Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Dumb motherfuckers cannot understand a consequence that most 4 year olds have fully sorted out.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Republicans got rid of McCarthy. Democrats chose not to save him.

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

It’s a good piece. click on over. but then come back!!

We are aware of all internet traditions.

He seems like a smart guy, but JFC, what a dick!

One lie, alone, tears the fabric of reality.

Mediocre white men think RFK Jr’s pathetic midlife crisis is inspirational. The bar is set so low for them, it’s subterranean.

This fight is for everything.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

A norm that restrains only one side really is not a norm – it is a trap.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you do not.

Republican also-rans: four mules fighting over a turnip.

Celebrate the fucking wins.

The desire to stay informed is directly at odds with the need to not be constantly enraged.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires.

Cancel the cowardly Times and Post and set up an equivalent monthly donation to ProPublica.

The republican ‘Pastor’ of the House is an odious authoritarian little creep.

Republicans firmly believe having an abortion is a very personal, very private decision between a woman and J.D. Vance.

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

With all due respect and assumptions of good faith, please fuck off into the sun.

Republicans don’t lie to be believed, they lie to be repeated.

You are here: Home / Anderson On Health Insurance / CBO Score for the Republican plan is in

CBO Score for the Republican plan is in

by | 217 Comments

This post is in: 

And it is ugly:

TLDR: This is not bad for young, healthy and wealthy. Horrendous for anyone who thinks that there is a reasonable chance that they will not be one of those categories at any point in their lives.

I can’t figure out the politics of the GOP kicking the ever living snot out of their base of people who are 50+. Take a look at the situation for the individual earning 175% FPL. Their actuarial value drops from 87% due to Cost Sharing Reduction subsidies to 65%. That is roughly a $4,000 increase in deductible.

The 21 year old is better off under AHCA. The 40 year is slightly worse off. The 64 year old is beaten senseless.

I am betting that the 24 million net coverage loss number is a function of cohort replacement of older and sicker 50+ individuals leaving the individual market and getting replaced by 21 year olds in low cost markets who benefit from a 5:1 age band to get low cost and low utilization Bronze plans.

Okay, here are the lowlights:

Reader Interactions

217Comments

  1. 1.

    Roger Moore

    Translation: The GOP health bill would completely wipe out the predicted coverage gains (+23M) from the ACA.

    Which, when you think about it, is about what you’d expect from an attempt to completely repeal Obamacare. It shows that the important part is the repeal, not the cobbled together “replacement”.

  4. 4.

    Patricia Kayden

    Is anyone surprised by this? Of course the CBO was going to declare the AHCA a disaster. Republicans don’t care about less fortunate Americans gaining access to healthcare so they won’t care about the CBO’s findings.

  7. 7.

    patroclus

    They’re trying to kill 24 million people in the span of 9 years. And 14 million of those would be killed in two years

  9. 9.

    Gravenstone

    @Mike in NC: He pre-spun it by claiming the number to lose coverage would be strictly up to the choices people make. If they want coverage badly enough, they’ll make choices that get them that coverage. In other words, underwear gnomes.

  10. 10.

    Kelly

    People that ignored evolution, CO2 driven climate change and racism can easily ignore this.

  11. 11.

    dedc79

    @Mike in NC:

    How will that nitwit Ryan try to spin this?

    That these 24 million people will have access to health insurance that they are choosing not to utilize. And that this is freedom. Something like that.

  12. 12.

    Ian G.

    Can I compare the GOP on healthcare to Lysenkoism yet? If 24 million need to be kicked off of health insurance for the glory of the Randian revolution, so be it. Like starving Ukrainian peasants, you have to break some eggs to make an omelette.

  15. 15.

    Judge Crater

    It’s trickle down health care – tax cuts for the rich and Medicaid down the shitter. 24 million more people uninsured by 2026. Old people pay more. Sick people are fucked. Oh, the humanity……….

  16. 16.

