wanted to really repeal Obamacare, he would have worked it. Instead, he went golfing and tweeted out insults from the clubhouse.
 
calamity said:
Trump wants to blame Mitch. But, let's face it, it ain't Mitch's fault the repeal went down the toilet. Actually, if you ask me, the GOP never intended to repeal ACA, it was all just a ploy...and, that includes Don Cheeto.

If Don wanted to really repeal Obamacare, he would have worked it. Instead, he went golfing and tweeted out insults from the clubhouse.
Click to expand...

Trump is obsessed with Obama and Clinton. People from outside the country are laughing at him and his supporters. What fools these people be they say.
 
calamity said:
Trump wants to blame Mitch. But, let's face it, it ain't Mitch's fault the repeal went down the toilet. Actually, if you ask me, the GOP never intended to repeal ACA, it was all just a ploy...and, that includes Don Cheeto.

If Don wanted to really repeal Obamacare, he would have worked it. Instead, he went golfing and tweeted out insults from the clubhouse.
Click to expand...

Once enacted, programs that allow billions in "free" (little or no state fund matching required) federal money to flow into states/districts are nearly impossible to get congress critters to slow down much less stop their funding. At this point it seems that replace simply means to change the formula/method of supplying those added federal funds to the states. Trump appears to actually believe that republicants had a plan to lower medical care costs but they were just too shy to reveal it in legislative form. ;)
 
Mitch and Elaine like their health care. Why would they, or any other member of Congress want it gone?
 
While I know you're looking for specific individuals, have you considered that all the repeal packages were worse and more unpopular than keeping it?

Kinda' hard to get public support to take something reasonably popular away, replacing it with something bad & unpopular or nothing at all!
 
Chomsky said:
While I know you're looking for specific individuals, have you considered that all the repeal packages were worse and more unpopular than keeping it?

Kinda' hard to get public support to take something reasonably popular away, replacing it with something bad & unpopular or nothing at all!
Click to expand...

It is simply impossible to make something that costs (at or above) $500/month ($6K/year) "affordable" to someone making $1700/month ($20.4K/year).

EDIT: PPACA should have been called PPSCA because the affordable was simply subsidized.
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
It is simply impossible to make something that costs (at or above) $500/month ($6K/year) "affordable" to someone making $1700/month ($20.4K/year).
Click to expand...
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, and what nexus it has to my post?
 
Chomsky said:
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, and what nexus it has to my post?
Click to expand...

The folks that like PPACA mainly seem to mainly federal mandates and subsidies - thus any replacement plan that lacks them is 'unpopular'.
 
Well they better do something and fast...I just got an email today telling me Anthem is pulling out of VA for the most part and my policy will be cancelled Jan 1st...thank goodness I will be eligible for Medicare in 2018...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The folks that like PPACA mainly seem to mainly federal mandates and subsidies - thus any replacement plan that lacks them is 'unpopular'.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Agreed.

They could've just expanded Medicaid or Medicare, and got similar results.

But my point was that the last two years ObamaCare started polling just above 50%, so it's becoming entrenched and hard to get rid of. I personally can't stand it.
 
The blame ultimately lies with the influential donors to the GOP, who applied their leverage to try to do themselves a favor rather than do one for the people.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
Trump wants to blame Mitch. But, let's face it, it ain't Mitch's fault the repeal went down the toilet. Actually, if you ask me, the GOP never intended to repeal ACA, it was all just a ploy...and, that includes Don Cheeto.

If Don wanted to really repeal Obamacare, he would have worked it. Instead, he went golfing and tweeted out insults from the clubhouse.
Click to expand...

