Will the Repub Health Care Plan pass the house

[Fiddytree]

All attempts to make this bill more palatable to conservatives just means that the bill is going to keep getting crappier and crappier for citizens. They keep attacking Medicaid and they keep attacking what coverage Americans get.

White House moves to tweak health care bill to win over conservatives - POLITICO

 

[Jack Hays]

That's correct - I am not sure how one uses a principle that only exists in theory to justify a real world policy choice.

But of course the idea that those who cannot afford insurance and are not offered it at work (about 35-40% of the non-senior population) should have to beg for their healthcare is pretty insane all by itself, so I guess I shouldn't be expecting too much grounding of your preferences in political or economic realities.

The fundraising apparatus to fund those kinds of expenses year after year would be just immense and, in reality, unsustainable over any long period of time. Just for example, total giving - a record - totaled about $375 billion in the most recent year. Medicaid spending in the most recent year totaled about $550 billion. So all we'd need to do is, sustainably, in good times and bad, recessions and booms, is more than double ALL charitable giving, every year, and somehow find a way to efficiently allocate that money to thousands of communities all across the country in a way that didn't arbitrarily leave many areas flush with funds and others with nothing!

Please remember that covering everyone is not a goal I share, and no charitable organization I know makes people beg for care. Here's an interesting discussion.

[h=3]Exploring The Numbers In The GOP's Health Care Plan | FiveThirtyEight[/h]https://fivethirtyeight.com/.../exploring-the-numbers-in-the-gops-health-care-plan/

Mar 15, 2017 - Exploring The Numbers In The GOP's Health Care Plan ... We care about costs, access, choice. ... Per the CBO, “Under the legislation, the higher federal matching rate would apply for fewer than 5 percent of newly eligible ...

 

[Cardinal]

 

[Moderate Right]

View attachment 67215522

Oh man. The cherry picking on this one should even be obvious to the left. Why waste your time with something that is so obviously partisan and cherry picked?

 

[JANFU]

All attempts to make this bill more palatable to conservatives just means that the bill is going to keep getting crappier and crappier for citizens. They keep attacking Medicaid and they keep attacking what coverage Americans get.

White House moves to tweak health care bill to win over conservatives - POLITICO

Votes gained from the Freedom Caucus results in more losses from Repub moderates.
Now if they do not have the votes, will they delay to a later date?

 

[NeverTrump]

Will the Repub Health Care Plan pass the house?
Yes
No
Other Pls explain

I'll laugh if it fails to get through the house. The Republicans have everything riding on it, and they can't even agree on what to put in it. I see Trump blowing a lot of smoke saying everything is A-OK. I'm not so sure what the freedom caucus has to say about that. I see a revolt at the last minute, but some of them have been easily brainwashed by Trump's rhetoric in the past.

 

[JANFU]

I'll laugh if it fails to get through the house. The Republicans have everything riding on it, and they can't even agree on what to put in it. I see Trump blowing a lot of smoke saying everything is A-OK. I'm not so sure what the freedom caucus has to say about that. I see a revolt at the last minute, but some of them have been easily brainwashed by Trump's rhetoric in the past.

Lots riding on it are those that will lose HC under this plan. They need 216 to pass, and to avoid any changes in the Bill that cannot be performed under Senate Reconciliation.
A good number of moderate Republicans have stated they will not vote yes on this.
2018 elections are going to be interesting as hell. My gut feeling is it will not pass.

 

[NeverTrump]

Lots riding on it are those that will lose HC under this plan. They need 216 to pass, and to avoid any changes in the Bill that cannot be performed under Senate Reconciliation.
A good number of moderate Republicans have stated they will not vote yes on this.
2018 elections are going to be interesting as hell. My gut feeling is it will not pass.

I knew the plan was poo-poo but after the CBO numbers came out that only confirmed my suspicions. They don't even have a good counter to how many people will lose coverage. Just threats and the very thin, "now they will have choice," excuse.

 

[JANFU]

I knew the plan was poo-poo but after the CBO numbers came out that only confirmed my suspicions. They don't even have a good counter to how many people will lose coverage. Just threats and the very thin, "now they will have choice," excuse.