    Baud

    Starting in 2020, the increase in average premiums from repealing the individual mandate penalties would be more than offset by the combination of three main factors . First, the mix of people enrolled in coverage obtained in the nongroup market is anticipated to be younger, on average, than the mix under current law. [Why?] Second, premiums, on average, are estimated to fall because of the elimination of actuarial value requirements, which would result in plans that cover a lower share of health care costs, on average . [Plans will be worse than today?] Third, reinsurance programs supported by the Patient and State Stability Fund are estimated to reduce premiums. If those funds were devoted to other purposes, then premium reductions would be smaller.

    By 2026, average premiums for single policyholders in the nongroup market under the legislation would be roughly 10 percent lower than the estimates under current law. The changes in premiums would vary for people of different ages. The change in age -rating rules, effective in 2019, would directly change the premiums faced by different age groups, substantially reducing premiums for young adults and raising premiums for older people. By 2026, CBO and JCT project, premiums in the nongroup market would be 20 percent to 25 percent lower for a 21-year-old and 8 percent to 10 percent lower for a 40-year-old—but 20 percent to 25 percent higher for a 64-year-old [Wow] .

  19. 19.

    Yarrow

    @Mike in NC:

    How will that nitwit Ryan try to spin this?

    Don’t know about Ryan, but Trump will just abolish the CBO. Is that in the EO he’s signing today?

  21. 21.

    prob50

    Ryan & Co. an always argue that once people die from lack of health care they will no longer be among the uninsured.

    Success!!!

  22. 22.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Steve Kornacki says the CBO cleared this for a reconciliation vote, because it will lower the deficit. I wonder if McConnell will let Collins and Murkoswki vote against it and bring Pence in.

    Also, does the CBO score take into account the almost certain increase in emergency room treatment of untreated chronic conditions due to the elimination of preventative and continuing care ?

  24. 24.

    Mikefromarlington

    When these stories break I always get a kick out how Fox News website just ignores them until they come up with some outrageous spin on it. All other major news sites have a story already.

  26. 26.

    Bostonian

    @Mike J: I expect Ryan will declare victory and the abolition of the donut hole.

    If you eradicate the entire donut, there is no hole.

  27. 27.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: “Lower the deficit” sounds like it means “kick off the moochers.” That’s what Ryan and Fox are going to latch on to.

    ETA: They’ll make it seem like it’s the famous “47%” from the Romney tape.

  28. 28.

    Wayne

    I think the right will like it and spin it well. Millions will be able to choose, not be forced, to get healthcare. It will save billions. Case closed. They will ignore the rest.

  29. 29.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    and RyanCare I believe maintains coverage for young adults on their parents policies, no? Can’t piss off the white suburban UMC, for goodness sake! Also protects pre-existing conditions provisions, but does away with the ban on lifetime limits? As in they can cut you off in the middle of chemo

    @FlipYrWhig: Yup

    ETA: @Wayne: that was my thought, I was surprised to hear concern trolls Kornicaki and Kasie Hunt saying this is bad for Republicans

  31. 31.

    PhoenixRising

    premiums, on average, are estimated to fall because of the elimination of actuarial value requirements

    Oh good. We’re going to let consumers buy junk policies that don’t cover their health problems, and as long as they keep paying the premiums continuously they can keep paying premiums for junk coverage that doesn’t pay doctors.

    David, is there a way to talk about this problem more effectively that I’m not seeing because I can’t breathe right now?
    Story here:
    https://twitter.com/AlexKing3rd/status/841381066220941316

  35. 35.

    PhoenixRising

    @Baud: yes, and we’re going to need some of those bootstraps to complete med school and fellowships in radiation oncology quickly, which will be quite a feat.

  36. 36.

    Kelly

    @Baud: We don’t need bootstraps we need to put some boots in the right places and maybe take a strap to some behinds.

  37. 37.

    Jeanne

    Soooo, as someone who was able to leave my job at an agency and open a solo counseling practice because I had access to the ACA and a subsidy, should we just assume we will not be able to afford healthcare? Not to mention my many many clients I helped get on the ACA or medicaid. I guess I will have to close my practice and go back to a job I hated just so I can have health insurance. Devastating news!

  39. 39.

    tobie

    @Baud: Your highlighted portions remind me that one of the many things the ACA has does for health care coverage as a whole is ensure minimum standards for health insurance. Even though I get my health insurance from my employer and do not participate in the exchanges, I’ve seen my out of pocket expenses drop dramatically for things like physicals and routine cancer screening.

    I wish the CBO’s budget scoring of the AHCA took account of the cost of things like medical bankruptcies.

  40. 40.

    Betty Cracker

    Since they’re repealing the ACA provisions that regulated coverage, what they’ll probably do is make it profitable for insurers to offer cheap, shitty plans, and when people decline to buy those cheap, shitty plans, they’ll call that freedom.

    It’ll go something like this: “Under the ACA, the people in Sisterfuck, KY only had one Obamacare plan on offer, and they had to pay $3K for it, with a government subsidy of $8K, for a total of $11K. Now, Sisterfuckians can choose between three plans that cost $4K total!”

    (They’ll neglect to point out the yawning chasm in benefits between Obamacare and Trumpcare.)

  41. 41.

    JMG

    Estimate in score is that premiums in individual market policies will rise an average of 15-20 percent. That’s averaging all ages. Will be way higher for older people still too young for Medicare.

  42. 42.

    The Ancient Randonneur

    @Mike in NC:

    How will that nitwit Ryan try to spin this?

    CBO says it will lower the deficit. Hence, it’s eligible for a reconcilition vote so the deficit hawks will eat this up. Killing off a few million moochers is a small price to pay for another tax cut.

  44. 44.

    tobie

    @PhoenixRising: @Betty Cracker: One possible response to this…call it “insurance that’s not worth the paper it’s printed on.” Or as Tom Waits said in one song, “The large print giveth, the small print taketh away.”

  47. 47.

    Mister Forkbeard

    @Baud: Also: Is that 20% higher number the cost of the PREMIUM, not the payout price for the person? PPACA subsidies are also going away, so the I imagine the cost of the premium will go up and said elderly person will also have to pay the whole thing, as opposed to the deal they’re getting now.

    If that’s the case, you’re looking at a 3-4x increase.

  48. 48.

    bystander

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Steve Kornacki says the CBO cleared this for a reconciliation vote, because it will lower the deficit.

    This is all they wil need to hear to ratchet up the deficit b/s again. The noise will be unbearable. And never once will any of them acknowledge that they favor some unimportant drop in the national deficit over paying tons more for coverage while millions go without coverage.

  49. 49.

    JMG

    Nobody cares about the deficit but editorial writers. People care about health a lot. That argument will only fly with the donor class.

  52. 52.

    Roger Moore

    If they repeal the coverage minimum requirements, I can think of a potential money maker. I’ll offer a policy that calls itself insurance but makes no bones about offering zero coverage. I’ll sell it for a fairly nominal price, enough to cover clerical costs and give a reasonable profit. Why would anyone want to buy it? Because it will provide continuity of coverage. That way if people get sick and need to buy coverage, they’ll officially have had coverage the whole time and won’t get charged a 30% penalty when they switch to a policy that actually covers something. Would it work?

  53. 53.

    Lizzy L

    I try really really hard not to hate these people — but God, I hate these people. I am not surprised, I expected these numbers, but somehow, seeing it out there, I am once again toggling between despair and rage, just as I was on November 9th, and every day thereafter for about a month.

    I don’t believe in hell. But damn them.

  54. 54.

    Mister Forkbeard

    @The Ancient Randonneur: The sad part about this is that they had to make it use “Dynamic Scoring” (which is… making up stuff) to make it work. The real budgetary impact is going to be pretty awful, all things considered.

  57. 57.