When you try to replace something that was bad with something horrible, it deserves to be defeated. Whose fault is it? The one's who write this horrible piece of legislation in the first place. Remember, it was promised to replace Obamacare with something better, not worst. Trump is ignorant to the workings of congress. He is letting that show.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Once enacted, programs that allow billions in "free" (little or no state fund matching required) federal money to flow into states/districts are nearly impossible to get congress critters to slow down much less stop their funding. At this point it seems that replace simply means to change the formula/method of supplying those added federal funds to the states. Trump appears to actually believe that republicants had a plan to lower medical care costs but they were just too shy to reveal it in legislative form. ;)
Click to expand...
He's the Fox News president. Unfortunately he appears to be unable to tell when they are just reinforcing the party message.
 
Chomsky said:
Absolutely. Agreed.

They could've just expanded Medicaid or Medicare, and got similar results.

But my point was that the last two years ObamaCare started polling just above 50%, so it's becoming entrenched and hard to get rid of. I personally can't stand it.
Click to expand...

The last two years of Obamacare polled 2015 41.4% in favor, 2016 40.4% in favor. Not even close to 50%. Today RCP averages puts Obamacare at 46.5% in favor, 41.8% opposed. It took the Republicans and the AHCA to make Obamacare popular. It took a much worst replacement for most folks to say, hey, wait. Obamacare may be really bad, but really bad is much better than horrible.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

If the GOP drops healthcare completely. I look for Obamacare to once again to become very unpopular.
 
WillyPete said:
The blame ultimately lies with the influential donors to the GOP, who applied their leverage to try to do themselves a favor rather than do one for the people.
Click to expand...

I'll agree that those influential donors are behind the GOP Elites who oppose everything Trump wants to do. After all, those donors are the ones who stand to suffer...they don't give their money for nothing. But I don't agree that they are ultimately to blame.

The GOP Elites who are TAKING that money and WORKING to oppose everything they...and Trump...said they want to do (that means they are the liars...not Trump) are ultimately to blame.

All they really have to do is what they've promised their voters.
 
Chomsky said:
Absolutely. Agreed.

They could've just expanded Medicaid or Medicare, and got similar results.

But my point was that the last two years ObamaCare started polling just above 50%, so it's becoming entrenched and hard to get rid of. I personally can't stand it.
Click to expand...

The expansion (to those above the FPL who are not disabled) of Medicaid is not a bad idea but it should include a premium, at a fixed percentage (say 7.5%) of gross income, for those above the FPL that elect expanded Medicaid as a "public option".
 
Perotista said:
The last two years of Obamacare polled 2015 41.4% in favor, 2016 40.4% in favor. Not even close to 50%. Today RCP averages puts Obamacare at 46.5% in favor, 41.8% opposed. It took the Republicans and the AHCA to make Obamacare popular. It took a much worst replacement for most folks to say, hey, wait. Obamacare may be really bad, but really bad is much better than horrible.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

If the GOP drops healthcare completely. I look for Obamacare to once again to become very unpopular.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link.

I should have stated "a positive approval/disapproval", rather than ">50%". But you are also right, in that it has only been 8 months or so

But the point was that as of late, it's enjoying a positive approval rating, even if only slight.
 
Chomsky said:
Thanks for the link.

I should have stated "a positive approval/disapproval", rather than ">50%". But you are also right, in that it has only been 8 months or so

But the point was that as of late, it's enjoying a positive approval rating, even if only slight.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I noticed that. My take, it took the Republicans and their AHCA which was totally worst that the ACA itself to make the ACA popular. If it weren't for the Republicans and their ever how many plans they came up with, worse plans. The ACA would still be unpopular as ever. But thanks to the GOP, the ACA is at its height of popularity.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The expansion (to those above the FPL who are not disabled) of Medicaid is not a bad idea but it should include a premium, at a fixed percentage (say 7.5%) of gross income, for those above the FPL that elect expanded Medicaid as a "public option".
Click to expand...
I think that's a great idea, ttwtt. I'd like to see a public option, in the way of a buy-in.

I also saw a great plan suggested by a Republican House member (forgot his name), the same night the repeal failed:

1] Separate the high-risk and existing conditions out of the exchanges.

2] Put the high risk & existing conditions into a separate subsidized pool.

