Republicans, do you support the new Healthcare bill that was just passed?

I'm interested to see what you guys think of the new bill. I have mixed feelings over this. The bill is bad, but it's a first step in the right direction.

 

There is simply not sufficient data to evaluate this bill...not even a CBO score. Every piece that HAS been released seems to be extremely bad for both the insured and the insurers however...I'm guessing that when it is scored and in the senate we will watch it explode.

 

Yeah, the idea that they would rush into a vote without a CBO score is suspicious.

I can't understand why they still won't repeal Obamacare. How can a bill that was passed under reconciliation not be repealed under reconciliation? Everything about how this was handled was stupid. And I'm not sure that this bill won't make things worse. And if it does, the Republicans will be brushed aside by a Democratic House in 2018.

 

The bill will be dead on arrival when it gets to the Senate. Republicans had over 6 years to figure this out. But they are divided because they know that politically they can't survive if they support a replacement that takes away protection for pre-existing conditions. That will lead to tens of millions of American to get their coverage dropped. People will literally die. But some of the Republicans, mainly those propped up by the Koch Brothers like the House Freedom Caucus, want a repeal and replacement bill that kicks those people off of health insurance. They want to see our healthcare system go back to the way it was before Obamacare. Republicans only hold a 2 seat majority over Democrats. Democrats are pretty much expected to enact the filibuster in the Senate which is going to require a 60 vote majority. Assuming they rewrite this bill and have enough support in the Senate, that will just send it back to the House to be voted on again. And House Republicans that initially supported this bill are probably going to reject this. By forcing this House vote with no CBO score, and only getting a handful of votes to pass it, Republicans have pretty much secured yet again, another failure.

 

Are you sure the aca was passed under reconciliation mike?

Or 2020... some provisions are backloaded

 

Honestly the way they have chosen to handle this is making them look really stupid on a number of levels. There are time's I wonder how the Democrat's get away with being so stupid and then I see stuff like this and remember why those clowns in government can get away with such great levels of foolishness.

 

The repeal is strong enough for every how Think thus method.

What is new name of new Healthcare. Any buddy can answer ?

 

TrumpCare ? I've write this in USMB Before republican choose an candidate in big election.

 

That's my memory of it, however it could be flawed

 

My memory is different
I have researched this and find your memory to be wrong
But I do not expect you to believe my research
So if you want to research it yourself.... great
Or if you are willing to accept my research, here you go

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/obamacare-was-not-passed-reconciliation

 

Surely since ACA was a right wing think tank creation back when hillarycare was being pushed forward, its replacement will still be very similar to obamacare, mandated private sector insurance that benefits primarily big insurance and wall street. I figure the main difference will be less financing by taxes, which would take away coverage, not add it.

I have not looked into it, but I would wager that trump's idea of getting rid of the restrictions of buying insurance across state lines, to add some free market to it, is NOT in this GOP bill. For there is an advantage for insurance in not being able to buy insurance across state lines. Perhaps it keeps competition down by these very old restrictions?

 

Beats me. What struck me is the huge almost one trillion dollar cut to medicaid. What are the elderly on limited Social Security income, who can't work, supposed to do?

 

Oh I remember that, but that was the bill that had to go to reconciliation with the House. That wasn't the final bill.

 

Can you provide info?

 

I guess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

"On December 23, the Senate voted 60–39 to end debate on the bill: a cloture vote to end the filibuster. The bill then passed, also 60–39, on December 24, 2009, with all Democrats and two independents voting for it, and all Republicans against (except Jim Bunning, who did not vote). The bill was endorsed by the AMA and AARP.

On January 19, 2010, Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown was elected to the Senate in a special election to replace Kennedy, having campaigned on giving the Republican minority the 41st vote needed to sustain Republican filibusters. His victory had become significant because of its effects on the legislative process. The first was psychological: the symbolic importance of losing Kennedy's traditionally Democratic Massachusetts seat made many Congressional Democrats concerned about the political cost of passing a bill.

Brown's election meant Democrats could no longer break a filibuster in the Senate. In response, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel argued that Democrats should scale back to a less ambitious bill; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushed back, dismissing Emanuel's scaled-down approach as "Kiddie Care".

Obama remained insistent on comprehensive reform. The news that Anthem Blue Cross in California intended to raise premium rates for its patients by as much as 39% gave him new evidence of the need for reform. On February 22, he laid out a "Senate-leaning" proposal to consolidate the bills. He held a meeting with both parties' leaders on February 25. The Democrats decided that the House would pass the Senate's bill, to avoid another Senate vote.

House Democrats had expected to be able to negotiate changes in a House-Senate conference before passing a final bill. Since any bill that emerged from conference that differed from the Senate bill would have to pass the Senate over another Republican filibuster, most House Democrats agreed to pass the Senate bill on condition that it be amended by a subsequent bill. They drafted the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, which could be passed by the reconciliation process."

 

The vast majority of people who got "insurance" under Obamacare actually got medicaid.

http://www.urban.org/sites/default/...sion-National-and-State-by-State-Analysis.PDF

That's where the $1 TRILLION comes in. That's how much the medicaid expansion cost us.

Note that that's in ADDITION to what it cost before the ACA.

 

What are new name on new system of HC ??!

 

TrumpCare are an topic name. TAMA is this new name with Health Care or.

 

Thx mike, I appreciate your follow up with information I did not know

I think now the answer to your original question is a bit more clear

The main aca legislation was originally passed without reconciliation
Which required 60 senate votes
Then they tweaked it with reconciliation
Which requires a simple majority
Reconciliation apparently being limited as to what it can address ini some ways

And the GOP is doing a similar thing
Except they do not have 60 votes for full repeal
So they are using reconciliation with its limitations

The nature of those reconciliation limitations is minutiae that I do not really understand

 

Heh, thanks for actually remembering the original question!

Apparently this is an issue for the Senate Parliamentarian, and as far as I know, he (or she) hasn't been asked. But the House shouldn't be worried about that anyway. They should have just done the full repeal and crafted a bill that reflected what they want, since the Senate is going to throw everything out anyway. At least then they would have had a bill that supporters could get behind and support.

 

Yeah, lol

 

They said they would repeal the thing when they got the White House and got control of Congress. So they should do it and let the states implement any universal healthcare plans they want.

 

I do believe the Medicaid question in the bill will be up to the states.

 

I noticed that there wasn't an option to express the reality that nothing has been "passed" yet. As in, the senate version, and the reconciliation haven't even happened yet. So, it's premature at best to have an opinion.

 

As far as the name I'm partial to Republicare.