    Hobbes83

    Well, even with their “dynamic scoring” and all, the CBO just shit on the entire GOL. The media will happily polish this true on behalf of Rebublicans, unfortunately.

  58. 58.

    West of the Rockies (been a while)

    @Mike in NC:

    How will Ryan frame it?

    Freedom of choice, baby!

    The poor can just choose to get a super awesome job! Under Trump, they’ll be giving away the jobs! You won’t be able to swing a dead cat (or a live boy) and not hit a job with your name on it!

    Winning….

  59. 59.

    D58826

    Well I can certainly see why the GOP is going to be upset with this report. After all by 2026 ONLY 50 million people will be w/o heath care. I’m sure Ayn Rand is turning over in her crypt with disappointment at her most famous protegee. Surely with a bit of effort Ryan can get that number up to 100 million.

  63. 63.

    Betty Cracker

    @tobie: Yeah, that should be one line opponents should take. Trump is a conman, and any plan he’s associated with will be a screw job — count on it. Also, that ad Doug (I think) highlighted the other day to call the rise in premiums an “age tax” is goddamn genius. Older folks vote, and if the Dems and AARP can push this “age tax” angle, things could go very pear-shaped for the GOP in 2018.

  66. 66.

    Brachiator

    From the previous thread:

    GOP Talking points begin… Now!

    Scary Spicer: The CBO lies!

    Tea Party Congressman: Those 14 million are all freeloaders buying iPhones.

    Trump: We will come up with a free market plan that will soak up all those freeloaders and give them … access … to the best health care in America. And we will also sell them some Trump steaks.

    Paul Ryan: So, a few million will die. The rest will learn a useful, hard lesson. They don’t call me the “Blue Eyed Granny Starver” for nothing!

  68. 68.

    Betty Cracker

    @MattF: Seriously? If that removes his sorry ass from WaPo, I consider it good news. If it’s another gig in addition to his WaPo sinecure, I consider it a metastasis.

  72. 72.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    it’s gonna be this

    Matthew Yglesias‏Verified account @ mattyglesias 4m4 minutes ago
    More
    Fewer covered
    Higher premiums
    Higher deductibles

    vs “lower the deficit”

  73. 73.

    Baud

    Haha. Can you say Bill of Attainder?

    For a one -year period following enactment, the legislation would prevent federal funds from being made available to an entity (including its affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and clinics) if it is:

    •A nonprofit organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the code;
    •An essential community provider that is primarily engaged in providing family planning and reproductive health services and related medical care;
    •An entity that provides abortions—except in instances in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest or the woman’s life is in danger; and
    •An entity that had expenditures under the Medicaid program that exceeded $350 million in fiscal year 2014.

    CBO expects that, according to those criteria, only Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates and clinics would be affected.

  79. 79.

    Baud

    CBO and JCT estimate that 48 million people under age 65, or roughly 17 percent of the nonelderly population, would be uninsured in 2020 if the legislation was enacted. That figure would grow to 52 million, or roughly 19 percent of the nonelderly population, in 2026. (That figure is currently about 10 percent and is projected to remain at that level in each year through 2026 under current law.) Although the agencies expect that the legislation would increase the number of uninsured broadly, the increase would be disproportionately larger among older people with lower income; in particular, people between 50 and 64 years old with income of less than 200 percent of the FPL would make up a larger share of the uninsured (see Figure 2)

    This seems like the key paragraph.

  82. 82.

    Kropadope

    @Barbara:

    That it’s not his fault more people don’t want to buy insurance when they aren’t forced to. Or something like that.

    What about people who want to but couldn’t otherwise? I want to be able to afford coverage without having my costs driven up by people who wanted care but didn’t want to pay for it.

    The AHCA is the moocher plan, end of story.

  83. 83.

    Baud

    Trying again.

    Haha. Can you say Bill of Attainder?

