Following up on Dave’s post, here’s how one of Paul Ryan’s errand boys (sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill) puts it:
“You’re a Republican, you’ve been running to repeal Obamacare, they put a repeal bill in front of you,” Doug Badger, a longtime Republican leadership health policy adviser, told the Journal. “Are you going to be the Republican senator who prevents Obamacare repeal from being sent to a Republican president who is willing to sign it?”
I’m sure some see this how Vincent Vega did. This is a moral test of one’s self; whether or not you can maintain loyalty. Because being loyal is very important.
But…if they think they’ll lose their seat over this bullshit, they won’t go along with it. Today’s a good day to double down on the phone calls, faxes, letters, and in-person encounters with members of Congress.
Don’t see how this gets passed with Combover Caligula polling in the low 40’s.
They know who they are, low 40s is better than they expected. As the old tale states, never turn your back on a snake.
@Hunter Gathers: Hair Furor is still polling in the 80s with Republicans. A rep in a gerrymandered district is still more at risk from a primary, sadly.
The Moar You Know
This will pass. They have to, really. Pass it or get primaried. Do you think the Kochs or Mercer won’t fund a primary? They paid GOOD CASH MONEY for their tax cuts and they will get them by any means necessary.
Holding one’s seat is apparently the only measure of honor left in today’s Congress. Never mind all that antiquated bullshit about serving one’s nation.
The Democrats who were lost in 2010 sacrificed their careers in order to give health insurance to 20 million Americans. These people will risk their jobs to ruin lives and kill people. Are we going to let them?
The Horror of grocery clerks….
A Ghost to Most
Always Party Over Country with the fascists.
A key reason why it passed in the past was precisely because there was no Republican president to sign it. No one is going to think twice about taking a risk over a vote that is purely symbolic. Now the vote is not symbolic but carries actual consequences. I still expect most Republicans to vote for it but the Senate is another story altogether.
For some people, loyalty is the very definition of honor.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
I thought the real split in the GOP was the bill doesn’t do sufficent harm to the poor and the economy in general.
@Redshift: No, no, no! The point of gerrymandering is to create districts in which the incumbent party has a distinct yet small numerical advantage, say 5-6 points. The 80% districts are for the opposition party, whose political power is diluted by being concentrated in fewer districts. The problem for the party doing the gerrymandering is that about a 10% drop in popularity turns a 6-point advantage into a deficit, a trend exacerbated the further away an election is from redistricating. Like 2018.
Hate to tell every one but ACA is dead in the water and repeal isn’t the issue. When the small handed nutcase removed the only way to get healthy and/or young people to enroll into the ACA, it will collapse sooner or later due to continued policy cost increases. The thugs know this and will not repeal (nor replace) the ACA. Rates will climb for all of us, as more people who didn’t need a polcy suddenly get real sick and will only then sign up. This will cause rates to increase and start to even shore in time. Soon all of us will be howling about the huge increases in cost for policies and fewer and fewer poor/lower income people (who are healthy) will stay on such polices further increasing costs/rates for the rest of us. This is a very bad situation.
Up in NY-23, here. Called Reed’s office in DC, asked the staffer there whether Reed is still committed to voting *against* any repeal of the ACA until there is an equally good replacement in place. Staffer said, yup, that’s his position.
So I said, I’ve been reading some crazy stories about the Republican leadership forcing the rank and file to vote for a repeal bill without any replacement. He’s going to vote against that, you’re saying? Staffer again said yes, he’ll vote against it.
The staffer sounded far too smooth and pleased with himself, so I assume he was lying. But there’s not much I can do if he’s going to just straight out lie.
I made my views heard, anyhow. And who knows? Maybe Reed really is opposed to repeal at this stage?
Paul in KY
@oldster: Thank you for doing that, oldster!
@Cermet: That applies only to the non-subsidized buyers who will death spiral out. The on-exchange and subsidized buyers are protected from the shit show