3] Have a Medicare buy-in as the public option.

--

#1 frees up the exchanges from excessive premiums and risks, stabilizing the market places.

#2 takes care of the high-risk crowd in a manner they can afford.

#3 assures there will be at least one reasonable insurer in every market place.

I like this idea.
 
Perotista said:
Yeah, I noticed that. My take, it took the Republicans and their AHCA which was totally worst that the ACA itself to make the ACA popular. If it weren't for the Republicans and their ever how many plans they came up with, worse plans. The ACA would still be unpopular as ever. But thanks to the GOP, the ACA is at its height of popularity.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can't argue there.

While it still sucks, it appears everything else the GOP tried sucked worse, so now it's popular! :lamo

But while I don't support the ACA's basic premise of mandating the purchase of private insurance, I can't help but wonder what would have happened if it had been nurtured rather than hobbled.

You know, the full medicaid expansion in all 50 states, and a legit public option. Along without having all those little things the GOP did to hinder it over the years. To speak nothing of whatever improvements & adjustments should have been done over the same 7 years.

We'll never know I suppose, unless Congress decides to accept it and improve it.
 
Chomsky said:
I think that's a great idea, ttwtt. I'd like to see a public option, in the way of a buy-in.

I also saw a great plan suggested by a Republican House member (forgot his name), the same night the repeal failed:

1] Separate the high-risk and existing conditions out of the exchanges.

2] Put the high risk & existing conditions into a separate subsidized pool.

3] Have a Medicare buy-in as the public option.

--

#1 frees up the exchanges from excessive premiums and risks, stabilizing the market places.

#2 takes care of the high-risk crowd in a manner they can afford.

#3 assures there will be at least one reasonable insurer in every market place.

I like this idea.
Click to expand...

The reason that I prefer Medicaid to Medicare, as the public option, is that Medicaid has no deductible and covers room and board for (medically necessary) nursing home care. If the "private" insurance providers were (again) allowed to use actuarial risk factors (aka pre-existing conditions) then anyone that is "high risk" (and lower income) would naturally select the public option (with premiums capped at a fixed percentage of their gross income).
 
Chomsky said:
Yeah, I can't argue there.

While it still sucks, it appears everything else the GOP tried sucked worse, so now it's popular! :lamo

But while I don't support the ACA's basic premise of mandating the purchase of private insurance, I can't help but wonder what would have happened if it had been nurtured rather than hobbled.

You know, the full medicaid expansion in all 50 states, and a legit public option. Along without having all those little things the GOP did to hinder it over the years. To speak nothing of whatever improvements & adjustments should have been done over the same 7 years.

We'll never know I suppose, unless Congress decides to accept it and improve it.
Click to expand...

I haven't the faintest idea about the ACA's future. I think one must remember the ACA wasn't wanted back in 2010 when it passed against the objections of the majority of Americans. That led to a 63 seat house loss for the Democrats. The Democrats knew the ACA was flawed and probably wouldn't last without major modifications, adjustments, improvements or at least they should have. The ACA was rushed through congress even though it wasn't ready. The thinking as near as I can tell was the Democrats would fix any and everything that went wrong with the ACA. They never dreamed they would lose the house and thus the ability to fix the numerous flaws within the ACA itself.

The take over of the House by the GOP in the 2010 election put a quick halt to their plans. That happens when around 60% of America says no, but those in charge because they can, passes it anyway. Sort of the Democrats telling the American people to stick it where the sun don't shine. All I have to say to the Republicans is they better listen to the American people when it comes to healthcare. If the American people say no, that is what they mean. Let the ACA be for this year, if the Republicans don't, they're liable to experience another 2010 only in reverse.

My grand pappy always said there is a time and a place for everything. Now isn't the time. Perhaps next year once more insurance companies exit the ACA, premiums go up along with the deductibles. Perhaps then most Americans will want it replaced. Perhaps next year will be the time. If the American people want the ACA for the rest of the year, let them have it. Sooner or later, they will want it gone once more. When that time comes, the Republicans better have a better plan.

