You know I had the chance to speak with them since 2009 and am surpised at this. 1-1 some of them really get it and have ideas to truly reform the system. Its the first time Ive seen just how much the poltical process can muck up good policy. And its not limited to the Rs. Dems had some great ideas pre ACA that never got the time of day.
ACA Running Thread
- Thread starter Wrangor
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
You know I had the chance to speak with them since 2009 and am surpised at this. 1-1 some of them really get it and have ideas to truly reform the system. Its the first time Ive seen just how much the poltical process can muck up good policy. And its not limited to the Rs. Dems had some great ideas pre ACA that never got the time of day.
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
Yeah, I haven't really dived into this yet to really get a sense of the impact, but I fear we have some pretty shitty options given we have a lot of people in the 65-70yo range.
I'll bet you a beer this thing never gets enacted. That being said, the tax is on the amount over the threshold so might not be all that bad. Are these folks actives on the plan or retired? Anyway you can get them off the Medicare?
PhDeac
PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 155,882
- Reaction score
- 22,833
Good chance you can blame the GOP for both.
Not so sure. The dems all were told how to roll back in 2009. It was a very orchestrated plan. They learned from HRCs mistakes and had a clear road map on how to get it passed. It was still crazy but there was a process.
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
Of course there's a law saying we can't encourage people onto medicare. #regulations
If active, largely true. There are a lot of people who handle this under the table. Not right but happens all the time.
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
Well yes , but I've gotten the owners to agree to go off our plan since they don't even get a tax deduction for it, so doing like 6 people all at once would seem suspicious. And since the employees would go from it being tax free to post tax, it's a harder sell to any employee.
ConnorEl
Well-known member
Whew. That's good news.
DeacWatcher
Ricky Peral
Really telling that McCain is the only balls to the wall badass left in the Senate on either side. Man what a bunch of wimps and pussies we have repping us.
ConnorEl
Well-known member
Cruelty, Incompetence and Lies
Quote:
----------
Graham-Cassidy, the health bill the Senate may vote on next week, is stunningly cruel. It’s also incompetently drafted: The bill’s sponsors clearly had no idea what they were doing when they put it together. Furthermore, their efforts to sell the bill involve obvious, blatant lies.
Nonetheless, the bill could pass. And that says a lot about today’s Republican Party, none of it good.
The Affordable Care Act, which has reduced the percentage of Americans without health insurance to a record low, created a three-legged stool: regulations that prevent insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions, a requirement that individuals have adequate insurance (and thus pay into the system while healthy) and subsidies to make that insurance affordable. For the lowest-income families, insurance is provided directly by Medicaid.
Graham-Cassidy saws off all three legs of that stool...
----------
Quote:
----------
Graham-Cassidy, the health bill the Senate may vote on next week, is stunningly cruel. It’s also incompetently drafted: The bill’s sponsors clearly had no idea what they were doing when they put it together. Furthermore, their efforts to sell the bill involve obvious, blatant lies.
Nonetheless, the bill could pass. And that says a lot about today’s Republican Party, none of it good.
The Affordable Care Act, which has reduced the percentage of Americans without health insurance to a record low, created a three-legged stool: regulations that prevent insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions, a requirement that individuals have adequate insurance (and thus pay into the system while healthy) and subsidies to make that insurance affordable. For the lowest-income families, insurance is provided directly by Medicaid.
Graham-Cassidy saws off all three legs of that stool...
----------
Gooner
Pit League Fantasy Football Commissioner
I still have faith that Collins, McCain, and Murkowski will all vote no. McCain coming out and saying he was a no takes a lot of pressure off of Murkowski's shoulders. If those 3 all vote no again, it will be McCain who gets the headlines for defeating Obamacare repeal again.
Also, Murkowski doesn't owe the GOP shit. She lost a primary, ran as a WRITE-IN independent, where voters had to spell her name correctly for the vote to count, and still won that shit.
ConnorEl
Well-known member
ConnorEl
Well-known member
Complacency Could Kill Health Care
Quote:
----------
I haven’t yet read Hillary Clinton’s “What Happened,” but it seems pretty clear to me what did, in fact, happen in 2016.
These days, America starts from a baseline of extreme tribalism: 47 or 48 percent of the electorate will vote for any Republican, no matter how terrible, and against any Democrat, no matter how good. This means, in turn, that small things — journalists acting like mean kids in high school, ganging up on candidates they consider uncool, events that suggest fresh scandal even when there’s nothing there — can tip the balance in favor of even the worst candidate imaginable.
And, crucially, last year far too many people were complacent; they assumed that Trump couldn’t possibly become president, so they felt free to engage in trivial pursuits. Then they woke up to find that the inconceivable had happened.
Is something similar about to go down with health care?
Republican attempts to destroy Obamacare have repeatedly failed, and for very good reason. Their attacks on the Affordable Care Act were always based on lies, and they have never come up with a decent alternative.
The simple fact is that all the major elements of the A.C.A. — prohibiting discrimination by insurers based on medical history, requiring that people buy insurance even if they’re currently healthy, premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion that make insurance affordable even for those with lower incomes — are there because they’re necessary. Yet every plan Republicans have offered would do away with or undermine those key elements, causing tens of millions of Americans to lose health insurance, with the heaviest burden falling on the most vulnerable.
