|
Badger of Basra posted:If the bill goes down in the House (either by being postponed or actually losing the vote), will they try and write a new one and pass that or just drop it and say "lol we tried"? I have a feeling that Ryan is going to be delusional and drop it, while trying to convince the voters that "they would be able to make their own healthcare choices" if the Democrats didn't block them. Even though Trump hasn't wanted to claim ownership, any perception of losing drives him up the wall, and he'll push Ryan and Co. for a win, no matter what. The Republicans will violently gnash at each other, but at least the current plan will be intact. e: changed wording
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
Simplex posted:I appreciate your post and your opinion, but I'm genuinely curious why you believe there is an ethical imperative to provide universal, nationwide health care if you also believe that the sick or low-earning power poor are a net drain on our social institutions. Also is stricter border control and security a necessary precondition to universal, nationwide health care? It's a heck of a lot harder to jump from another country to Colorado than it is to move from Amarillo to Pueblo. I'm not really thinking about undocumented immigrants. My bigger concern would getting hit with tons of people that have expensive health care needs coming from states that didn't take the Medicaid expansion or families bringing their severely disabled members to Colorado to get them on Colorado Care, having paid nothing in. If that happened, I would fear the taxes to pay for the program wouldn't be enough to cover the program. We have no rainy day fund (hell, we have to cut hundreds of millions a year despite the marijuana taxes), our system makes it nearly impossible to raise taxes (especially now that we need a 55% majority to pass anything), and, frankly, most of the state is not a cheap place to live (and the cheap places have no jobs). I don't think being host to a bunch of healthcare refugees from other states would be good for Colorado or the people coming here...especially once they figure out that staying housed is going to eat up a lot more of their income than it did in Oklahoma. If they fell through the cracks (and many would, because people with money and good healthcare would not be the ones uprooting to come here), then their housing and food becomes our responsibility as well. In a state where the government can't borrow or raise money without voters approval and voters rarely approve. I'd rather UHC be handled at the federal level, where they can set a proper tax rate, borrow if needed, and keep the program running during lean times. Colorado would have a very hard time doing that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Hastings posted:I have a feeling that Ryan is going to be delusional and drop it, while trying to convince the voters that "they would be able to make their own healthcare choices" if the Democrats didn't block them. Even though Trump hasn't wanted to claim ownership, any perception of losing drives him up the wall, and he'll push Ryan and Co. for a win, no matter what. The Republicans will violently gnash at each other, but at least the current plan will be intact. Best guess is they claim they will try again later but if they can't get the votes now they can't later.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Best guess is they claim they will try again later but if they can't get the votes now they can't later. There has to be a breaking point. They can't possibly go to the six-month mark, or god forbid next year's election, without passing SOMETHING to say they destroyed Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:There has to be a breaking point. They can't possibly go to the six-month mark, or god forbid next year's election, without passing SOMETHING to say they destroyed Obamacare. Trumps' narcissism would never let them live it down if they can't secure a victory, even the first time around. He's had so many losses in a short amount of time, I can't imagine the base not demanding some kind of action. If they want a bill to pass and to repeal Obamacare, those full blown Randian/get yer paws off my money conservatives are going to have to deal with the fact their base is working class/poor/real and are going to need something very similar to Obamacare in practice. Otherwise, it'll be failure in the next election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
blackmet posted:My bigger concern would getting hit with tons of people that have expensive health care needs coming from states that didn't take the Medicaid expansion or families bringing their severely disabled members to Colorado to get them on Colorado Care, having paid nothing in. If that happened, I would fear the taxes to pay for the program wouldn't be enough to cover the program. Why wouldn't you just do a two-year residency requirement or whatever like state universities do for tuition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Hastings posted:Trumps' narcissism would never let them live it down if they can't secure a victory, even the first time around. He's had so many losses in a short amount of time, I can't imagine the base not demanding some kind of action. If they want a bill to pass and to repeal Obamacare, those full blown Randian/get yer paws off my money conservatives are going to have to deal with the fact their base is working class/poor/real and are going to need something very similar to Obamacare in practice. Otherwise, it'll be failure in the next election. I kind of want to see what would happen if the Republicans failed to pass a bill, and then Trump just started insisting that yes, they totally passed a health care bill, and it's the best bill ever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:23
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Why wouldn't you just do a two-year residency requirement or whatever like state universities do for tuition. There's lots and lots of situations where moving and waiting out a few years is reasonable, especially if the alternative is having minimal/no care somewhere else. For anyone with a chronic problem that's expensive to manage (especially if you can't work so you don't have a job tieing you someplace), moving into a UHC area, scraping by for an eligibility period, and then getting good health care makes sense. Also since most US healthcare spending is on the elderly, if Colorado's plan was more generous the Medicare/the GOP continues its plans to gut it, there would be an influx of retirees that don't contribute much to the state tax base and are expensive to care for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Best guess is they claim they will try again later but if they can't get the votes now they can't later. I'm curious as to the narrative they will use- Democratic obstructionism would be a hard sell, even for those saturated in right wing media.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
I get the feeling the bill will pass. The Freedom Caucus know they have a lot of power, so they are trying to wield that to get a few more goodies thrown in, and perhaps a commitment to deliver on some non-healthcare related items on their wishlist. I think in the long run, its best for the Democrats, and the country, that the bill passes, people hate it, and then it gives the Democrats room to campaign on replacing Trumpcare with Medicare for all. The GOP are full of poo poo, but they are on the mark when they say Obamacare is collapsing. My brother's premiums (late 20s with no pre-existing conditions), with the maximum subsidy, are up to almost 350/month. Two more years of increases, and he is dropping out - as I imagine millions of others will. Let the Republicans own a healthcare disaster, use it to win back power, and then implement a real solution. My biggest concern was that Trump would have only done things that would only cause noticeable harm to the average Trump voter years later, and therefore skate through re-election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
the bill passing is the dumbest outcome, so I'm guessing it's going to happen
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 12:48
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I'm curious as to the narrative they will use- Democratic obstructionism would be a hard sell, even for those saturated in right wing media. I think the only option will be blaming each other. Ryan will blame the freedom caucus, they will blame him, then Trump will probably blame everyone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
I think the path of least resistance for them is to pass it in the house and have it die in the senate. That way house members get to take credit for the vote and the right wing media can shift the blame to senate democrats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
Nothus posted:I think the path of least resistance for them is to pass it in the house and have it die in the senate. That way house members get to take credit for the vote and the right wing media can shift the blame to senate democrats. As much as i want to say it wouldn't work given senate has the votes to pass it sans democrats i know that this is probably what would happen
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:21
|
|
|
Nothus posted:I think the path of least resistance for them is to pass it in the house and have it die in the senate. That way house members get to take credit for the vote and the right wing media can shift the blame to senate democrats. The right wing media can't sell "blame democrats" on a bill that could have passed with only republican votes, and the right wing media adores traitor-hunting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:My biggest concern was that Trump would have only done things that would only cause noticeable harm to the average Trump voter years later, and therefore skate through re-election. The biggest concern i had with Trump before inauguration is if he is a flash in the pan, like some of policies might be good economically. Short term benefit but long term damage the next Democrat president would have to clean up. But now are 3 months in and a lot of these signature moves have been disastrous for Trump like the travel ban. If this healthcare bill doesnt pass you gotta wonder what other "bigly" campaign promises will be broken. I think for those of us on the left we should be glad there is a lot of incompetence. If Republicans cant get any significant leglistation to pass in 4 years thats good for us.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:Yeah it could take years for unintended consequences to play out with whatever this administration does however 4 years is still plenty of time to see how conservative policies crash into reality as they always do. If this fails, Republicans will still have tax cuts, where they are also scheduled to step on a rake: Ryan wants the tax cuts to be "budget neutral" so they don't sunset like the Bush tax cuts did, that requires the border adjustment tax, and that's going to piss off businesses something fierce. It'll wind up as just Bush Tax Cuts II with a sunset once the border tax fails, but Republicans aren't done pissing off their base.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
So in other interesting news, everyone - and I mean everyone, there is zero doubt on this - knows the House bill is DOA in the Senate. You'd think they'd then hold it up and try to work out something that would get to 50 votes. Or not. quote:“We’re not slowing down,” McConnell told reporters Tuesday. “We will reach a conclusion on health care next week.” And while he is brimming with certainty about the speed of the process, he is hardly confident of its outcome: “We’ll either pass something that will achieve a goal that we’ve been working on,” he said. “Or not.” Chait, at New York Magazine, has the not-as-crazy-as-it-sounds idea that what McConnell is doing is just killing it as quickly and cleanly as possible, because there's no loving way it passes and he wants to get the pain over with as quickly as humanly possible because drawing it out won't ever work. quote:The only possible way a health-care bill could pass the Senate would be a heroic feat of negotiation to bridge the chasm between Republicans who think the House bill provides too much care (Mike Lee, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz) and those who think it provides too little (a group numbering perhaps as many as a dozen, depending on how one interprets various fretting remarks). Republicans can lose no more than two votes in the upper chamber. What’s more, one of their senators, Georgia’s Johnny Isakson, is out indefinitely while recovering from back surgeries. Isakson’s absence in the short term cuts the GOP’s margin for error in half, which means — unless he rushes back faster than expected — a vote next week is all the more hopeless. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/mitch-mcconnells-trumpcare-plan-is-to-lose-fast.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
The huge takeaway is what will be the end goal here for healthcare during their power? Is it really going to be roll over and not do a drat thing despite entire campaigns run on this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:I think in the long run, its best for the Democrats, and the country, that the bill passes, people hate it, and then it gives the Democrats room to campaign on replacing Trumpcare with Medicare for all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
Sloober posted:The huge takeaway is what will be the end goal here for healthcare during their power? They have never had an end goal other than re-election. They especially don't have an actual goal in terms of health care policy, because caring about sick people is not something they have ever done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They have never had an end goal other than re-election. They especially don't have an actual goal in terms of health care policy, because caring about sick people is not something they have ever done. They stand to lose as much in reelection by repeal as they do by not repealing
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They have never had an end goal other than re-election. They especially don't have an actual goal in terms of health care policy, because caring about sick people is not something they have ever done. That's not quite true. A lot of them sincerely believed in repealing obamacare to lower taxes on the rich because using money from the rich to heal the poor is unrandian. They just never had an alternative plan, or a desire to explicitly run on "gently caress you, poor people". If they could have repealed Obamacare before people were actually using it, they absolutely would have.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:That's not quite true. A lot of them sincerely believed in repealing obamacare to lower taxes on the rich because using money from the rich to heal the poor is unrandian. They just never had an alternative plan, or a desire to explicitly run on "gently caress you, poor people". If they could have repealed Obamacare before people were actually using it, they absolutely would have. Right, but that's a tax policy goal not a health care policy goal, if I can extend my argument out like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
NBC says there are 27 no votes, also one Dem will miss the vote Thursday meaning Republicans can afford 22 defections now http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/these-republicans-could-doom-their-party-s-health-care-bill-n736591
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:NBC says there are 27 no votes, also one Dem will miss the vote Thursday meaning Republicans can afford 22 defections now I don't really like any count that includes "leaning towards no" in the count, because in a situation like this I hear "I want to vote no if i can but you can twist my arm if absolutely necessary" when I hear "leaning no". If they actually manage to pass it because that one democrat can't make the vote though, cripes
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:If they actually manage to pass it because that one democrat can't make the vote though, cripes I'm going to be so pissed if that happens. This is callous, but gently caress your death in the family, millions of people's healthcare is at stake and this is down to the wire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
Also because I was curious and didn't know the answer and it matters because there's an even number of house members right now: in the House, a tie vote means the bill fails. There is no tiebreaker vote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They have never had an end goal other than re-election. They especially don't have an actual goal in terms of health care policy, because caring about sick people is not something they have ever done. I don't understand why they didn't use Trump's power of being able to reinvent reality for GOP voters to step back from the claim of repeal and replace. All Trump had to do was give a speech saying that he brought together the best healthcare experts to examine Obamacare and that it's such a disaster, that it can't even be repealed without causing harm to his voters, therefore the GOP are going to do what they have always done and fix the Democrat's mess by repairing Obamacare. gently caress Paul Ryan and what he thinks. You have control of all three branches of government because of Trump, so take control and set the agenda regardless of whatever tears flow from Paul Ryan and Rand Paul. A lot of the GOP would fall in line with whatever Trump says, he would get Democrats engaged, and people would say "Trump is not so bad, look at how he is engaging in a bipartisan way to fix healthcare".