Wife says to get my butt to bed, catch you all in the AM.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The reason that I prefer Medicaid to Medicare, as the public option, is that Medicaid has no deductible and covers room and board for (medically necessary) nursing home care. If the "private" insurance providers were (again) allowed to use actuarial risk factors (aka pre-existing conditions) then anyone that is "high risk" (and lower income) would naturally select the public option (with premiums capped at a fixed percentage of their gross income).
Click to expand...
I think I prefer Medicaid, too.

I just thought Medicare would be an easier buy-in, but I suppose it wouldn't matter.

For all it's being maligned, Medicaid doesn't seem so bad to me. I've seen medicaid recipients I know get excellent care at top facilities.

If Medicaid's lacking, it's only because it's the green-eyed, freckle-faced, red-haired, step-child, of health insurance! It always the easiest to let slide something seen as a freebie give away to the poor. But yeah, I'd like to see medicaid propped-up, and I'd like to see it extended into single-payer.

But since single-payer isn't realistically happening anytime soon, I thought I'd toss out that Rep's plan in my previous post. That seems possibly doable, down the line.
 
Chomsky said:
I think I prefer Medicaid, too.

I just thought Medicare would be an easier buy-in, but I suppose it wouldn't matter.

For all it's being maligned, Medicaid doesn't seem so bad to me. I've seen medicaid recipients I know get excellent care at top facilities.

If Medicaid's lacking, it's only because it's the green-eyed, freckle-faced, red-haired, step-child, of health insurance! It always the easiest to let slide something seen as a freebie give away to the poor. But yeah, I'd like to see medicaid propped-up, and I'd like to see it extended into single-payer.

But since single-payer isn't realistically happening anytime soon, I thought I'd toss out that Rep's plan in my previous post. That seems possibly doable, down the line.
Click to expand...

Single payer as an option could work but as a mandate it sucks.
 
Perotista said:
I haven't the faintest idea about the ACA's future. I think one must remember the ACA wasn't wanted back in 2010 when it passed against the objections of the majority of Americans. That led to a 63 seat house loss for the Democrats. The Democrats knew the ACA was flawed and probably wouldn't last without major modifications, adjustments, improvements or at least they should have. The ACA was rushed through congress even though it wasn't ready. The thinking as near as I can tell was the Democrats would fix any and everything that went wrong with the ACA. They never dreamed they would lose the house and thus the ability to fix the numerous flaws within the ACA itself.

The take over of the House by the GOP in the 2010 election put a quick halt to their plans. That happens when around 60% of America says no, but those in charge because they can, passes it anyway. Sort of the Democrats telling the American people to stick it where the sun don't shine. All I have to say to the Republicans is they better listen to the American people when it comes to healthcare. If the American people say no, that is what they mean. Let the ACA be for this year, if the Republicans don't, they're liable to experience another 2010 only in reverse.

My grand pappy always said there is a time and a place for everything. Now isn't the time. Perhaps next year once more insurance companies exit the ACA, premiums go up along with the deductibles. Perhaps then most Americans will want it replaced. Perhaps next year will be the time. If the American people want the ACA for the rest of the year, let them have it. Sooner or later, they will want it gone once more. When that time comes, the Republicans better have a better plan.

Wife says to get my butt to bed, catch you all in the AM.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the great post.

It's accurate, and I agree with pretty much everything.

And your assessment of pushing the hobbled initial bill (ACA) through, to fix and refine it later, is dead-on. Also not having the public option, along with the SC ruling against the mandatory Medicaid expansion, were significant impediments. I do believe the Dems saw this as the beginning movement to a single-payer system, even if a hybrid one.

But the wild card will be if the GOP decide to work with the Dems to stabilize and improve the ACA. Even if thought to be only temporary. That's the only way it will survive. Otherwise it will die a painful miserable death, with the only question being upon which party's neck will the albatross hang?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom