Trumpcare Megathread: It's dead (for now)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

RIP, CBO.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

RIP, CBO

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Establishment Democrat position: 28 million uninsured is fine, but 50 million is unacceptable.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Establishment Democrat position: 28 million uninsured is fine, but 50 million is unacceptable.

What is it with you and the straw man arguments?

The establishment Democrats have no solution for the 28 million uninsured.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nice straw man argument, jfern.

So where's the plan?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nice straw man argument, jfern.

So where's the plan?

Dems have wanted to restore the risk corridors that Rubio sabotage, add a public option, and increase the subsides. Just doing those three things could improve the ACA dramatically.

Seriously, they have been talking about this for the last couple of years now.

Why didn't they add a public option or even better single payer in the first place? Even single payer might not be far enough. The UK has a national health system, and spends less than half as much per capita as the US. They really should have done healthcare right in the first place, rather than copying some Republican idea. Democrats have had 7 years to come up with a better system, and I don't hear much about it from them, except for the few who are progressive enough to support single payer, which Hillary said would never happen.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nice straw man argument, jfern.

So where's the plan?

Dems have wanted to restore the risk corridors that Rubio sabotage, add a public option, and increase the subsides. Just doing those three things could improve the ACA dramatically.

Seriously, they have been talking about this for the last couple of years now.

Why didn't they add a public option or even better single payer in the first place? Even single payer might not be far enough. The UK has a national health system, and spends less than half as much per capita as the US. They really should have done healthcare right in the first place, rather than copying some Republican idea. Democrats have had 7 years to come up with a better system, and I don't hear much about it from them, except for the few who are progressive enough to support single payer, which Hillary said would never happen.

Single Payer is Socialist, unamerican, and unaffordable

Roads and schools are socialist, and the UK spends only 43% as much as the US on healthcare.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nice straw man argument, jfern.

So where's the plan?

Dems have wanted to restore the risk corridors that Rubio sabotage, add a public option, and increase the subsides. Just doing those three things could improve the ACA dramatically.

Seriously, they have been talking about this for the last couple of years now.

Why didn't they add a public option or even better single payer in the first place? Even single payer might not be far enough. The UK has a national health system, and spends less than half as much per capita as the US. They really should have done healthcare right in the first place, rather than copying some Republican idea. Democrats have had 7 years to come up with a better system, and I don't hear much about it from them, except for the few who are progressive enough to support single payer, which Hillary said would never happen.

Lieberman killed the public option in the senate bill in 2009. Obama let it go because he didn't have enough votes to spare. As for single-payer, they didn't go that route because they aren't stupid. Over 60% of Americans get their health insurance through their employers and most are content with their coverage. Single-payer would have upended that, just look how much grief Obama took when one million of Americans lost their plans after the ACA passage (and the majority of those plans were junk plans!), now imagine the backlash the Democrats would face for kicking people of their plans, which they like, and slapping on a tax-hike to pay for it? On top of that, there is the whole issue of the impact a single-payer system would have on the health industry in terms of jobs.

The Democrats mistake (besides the lack of a public option) was the subsides were too low in the ACA. It is a pity, they really should have passed the house bill, which was far stronger then the senate bill.

The reconciliation bill only needed 50 votes, and so really didn't need Lieberman's vote. They should have gotten 50 senators to support a stronger bill. This bill was passed after Scott Brown took office, so there's no way they were getting 60 votes, anyways.

Roads are built by private companies and thus are not socialism. Even public schools are largely under local/state control - without complete control by the federal government, it is not socialism. Single payer health care is solely controlled by the federal government and destroys an industry by banning private insurance, which is what makes it socialist. Single Payer health care is also likely increase the deficit, and inevitably results in long, unconsciable waits for surgeries and other time sensitive procedures.

In fact, you can see how terrible single payer is without going overseas. It's called the Veterans Hospitals. Tons of ethics scandals, no accountability, huge backlogs and wait periods, people literally dying due to lack of care. And now I'm supposed to believe that single payer is good for the whole country?

Roads can be built by the state. Why does it matter who builds them? And the state and local governments are still governments. The idea that they can't be socialist is ridiculous. In California, most of the school funding comes from the state, which would be one of the largest economies in the world if it was its own country. Gosh, there's some poorly run program, that proves that nothing can be run correctly.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The bulk of ObamaCare was passed under normal legislative rules in December 2009, before Brown was elected, on a party line 60 to 39 vote. The reconciliation bill was composed of fairly minor amendments and passed by a narrower margin (several conservadems voted against it).