The Bill sucks, and they know it.

 

[Risky Thicket]

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Votes gained from the Freedom Caucus results in more losses from Repub moderates.
Now if they do not have the votes, will they delay to a later date?

I think they chose Thursday specifically because it is the 7th anniversary of the affordable care act being signed into law.

 

[JANFU]

I think they chose Thursday specifically because it is the 7th anniversary of the affordable care act being signed into law.

Cold very well be. It also may be remembered as the day the Bill failed.
Do you think it will pass??

 

[earthworm]

View attachment 67215545

I cannot understand why so many support the costly, useless wars and catering to the wealthy ..
Yes , I do know , its the political power of the wealthy, difficult, if not impossible to overcome ..

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Cold very well be. It also may be remembered as the day the Bill failed.
Do you think it will pass??

I am not sure what will happen.

But if it fails to pass the house it will be a major defeat for trump's legeslative agenda.

 

[Cardinal]

Rumor is they don't have the votes, so the idea is to put it off to tomorrow.

 

[Cardinal]

Reporters on Twitter are saying that there is officially no deal between the Freedom Caucus and Trump. Also, there appears to be enough moderate Republicans who have officially voiced their opposition to Trumpcare. At least for today, the bill is dead.

 

[JANFU]

Rumor is they don't have the votes, so the idea is to put it off to tomorrow.

Found this- Get the feeling this is DOA
GOP lawmakers leave Trump White House with no deal | TheHill

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) told reporters on Capitol Hill that “there are not enough votes” to pass the bill.

Republicans need 215 votes to win passage, meaning they can afford 22 defections. A whip list kept by The Hill shows that five dozen members are either planning to vote no, leaning against the bill or uncertain of how they vote. A full 30 members on that list are no votes.

 

[Cardinal]

Aaaaaand the vote has been pushed to Monday. As unbelievably awful as the bill is right now, it's about to get so much worse.

Jon Lovett: "When frantically rewriting a bill that would have drastic impact on a fifth of the US economy, best not to rush. Give yourself a Saturday."

 

[Cardinal]

Yeah, Trump really tweeted this:

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump

It’s Thursday. How many people have lost their healthcare today?

 

[JANFU]

Aaaaaand the vote has been pushed to Monday. As unbelievably awful as the bill is right now, it's about to get so much worse.

Jon Lovett: "When frantically rewriting a bill that would have drastic impact on a fifth of the US economy, best not to rush. Give yourself a Saturday."

Saw this only as Kobie reposted it. That 1 I saved

Excellent points

I have long believed that the deal the Republicans made a grave error when they pushed the Tea Party into the forefront of their party's GOTV apparatus, and made Obamacare a major issue. It set up expectations that they cannot deliver on, at least while keeping their donor class happy and far Right happy.

Now, on the surface Obamacare looks like a great piece of legislation for Republicans to target --Obamacare basically pays for older people's healthcare on the backs of partially the healthy and partially the rich (which then, by Republicans and corporate Democrats, was immediately shifted away from the wealthy donor class and right onto the deficit), it has no meaningful price controls, and it did nothing to curb the price of drugs. In other words, it's your typical milquetoast "moderate reforms" that really only address about 25%-50% of the problems, but makes Democrats feel like they're done a great, noble thing. So, sure, that sounds like low-hanging fruit, politically speaking.

Here's the problem: There is no Republican plan for healthcare, and there can't ever be one. Either you have to go in and place massive legal restrictions on the healthcare industry and publicly subsidize massive portions of healthcare --which will cause a widespread revolt among the donor-class-- or the prices will continue skyrocketing --and it'll start bringing out the 50% of people who normally don't show up to the polls. In either case, they lose. And they've been harping on this issue for 8 years now. The thing is, when I say there "there can't ever be" a Republican plan for healthcare, that's not just my opinion. The Republicans spent 8 years blasting Obamacare and they spend billions on think-tanks and policy institutes. You know what they came up with during that time? What they were ready to enact after they finally got elected to the White House, Senate majority, and House majority? That's right, not a goddamn thing. Over the past few months, they've scraped together a cobbled hodgepodge of tax-breaks and nothing else.