All this should be clear to everyone by now. So you might be tempted to assume that no plan along these lines can possibly pass, let alone one that, if anything, looks worse than what we’ve seen so far. But it’s precisely because so many people assume that the threat is behind us, and have turned their attention elsewhere, that health care is once again in danger.
The sponsors of the Graham-Cassidy bill now working its way toward a Senate vote claim to be offering a moderate approach that preserves the good things about Obamacare. In other words, they are maintaining the G.O.P. norm of lying both about the content of Obamacare and about what would replace it.
In reality, Graham-Cassidy is the opposite of moderate. It contains, in exaggerated and almost caricature form, all the elements that made previous Republican proposals so cruel and destructive. It would eliminate the individual mandate, undermine if not effectively eliminate protection for people with pre-existing conditions, and slash funding for subsidies and Medicaid. There are a few additional twists, but they’re all bad — notably, a funding formula that would penalize states that are actually successful in reducing the number of uninsured...
...The good news is that for technical reasons of parliamentary procedure, Graham-Cassidy has to pass by the end of this month, or not at all. The bad news is that such passage is a real possibility.
So if you care about preserving the huge gains the A.C.A. has brought, make your voice heard. Otherwise we may wake up to another terrible morning after.
----------
Quote:
----------
I haven’t yet read Hillary Clinton’s “What Happened,” but it seems pretty clear to me what did, in fact, happen in 2016.
These days, America starts from a baseline of extreme tribalism: 47 or 48 percent of the electorate will vote for any Republican, no matter how terrible, and against any Democrat, no matter how good. This means, in turn, that small things — journalists acting like mean kids in high school, ganging up on candidates they consider uncool, events that suggest fresh scandal even when there’s nothing there — can tip the balance in favor of even the worst candidate imaginable.
And, crucially, last year far too many people were complacent; they assumed that Trump couldn’t possibly become president, so they felt free to engage in trivial pursuits. Then they woke up to find that the inconceivable had happened.
Is something similar about to go down with health care?
Republican attempts to destroy Obamacare have repeatedly failed, and for very good reason. Their attacks on the Affordable Care Act were always based on lies, and they have never come up with a decent alternative.
The simple fact is that all the major elements of the A.C.A. — prohibiting discrimination by insurers based on medical history, requiring that people buy insurance even if they’re currently healthy, premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion that make insurance affordable even for those with lower incomes — are there because they’re necessary. Yet every plan Republicans have offered would do away with or undermine those key elements, causing tens of millions of Americans to lose health insurance, with the heaviest burden falling on the most vulnerable.
All this should be clear to everyone by now. So you might be tempted to assume that no plan along these lines can possibly pass, let alone one that, if anything, looks worse than what we’ve seen so far. But it’s precisely because so many people assume that the threat is behind us, and have turned their attention elsewhere, that health care is once again in danger.
The sponsors of the Graham-Cassidy bill now working its way toward a Senate vote claim to be offering a moderate approach that preserves the good things about Obamacare. In other words, they are maintaining the G.O.P. norm of lying both about the content of Obamacare and about what would replace it.
In reality, Graham-Cassidy is the opposite of moderate. It contains, in exaggerated and almost caricature form, all the elements that made previous Republican proposals so cruel and destructive. It would eliminate the individual mandate, undermine if not effectively eliminate protection for people with pre-existing conditions, and slash funding for subsidies and Medicaid. There are a few additional twists, but they’re all bad — notably, a funding formula that would penalize states that are actually successful in reducing the number of uninsured...
...The good news is that for technical reasons of parliamentary procedure, Graham-Cassidy has to pass by the end of this month, or not at all. The bad news is that such passage is a real possibility.
So if you care about preserving the huge gains the A.C.A. has brought, make your voice heard. Otherwise we may wake up to another terrible morning after.
----------
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
Rand Paul says that he still won't vote for Graham-Cassidy even after the latest changes.
This thing is on life support (maybe worse) at this point.
Maybe the Republicans should have considered a good bill instead of pushing through a shitastic one so it could have a chance to be voted on before the votes needed goes back to 60. If only they had 7+ years to think of one that would work.
This thing is on life support (maybe worse) at this point.
Maybe the Republicans should have considered a good bill instead of pushing through a shitastic one so it could have a chance to be voted on before the votes needed goes back to 60. If only they had 7+ years to think of one that would work.
2&2 Slider To Leyritz
Well-known member
So you criticize the Republicans for not passing a shitastic bill, but still support the Dems for actually enacting a shitastic bill. Makes sense.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
I'm applauding the Republicans who are standing up and saying that this bill is unacceptably bad. I don't know how you could possibly have gotten me criticizing Republicans for not passing itout of my post other than making fun of them for not being able to come with anything better than the "shitastic" bill that is currently in force after 7 years of time to do so.
If the ACA is as bad as you think it is then how is it that Republicans can't pass anything better, even needing just a simple majority? Makes ya wonder, huh?
We obviously disagree on the Affordable Care Act. I think the fact that millions of Americans are now insured is a very good thing, while the hiked premiums are obviously a bad thing that need to be addressed. I think the mandates in the ACA are much needed, otherwise they won't be applied. You disagree with some of those things (hopefully not the fact that millions more have insurance than before the ACA was passed), which is fine. Passing a bill that is obviously worse than what is currently in force makes no sense, and you disagree with that too, somehow.
Louis Gossett Jr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2012
- Messages
- 12,907
- Reaction score
- 6,810
2&2 still thinking he needs to fuck a dead corpse to get back to fucking anything above a 4.