Okay, believe that single payer wouldn't be like the veterans hospitals, or that its wait times wouldn't mirror the unconsciable wait times that exist in the UK. Just don't come crying to me when you realize your beliefs are incorrect.

The reconciliation bill could have been much more major. And LOL at the idea that no one ever waits for healthcare in the US.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The bulk of ObamaCare was passed under normal legislative rules in December 2009, before Brown was elected, on a party line 60 to 39 vote. The reconciliation bill was composed of fairly minor amendments and passed by a narrower margin (several conservadems voted against it).

Okay, believe that single payer wouldn't be like the veterans hospitals, or that its wait times wouldn't mirror the unconsciable wait times that exist in the UK. Just don't come crying to me when you realize your beliefs are incorrect.

The reconciliation bill could have been much more major. And LOL at the idea that no one ever waits for healthcare in the US.

They wait far less than they would under single payer

93.4% of people in the emergency room in the UK are completed treated within 4 hours. That's certainly not true in the US.

http://www.businessinsider.com/comparison-uk-nhs-v-us-private-heathcare-2015-1

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

McCain out for surgery on his eye next week. So the bill is at 49 yes, 50 no, assuming Heller is a yea. Meaning no votes can really proceed until McCain is back.

Trump can't get his bill passed now that McCain has been captured by the surgeons. Sad!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If only McGinty or Feingold had won.

Bernie would have coattailed McGinty to victory. Sestak probably would have won in spite of Hillary. But the establishment got their way in both primaries, and that could make the difference in whether ObamaCare survives.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Quick, pass this bill that we don't know the implications of before McCain has to go back to the hospital.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Pence has left the chamber.

That either means they are stuck at 49 or believe they have 51.

If they thought they had 51, they'd probably keep him around just in case there is a surprise.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So do they just pull the vote at this point?

If they somehow actually don't have the votes, either that or McConnell lets it fail anyways to bring closure to the issue and declare it dead, and ObamaCare the law of the land, for good.

Naw, they'll probably just hope for gains in the Senate next year.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I guess their next plan will probably be to hope they gain Senate seats next year and try to repeal it in 2019.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Heller voted yes, lol

At this point he is digging his own grave.

They're probably more worried about primaries. Collins must think she's safe in Maine. Murkowski showed that she doesn't need to win a primary. And McCain will likely be dead.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

ObamaCare still isn't safe.

They could get one more anti ObamaCare senator in this congress if McCain or Menendez are replaced.

And the Senate map next year bad for Democrats. ObamaCare might come down to a few House Republicans next congress.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Vox has an interesting article on shifting American attitudes on the government and health care.  Using data from Gallup and Pew polls, they found a huge swing in just the last four years.  On the question of  whether it's the federal government's responsibility to ensure that all Americans have health coverage, the results were:

2013: 42/56 (-14)
2014: 47/50 (-3)
2015: 51/47 (+4)
2016: 51/46 (+5)
2017: 60/39 (+21)

That's a net change of +16 in the last year, and an astonishing +35 over four years.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/16/16158918/voxcare-poll-government-run-health-care

People who disapprove of ObamaCare from the left will switch back to saying they disapprove of it after Republicans stop trying to repeal it.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

According to a GOP Senate aide, here are some changes a new draft of the G-C bill might include for their "Alaska Purchase" in order to swing Murkowski. Basically, Alaska gets to keep Obamacare.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://ijr.com/2017/09/979983-republicans-attempt-buy-murkowskis-vote-new-draft-health-care-bill/

You know your bill's not very popular when the only way you can try and get people to vote for it is to say it won't apply to their state. It's a little funny.

Repeal ObamaCare just in DC?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

All bow to ObamaCare, our newest entitlement program, now basically safe forever.

They'll try again, and even before the 2018 elections, McCain or Menendez could be leaving.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

All bow to ObamaCare, our newest entitlement program, now basically safe forever.

No that it's out of the way, we can go all-in on single-payer.

Thankfully single payer will never actually pass.

Hillary, is that you?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I would have thought they'd give up with this current Senate composition. Of course if McCain dies or Christie gets to appoint a replacement for Menendez, or after their likely gains in next year's elections, then they'd try again.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This thread should remain stickied until January 2019 at least. I don't trust the GOP to ever let go.

You do realize that skinny repeal is in the tax cut bill?