Trumpcare is basically a full admission that they're going to choose to side with the donors, which is pretty funny coming from Donald "Everyone else let donors get away with murder, but I won't!" Trump. What will his voters do when they actually understand how screwed they are? It's why House Republicans are so torn on voting for the bill, because they know they're going to get skewered either way --the far Right extremists that they've been cultivating in their Red districts will hate them if they don't repeal Obamacare (beyond which, Trump will look incredibly weak), but if they do pass it and it destroys people's lives, people will vote them out of office.

There's no win here, because there's no "traditionally conservative" solution to this problem. There is, however, a socialist solution, the one pushed for by Bernie. I'm eagerly awaiting that policy battle following whichever crater Trump leaves behind on this issue.

 

[MAGAnificent]

and in Canada, you don't have things like "that diagnostic test might cost me thousands out of pocket, so let's put it off for a few more years." here, you absolutely have that, and i have experienced it personally.

However in Canada, you do have waiting lists for those diagnostic tests.....and some of those waiting lists are too long. We do not have hat problem here. If I went to the doctor tomorrow and needed an MRI, I could get one tomorrow or the next day. There are at least 5 locations I could get one within 15 miles of my house. As for a diagnostic test costing thousands out of pocket, at least prior to Obamacare, I have not seen it. My brother had cat scans and MRI's and never saw that. My mother had nearly every test known to man and she never saw it.....again prior to Obamacare. I have not had that much need for medical care since that bastard bill passed.

as for the ambulance chasers, we might find some small point of agreement there. FFS, there are commercials inviting people to join in class action lawsuits. that is definitely not "free money."

I am glad that we at least agree on that. And it does affect the cost of healthcare as doctors have to load up on malpractice insurance to fend off frivolous medical malpractice suits brought by ambulance chasing attorneys. Canada and the UK do not have that problem.

our health care is rationed by cost, ability to pay, and treatments that your specific health insurance will pay for. this varies wildly by specific employment and even geographic area. that is beyond debate, and it is a point that i'm not willing to waste time on. your food analogy is also completely non-analogous. food is cheap, readily available, and there is no factor of geographic immediacy. i can get food anywhere for a low price. if a family member is seriously ill or i am injured, we're going to the local hospital, and we'll be paying whatever they charge, even if it's an absolutely ridiculous price.

Whether you like the food analogy or not, the principle still applies. if we allow market forces to work...it works. even in healthcare. And once again, "Cost" does not translate to "rationed" If it did, every good or service bought or sold on the planet would be considered rationed. That would include the neighborhood children setting up a lemonade stand. Rationing is the government limiting the quantity of a good or service to a specific amount. How much you can pay or are willing to pay has absolutely nothing to do with rationing. The government either restricts distribution or they don't. If they don't, then it's not rationed. The only exception in the US is human organ transplants. Those are rationed obviously due to limited availability.

 

[disneydude]

and in Canada, you don't have things like "that diagnostic test might cost me thousands out of pocket, so let's put it off for a few more years." here, you absolutely have that, and i have experienced it personally.

However in Canada, you do have waiting lists for those diagnostic tests.....and some of those waiting lists are too long. We do not have hat problem here. If I went to the doctor tomorrow and needed an MRI, I could get one tomorrow or the next day. There are at least 5 locations I could get one within 15 miles of my house. As for a diagnostic test costing thousands out of pocket, at least prior to Obamacare, I have not seen it. My brother had cat scans and MRI's and never saw that. My mother had nearly every test known to man and she never saw it.....again prior to Obamacare. I have not had that much need for medical care since that bastard bill passed.





I am glad that we at least agree on that. And it does affect the cost of healthcare as doctors have to load up on malpractice insurance to fend off frivolous medical malpractice suits brought by ambulance chasing attorneys. Canada and the UK do not have that problem.