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:I'm going to be so pissed if that happens. This is callous, but gently caress your death in the family, millions of people's healthcare is at stake and this is down to the wire. Yeah, it's a really tough spot because that guy's vote probably doesn't matter - but nobody will know for sure until the vote, at which point it's too late for him to come back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
I don't like hearing things like quote:everyone - and I mean everyone, there is zero doubt on this - knows the House bill is DOA in the Senate. because I lost an account on the last zero-doubt political outcome, so I will frame it this way: What would it take for this terrible bill to become law?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
Simplex posted:I appreciate your post and your opinion, but I'm genuinely curious why you believe there is an ethical imperative to provide universal, nationwide health care if you also believe that the sick or low-earning power poor are a net drain on our social institutions. Also is stricter border control and security a necessary precondition to universal, nationwide health care? This seems like such a simple question. Just because I'd vote for a severely handicapped man to be eligible for national UHC doesn't mean I'd want him to be part of a healthcare co-op that only consists of me, him, and a handful of other neighbors. Considering it risk spreading.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:I don't understand why they didn't use Trump's power of being able to reinvent reality for GOP voters to step back from the claim of repeal and replace. All Trump had to do was give a speech saying that he brought together the best healthcare experts to examine Obamacare and that it's such a disaster, that it can't even be repealed without causing harm to his voters, therefore the GOP are going to do what they have always done and fix the Democrat's mess by repairing Obamacare. gently caress Paul Ryan and what he thinks. You have control of all three branches of government because of Trump, so take control and set the agenda regardless of whatever tears flow from Paul Ryan and Rand Paul. A lot of the GOP would fall in line with whatever Trump says, he would get Democrats engaged, and people would say "Trump is not so bad, look at how he is engaging in a bipartisan way to fix healthcare". Ryan doesn't want a fix. Ryan wants the tax cut. Trump doesn't know or care about the details and just wants "repeal obamacare" ticked off and likely does not realize he got played by Ryan and the Ryan allies surrounding him on heathcare issues. To explain to Trump why this is bad requires making him understand details. Trump doesn't do details. Ryan told him they were going to repeal obamacare, Trump liked the sound of that, Trump signed on. Bannon has been warning him its a problem, but Trump doesn't do details, so Trump's response has been to lay the groundwork to blame Other People for Paul Ryan's Failure rather than come up with a new plan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Craig K posted:I don't like hearing things like They have to finagle it through the House. In the Senate, Mitch McConnell has to thread the needle again. Then, it goes to a conference committee, where they try to thread the needle a third time to get something that passes both the House and the Senate. The Republicans in the Senate can lose only 2 votes and something like 13 have come out against the House bill. The prospect of the Senate passing anything at all isn't DOA - the House bill is, but theoretically maybe they can thread the needle - but it will be much harder there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Some Republican senator is out with a back injury next week so they can only afford to lose 1 vote if he can't get back. Edit: although I don't know how he was leaning, if he was already a "no" then it doesn't change much
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:Some Republican senator is out with a back injury next week so they can only afford to lose 1 vote if he can't get back. Which Senator? Where did you see that? Not that I don't believe you but I can't find it and want to see who it is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Which Senator? Where did you see that? Not that I don't believe you but I can't find it and want to see who it is. Phone posting so no link but it's Isakson
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Isakson IIRC
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:Phone posting so no link but it's Isakson He's not one of the known problem votes. Problem votes: Conservative wing: Lee Cruz Paul "Moderate" wing: Collins Murkowski Cassidy Heller Portman Gardener Capito I Hate The Poor But I Hate Losing Power When We Get Creamed For This Idiot Bill More wing: Cotton
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:
My GOD my representative accidentally voting correctly for a bill for a change! e: what's Wal-Mart's opinion on this travesty that's how you can tell how he'll vote in the long run
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 16:43
|
|