Trumpcare Megathread: It's dead (for now)

[The Other Castro]

Breaking now:



https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/costestimate/americanhealthcareact.pdf

[The Other Castro]

Summary:

# of more people uninsured would be:
14 million by 2018
21 million by 2020
24 million by 2026

Total # uninsured in 2026 would be 52 million.

But, Medicaid slashes would reduce the deficit over 10 years by $337 Billion.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Summary:

# of more people uninsured would be:
14 million by 2018
21 million by 2020
24 million by 2026

Total # uninsured in 2026 would be 52 Million.

But, Medicaid slashes would reduce the deficit over 10 years by $337 Billion.

Double the uninsured to fully 1/6 of Americans...reduce the deficit by a small amount. 

[The Other Castro]

Summary:

# of more people uninsured would be:
14 million by 2018
21 million by 2020
24 million by 2026

Total # uninsured in 2026 would be 52 Million.

But, Medicaid slashes would reduce the deficit over 10 years by $337 Billion.

Double the uninsured to fully 1/6 of Americans...reduce the deficit by a small amount. 

In comparison, the # of uninsured under current law in 2026 would be 28 million.

[Gass3268]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trumpcare sucks!

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Probably a bit exaggerated, but the overall finding is clear: The right path is to revise ObamaCare, not tear apart its core tenets.

[JA]

Summary:

# of more people uninsured would be:
14 million by 2018
21 million by 2020
24 million by 2026

Total # uninsured in 2026 would be 52 million.

But, Medicaid slashes would reduce the deficit over 10 years by $337 Billion.

So we'll have an uninsured population larger than the population of South Korea, and about the size of the states of California and Pennsylvania combined. And the savings will amount to barely over half the size of the military budget in 2015 ($597 billion). We could save that much if we cut the military budget alone by just 5.6% and maintained it at that for 10 years.

[Pericles]

Dear God that's even worse than I thought.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Meh...this bill is DOA anyway

Also...Dean Heller - NV said he's not voting for it and even said "the ACA is not all bad"

I'll believe Heller's against this when I see him vote against it on the senate floor, and not before. He voted for 100% of Trump's cabinet. Doesn't look very moderate/pragmatic/sensible.

[The Other Castro]

Meh...this bill is DOA anyway

Also...Dean Heller - NV said he's not voting for it and even said "the ACA is not all bad"

I'll believe Heller's against this when I see him vote against it on the senate floor, and not before. He voted for 100% of Trump's cabinet. Doesn't look very moderate/pragmatic/sensible.

This is more than a Cabinet confirmation. People's lives are at stake.

[I Won - Get Over It]

Trump won't be reelected if he approves it.

[DrScholl]

There is no way that this passes. I can't see how something like this gets enough votes to pass, because it is horrific.

[The Other Castro]

Early Dem reactions:

Chris Murphy @ChrisMurphyCT
#CBO says 14m immediately lose insurance, rising to 26m. Premiums go up for millions more. My god. Stop this now, @SpeakerRyan.

Our Revolution @OurRevolution
Perspective: If you were to create a state out of the people who would lose coverage under GOP plan, it would be 3rd largest state in US.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

YOu know it's bad when sociopath and arsonist Darrel Issa says he just cant vote for it lol

I don't know about Issa. He's turning himself into quite the sacrificial lamb for what's looking to be an inevitable 2018 defeat. It looks more obvious with every statement, such as this, that it's more re-election fears & less pragmatic governing

[Gass3268]

University of Chicago Professor and healthcare policy expert:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[publicunofficial]

YOu know it's bad when sociopath and arsonist Darrel Issa says he just cant vote for it lol

Issa is attempting to transition into being a moderate liberal Republican, now that he's in a swing district.

[Virginiá]

University of Chicago Professor and healthcare policy expert:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No worries, they already have a solution for these pesky facts: fake news! biased media! Obama admin govt saboteurs!

[The Other Castro]

Schumer and Ryan have very different responses:

Schumer:


Ryan:

[Gass3268]

University of Chicago Professor and healthcare policy expert:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No worries, they already have a solution for these pesky facts: fake news! biased media! Obama admin govt saboteurs!

The White House laid the ground work for this, but Paul Ryan going the other way is pretty amusing.

