Trumpcare Megathread: It's dead (for now)

[Mr. Morden]

But what do Republicans tell their base if they give up on it? They can't just do literally nothing in the lead up to 2018 and have the audacity to ask for more power then

Sure they can.  Voters don't care about policy wins.  I think Bill Scher is largely right on this:

"Trump isn't accomplishing anything, but his voters don't care."

[Mr. Morden]

But what do Republicans tell their base if they give up on it? They can't just do literally nothing in the lead up to 2018 and have the audacity to ask for more power then

Sure they can.  Voters don't care about policy wins.  I think Bill Scher is largely right on this:

"Trump isn't accomplishing anything, but his voters don't care."

Nate Silver points out Trump's voters aren't enough for the Republican Party. They need more than just that which affects their political calculation.

OK, but swing voters wouldn't be happy with AHCA passing either.

What I was suggesting was that the idea that the GOP electorate in particular is going to be mad if Congress fails to pass ACA repeal seems unlikely to me.  I don't think it's true.  I don't think voters care that much about policy as such.  They care about what happens to them.  There was anti-Obamacare passion on the right, but that was really just anti-Obama passion.  Now that Obama himself is gone, I doubt many Republican voters rate it as a high priority issue.

Congress failing to repeal the ACA isn't going to turn normal Republican voters against either Trump or Republicans in Congress.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if, a year from now, a large percentage of the electorate won't even be able to correctly answer a poll question on whether Obamacare has been repealed or not.

[Mr. Morden]

seems like it is coming apart.

several senators now complaining about the tax cuts for the rich.

how is the freedom caucus going to swallow that?

Which senators? What's the twitter saying?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-28/key-republicans-want-to-scrap-health-bill-s-tax-cuts-for-wealthy

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

seems like it is coming apart.

several senators now complaining about the tax cuts for the rich.

how is the freedom caucus going to swallow that?

Which senators? What's the twitter saying?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-28/key-republicans-want-to-scrap-health-bill-s-tax-cuts-for-wealthy

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I see GOP Senators are now in "kill the bill" phase. If they phased out these cuts they might as well as keep the ACA, right? It will be interesting to see what Mitch McConnell decides to do in response by Friday.

Axing these tax cuts would probably kill the bill in the House too. Which seems the point too. These senators are being vocal about the tax cut side, which implies they're no longer interested in negotiation but in killing the bill. Tax cuts are integral to the point of repeal.

As I said in another thread yesterday, it's quite possible that "Obamacare repeal" is dead, and yet, this bill wasn't really Obamacare repeal, and many of its provisions could show up again in different incarnations in either the 2018 budget or in "tax reform".  I mean, the main provisions of this bill are a tax cut and a Medicaid cut.  Both of those could come back on their own, just not packaged together as something that's being touted as "Obamacare repeal".

[Mr. Morden]

You guys are far too rosy and idealistic. The GOP is going to pass this one way or another. Someone will sit out the vote purely for re-election reasons. Far right wingers are going to get bullied into supporting it since GOP congress peoples melt at strong arm tactics. When Trump starts threatening them and handing out their phone numbers on Twitter, they will all fold like they always do. GOP just cant resist a charming strongman and the opportunity to destroy government programs.

Just two days ago, you weren't sounding so sure:

According to Bill Kristol, McConnell isnt even pushing the bill or contacting GOP Senators who said they'll vote no...maybe hes just wants the whole thing done and gone.

[Mr. Morden]

This is the GOP were talking about. There are no principles or courage in this party. It's all about sociopathic ambition combined with reckless ignorance on policy proposals. These people have no problem lying shamelessly about the effects of the bill and since their voters live in a bubble, they wont even know it will effect them and if it does, they'll just blame Obama or illegals.

All of that was true two days ago too, and yet you posted that it looked like McConnell might be giving up.  So clearly, you think that under some circumstances, they might not be able to pull it off.

I am not convinced that this Congress can manage to pass major legislation like this.  Maybe they will, and maybe they won't.  But what of any great consequence have they actually passed so far?  Confirmations of Cabinet nominees?

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/TeddyDavisCNN/status/880746714768056320

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

"Repeal and delay" is back, with Rand Paul jumping on board:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/06/the-return-of-repeal-and-delay-as-gop-health-care-strategy.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But this approach got axed, in part because of opposition from Rand Paul, and then Trump himself.  However, now....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/TeddyDavisCNN/status/880746714768056320

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's fing irresponsible on ungodly levels

Can they even just pass that through as a budget cut or will they need to abide or nuke the legislative fillibuster?

And if they do just repeal it, wouldn't that just damage industry confidence so badly that many insurers might just stop offering non-group plans?

They cant, they would need to get rid of the filibuster, something McConnell wont do. 

I guess what's being floated now is to repeal all of the budget-only aspects of Obamacare that can be included in a reconciliation bill.  The regulatory side of Obamacare, which couldn't be handled in a reconciliation bill, would be left untouched.  This is the "repeal and delay" strategy that was talked about months ago but ultimately rejected (and that some are now circling back to).

[Mr. Morden]

Here's Paul's new "repeal and delay" tweet:

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/880752077613518849

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

I would not take it for granted that the supposed "indecision" by Heller or anyone else is genuine.  Some of them may have already made up their minds to vote yes or no, but just don't want to be the ones to say it publicly, for political reasons.

[Mr. Morden]

If there really are 10 senators who want to vote no but are too chicken to say so unless the bill is already dead, and will vote Yes if Heller never kills it, all I can say is "wow, what a bunch of cucks."

The bolded part seems like a big assumption.  One or more of them might be planning to vote no regardless.  They just would prefer that someone else is the first one to announce their "no" vote, because it means that they're less of a target.