Whether you like the food analogy or not, the principle still applies. if we allow market forces to work...it works. even in healthcare. And once again, "Cost" does not translate to "rationed" If it did, every good or service bought or sold on the planet would be considered rationed. That would include the neighborhood children setting up a lemonade stand. Rationing is the government limiting the quantity of a good or service to a specific amount. How much you can pay or are willing to pay has absolutely nothing to do with rationing. The government either restricts distribution or they don't. If they don't, then it's not rationed. The only exception in the US is human organ transplants. Those are rationed obviously due to limited availability.

Are you going to change your name to Trumpcarefail?

 

[Helix]

However in Canada, you do have waiting lists for those diagnostic tests.....and some of those waiting lists are too long. We do not have hat problem here. If I went to the doctor tomorrow and needed an MRI, I could get one tomorrow or the next day. There are at least 5 locations I could get one within 15 miles of my house. As for a diagnostic test costing thousands out of pocket, at least prior to Obamacare, I have not seen it. My brother had cat scans and MRI's and never saw that. My mother had nearly every test known to man and she never saw it.....again prior to Obamacare. I have not had that much need for medical care since that bastard bill passed.

younger workers have had a different experience. they're probably going to tell me at my upcoming checkup that i need a test in the coming year which will cost who knows how much out of pocket. and no, laissez faire is not going to fix that.

I am glad that we at least agree on that. And it does affect the cost of healthcare as doctors have to load up on malpractice insurance to fend off frivolous medical malpractice suits brought by ambulance chasing attorneys. Canada and the UK do not have that problem.

probably to some limited extent, but not like in the states.

Whether you like the food analogy or not, the principle still applies. if we allow market forces to work...it works. even in healthcare. And once again, "Cost" does not translate to "rationed" If it did, every good or service bought or sold on the planet would be considered rationed. That would include the neighborhood children setting up a lemonade stand. Rationing is the government limiting the quantity of a good or service to a specific amount. How much you can pay or are willing to pay has absolutely nothing to do with rationing. The government either restricts distribution or they don't. If they don't, then it's not rationed. The only exception in the US is human organ transplants. Those are rationed obviously due to limited availability.

it's not that i don't "like" the food analogy. it's that the food analogy is not analogous.

 

[Greenbeard]

I've got to say, the dramatic rise in "why failure will be good for Trump" takes popping up around here seem to be a good indicator of how the DP rightwinger prediction markets expect the vote to go today.

 

[JumpinJack]

Not without major revisions. Not many things pass without modifications. Well, except Obamacare, that was pretty much shoved through fast.

Not true.

Obamacare was worked on for almost 1 1/2 years and was amended a number of times. In fact, almost 200 REPUBLICAN AMENDMENTS WERE ACCEPTED TO IT. After accepting those amendments, the Dems were repaid by not one Republican voting for it.

It was not shoved through quickly at all. It's one of the most discussed, analyzed, and reported on major reform bills in our history.

All the Republicans did afterwards is complain how thick it is. The Repubs, and Trump, are now learning that a major healthcare reform bill is COMPLICATED, esp. when it's the first of its kind in our history.

It was a remarkable feat that the Dems got that done, even with its horrible flaws. At the time, though, no one knew exactly how it actually perform in real life, since that's the first time such a reform in health care had been done.

Then when Obamacare was passed, it became effective in increments, so the country could adjust along the way. It took SIX YEARS for it to be fully implemented (2009 to 2015).

This is the purpose of governing. You get things done by working diligently and hard for long periods of time to get something done that will help the citizens for a long time into the future, even though it may not immediately result in a profit for all. Running a business is very different, and you don't have life or death concerns in your business plans that will become effective the next year, after you sleep on it a day or two. Then you bark an order, and it's done. Governing requires a consensus among people with different opinions and different goals. The Dems tried to get Republicans on board by accepting numerous amendments. In the end, though, the Republicans would have nothing to do with it, but the Dems were able to get most of their members on board.

But the Republicans don't like to govern. In fact, they are against government, generally. So unless they can dictate what's to be done & not worry about consensus, they are not so good about getting bills passed. That requires governing skill and concerns.