[JA]

Schumer and Ryan have very different responses:

Ryan:

Paul Ryan is seriously a low life fuk boy

It was never Republican intentions to ensure more Americans receive health insurance coverage, only that the cost of premiums, the cost of health insurance for the average American, and the burden of cost to tax payers decreases. Technically this plan meets those criteria. So as far as most Republicans are concerned, yes, this is a success. It's not a Republican goal to expand coverage or ensure access to healthcare as a right; those are Democratic goals.

[Confused Democrat]

Schumer and Ryan have very different responses:

Ryan:

Paul Ryan is seriously a low life fuk boy

It was never Republican intentions to ensure more Americans receive health insurance coverage, only that the cost of premiums, the cost of health insurance for the average American, and the burden of cost to tax payers decreases. Technically this plan meets those criteria. So as far as most Republicans are concerned, yes, this is a success. It's not a Republican goal to expand coverage or ensure access to healthcare as a right; those are Democratic goals.

Except Trump said that no Americans would lose coverage under an Obamacare repeal.

[Ronnie]

The deficit projection makes me a bit nervous.  I think Republicans just might rally behind it now, despite its problems.

[JA]

Schumer and Ryan have very different responses:

Ryan:

Paul Ryan is seriously a low life fuk boy

It was never Republican intentions to ensure more Americans receive health insurance coverage, only that the cost of premiums, the cost of health insurance for the average American, and the burden of cost to tax payers decreases. Technically this plan meets those criteria. So as far as most Republicans are concerned, yes, this is a success. It's not a Republican goal to expand coverage or ensure access to healthcare as a right; those are Democratic goals.

Except Trump said that no Americans would lose coverage under an Obamacare repeal.

Which is true, except, as usual, Trump lied. And rather than reject this plan or admit to his failure to abide by his campaign promise, he'll claim the CBO is lying and producing false information. As I've said before, Trump's rhetoric was a ruse to get elected so he could pass traditional right wing, Congressional Republican legislation. It was never his goal, nor that of other Republicans, to protect those who received health coverage under the ACA nor to expand coverage.

[Confused Democrat]

Schumer and Ryan have very different responses:

Ryan:

Paul Ryan is seriously a low life fuk boy

It was never Republican intentions to ensure more Americans receive health insurance coverage, only that the cost of premiums, the cost of health insurance for the average American, and the burden of cost to tax payers decreases. Technically this plan meets those criteria. So as far as most Republicans are concerned, yes, this is a success. It's not a Republican goal to expand coverage or ensure access to healthcare as a right; those are Democratic goals.

Except Trump said that no Americans would lose coverage under an Obamacare repeal.

Which is true, except, as usual, Trump lied. And rather than reject this plan or admit to his failure to abide by his campaign promise, he'll claim the CBO is lying and producing false information. As I've said before, Trump's rhetoric was a ruse to get elected so he could pass traditional right wing, Congressional Republican legislation. It was never his goal, nor that of other Republicans, protect those who received health coverage under the ACA nor to expand coverage.

What blows my mind is that Trump and the Republicans are going to try their best to discredit this CBO report, but at the same time they're going to point to the same report and say that their plan will reduce the deficit.

They can't have it both ways.

[JA]

Schumer and Ryan have very different responses:

Ryan:

Paul Ryan is seriously a low life fuk boy

It was never Republican intentions to ensure more Americans receive health insurance coverage, only that the cost of premiums, the cost of health insurance for the average American, and the burden of cost to tax payers decreases. Technically this plan meets those criteria. So as far as most Republicans are concerned, yes, this is a success. It's not a Republican goal to expand coverage or ensure access to healthcare as a right; those are Democratic goals.

Except Trump said that no Americans would lose coverage under an Obamacare repeal.

Which is true, except, as usual, Trump lied. And rather than reject this plan or admit to his failure to abide by his campaign promise, he'll claim the CBO is lying and producing false information. As I've said before, Trump's rhetoric was a ruse to get elected so he could pass traditional right wing, Congressional Republican legislation. It was never his goal, nor that of other Republicans, protect those who received health coverage under the ACA nor to expand coverage.

What blows my mind is that Trump and the Republicans are going to try their best to discredit this CBO report, but at the same time they're going to point to the same report and say that their plan will reduce the deficit.

They can't have it both ways.

What I expect is for the Trump Administration to refute the CBO report while the Congressional Republicans simultaneously champion the deficit and premium increase reduction numbers. They can send a contradictory message that emphasizes different aspects of the report, then refuse to refute the other side's assertion about the CBO report. This has been their style for a long time now.