[Mr. Morden]

I remain skeptical that this is actually going to pass as its own standalone thing.  But I do think people are underrating the chances that elements of it will get packaged in with the 2018 budget or with the tax reform bill.  I mean, it's not really Obamacare repeal.  It's a Medicaid cut and a tax cut.  The tax cut portion, for example, could certainly pass if it was separated off from the Medicaid cut.  Though, yeah, they might have to be made temporary if they can't offset the cost with anything else.  Not sure how much leeway there is on the budget rules for reconciliation.

[Mr. Morden]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders won't even say definitively that Trump would sign repeal-only legislation if it were to somehow pass:

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/887386150003978241

[Mr. Morden]

I must say that I was really thinking that some version of ObamaCare repeal would pass, as this is a republican caucus who approved DeVos, who is objectively and extremely unqualified for her position. Based on that, they should be lapdogs for Trump.  But they have decided not to be, and that is very admirable.

I tried to warn you guys, when I said (several times actually) that "personnel isn't policy":

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=259738.msg5545889#msg5545889

The Senate rarely blocks a Cabinet appointment from a president of the same party that controls the Senate.  (And even in Trump's case, they did torpedo Puzder before a vote could even be held, so it's not like they were 100% on board with all his Cabinet picks.)  But that doesn't mean they're going to support him on every policy.

As I also said in that thread:

Why does it seem like people are vacillating back and forth between "Congressional Republicans are lap dogs who'll vote with Trump no matter what" and "Trump won't be able to get anything passed through Congress"?

[Mr. Morden]

Mondale, why do you keep flipping back and forth on this?:

By the way, I think Mondale deserves everyone he was calling naïve for doubting the bill's passage an apology.

(I'm not actually serious about this)

Eh....I was wrong...you guys were right. Congrats

One day it's sure to pass, then no, I guess not, then oh wait, I guess it is....

[Mr. Morden]

Mondale, why do you keep flipping back and forth on this?:

By the way, I think Mondale deserves everyone he was calling naïve for doubting the bill's passage an apology.

(I'm not actually serious about this)

Eh....I was wrong...you guys were right. Congrats

One day it's sure to pass, then no, I guess not, then oh wait, I guess it is....

Yawn...I said it once and that was before I knew the McTurtle can just change the rules or over rule the parliamentarian.

And so if the motion to proceed is voted down tomorrow, will that convince you that maybe, just maybe, this isn't going to pass?  Or will you still be sure that they'll come back with something else next week?  I'm just wondering what kind of evidence is sufficient that it's not a sure thing?

[Mr. Morden]

Mondale, why do you keep flipping back and forth on this?:

By the way, I think Mondale deserves everyone he was calling naïve for doubting the bill's passage an apology.

(I'm not actually serious about this)

Eh....I was wrong...you guys were right. Congrats

One day it's sure to pass, then no, I guess not, then oh wait, I guess it is....

Yawn...I said it once and that was before I knew the McTurtle can just change the rules or over rule the parliamentarian.

And so if the motion to proceed is voted down tomorrow, will that convince you that maybe, just maybe, this isn't going to pass?  Or will you still be sure that they'll come back with something else next week?  I'm just wondering what kind of evidence is sufficient that it's not a sure thing?

Until the date of reconciliation has run out then this thing isnt dead.

But it can be not dead yet also not a sure thing to pass.  You're talking as if it's a sure thing to pass.  And so I'm wondering if there's any conceivable piece of evidence that would cause you to downgrade its chances of passage before the clock runs out on reconciliation?

[Mr. Morden]

Understand why I dislike McCain now? He played you guys like a fiddle.

None of us expected McCain to vote no.

I did. McCain always makes himself the swing vote.

He would have been the swing vote whether he voted yes or no.

[Mr. Morden]

If they really just want to get to conference, there's no reason they couldn't just pass an empty shell of a bill that has no meaningful policy implications.  That way they don't have to worry about the House "tricking them" by passing it without a conference, since passing it without a conference wouldn't really do anything.

[Mr. Morden]

My source on the Hill tells me that word around the House was that Ryan was full of s@$& about working it out in conference committee, so good on McCain for seeing through Ryan's BS.

My impression from Ryan's statement was that there would indeed be a conference committee, but the question is what happens if the conference committee fails to come up with something?  Ryan didn't seem to address that part of the question.  Nothing in his public statement ruled out the possibility that if the conference committee failed, the House wouldn't just put the Senate's "skinny repeal" bill up for a vote.

[Mr. Morden]

As today is the reconciliation deadline and the Senate isn't even in session, I request that this thread be locked and unstickied. TrumpCare is dead.

It should be unstickied, but locking doesn't seem necessary (unless it miraculously grows to 2000 replies).  If someone wants to add a few more things on this topic, this thread is as good a place as any.

[Mr. Morden]

Someone please unsticky this dead thread. Potential repeal of the individual mandate is being addressed in the also-stickied tax cut thread, and no one has posted here in about 7 weeks.

Let it go, please.

No, this thread must remain stickied until Republicans give up on their dream of committing mass murder on millions of Americans.

Disagree.  We don't need to keep threads stickied that aren't going to get any comments for like a month or two.  Then they're just a waste of space.  If it comes back in the news, and there's more for people to talk about, then it can be re-stickied.  Or better yet, should that happen, start a new thread.  This one's almost at 2000 replies as it is, so it's close to being ready to be locked anyway.  If a new health care push happened now, it should get a brand new thread, rather than letting this zombie thread stumble forward.

EDIT: I mean, for those saying "I don't trust the GOP to not bring it up again", you do realize that this thread being stickied or not has zero impact on what actually happens in Congress, right?  It's not like you're going to stop the GOP agenda based on which threads show up in this forum.