    For a one -year period following enactment, the legislation would prevent federal funds from being made available to an entity (including its affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and clinics) if it is:

    •A nonprofit organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the code;
    •An essential community provider that is primarily engaged in providing family planning and reproductive health services and related medical care;
    •An entity that provides abortions—except in instances in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest or the woman’s life is in danger; and
    •An entity that had expenditures under the Medicaid program that exceeded $350 million in fiscal year 2014.

    CBO expects that, according to those criteria, only Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates and clinics would be affected.

  86. 86.

    Baud

    Third time’s a charm

    Haha. Can you say Bill of Attainder?

    For a one -year period following enactment, the legislation would prevent federal funds from being made available to an entity (including its affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and clinics) if it is:

    •A nonprofit organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the code;
    •An essential community provider that is primarily engaged in providing family planning and reproductive health services and related medical care;
    •An entity that provides abortions—except in instances in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest or the woman’s life is in danger; and
    •An entity that had expenditures under the Medicaid program that exceeded $350 million in fiscal year 2014.

    CBO expects that, according to those criteria, only Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates and clinics would be affected.

  89. 89.

    Kropadope

    @NR:

    Trump made a very specific promise during the campaign: that Trumpcare would be better than Obamacare.
    As it stands now, it simply is not.

    They’re throwing the working poor to the dogs. What could be better than that?

  90. 90.

    Patricia Kayden

    @rikyrah: Freedom. That’s pretty much what I’m hearing from Ryan and his ilk right now. Somehow access to healthcare through the ACA is tyranny and government overreach. Interfering with abortion rights and transgender people’s bathroom choices isn’t meddling though in Rightwingstan. Sigh.

  91. 91.

    Nicole

    I can’t figure out the politics of the GOP kicking the ever living snot out of their base of people who are 50+.

    Because, in their eyes, those folk aren’t actually their base; their base are the rich people who give them lots of campaign dollars and those people don’t need the ACA.

    And if they start to worry they’ll lose enough votes from the not-Richie Riches, they’ll just do more gerrymandering.

  92. 92.

    smintheus

    Paul Ryan on the CBO estimates:

    “This report confirms that the American Health Care Act will lower premiums and improve access to quality, affordable care.”

    Emperor Hirohito in 1945 on Japan’s glorious war:

    Despite the best that has been done by everyone … the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage

  95. 95.

    sunny raines

    since human suffering impact means nothing to republicans, I’m wondering if the CBO factored in the cost to the economy of the people who will die earlier or be disabled from not having health insurance. 45,000 additional earlier deaths and who knows how many additional disabled could have an economic impact.

  96. 96.

    Nicholas

    So can the Democrats stop being fucking cowards and push for single payer, like today?!?! There is no better time than right now.

  99. 99.

    tobie

    @smintheus: Regarding the Ryan quote:

    “This report confirms that the American Health Care Act will lower premiums and improve access to quality, affordable care.”

    This seems pretty easy to rebut. Lower premiums for whom? And what defines “quality” healthcare when you throw out all minimum coverage requirements? This plans not worth the paper it’s printed on (sorry…I’m practicing saying that last line so I can whip it out fast in the future).
    He really is a Big Eyed Granny Starver–in a word, a monster.

  100. 100.

    goblue72

    I can’t figure out the politics of the GOP kicking the ever living snot out of their base of people who are 50+.

    Republican voters will crawl over glass to show up on election day and pull the lever marked “R”, regardless of how awful the candidate is or how retrograde the platform.

    “What’s the matter with Kansas?” Absolutely nothing if you are a Republican politician.

    Maybe Democrats need to start spending more time thinking about how to assemble a voter coalition that will crawl over equally large fields of glass to show up on election day and less time worried about coming up with a perfectly polished refundable, means-tested, graduated tax credit.

  101. 101.

    Fair Economist

    There’s an interesting incentive for states here. If a state can get near-universal coverage via a combination of subsidies and mandates, it can get a lot of federal support to pay for it – probably around 50%. Pretty much any blue state will put in Romneycare with these incentives, and that will improve coverage and increase costs compared to the CBO estimate. Costs will be overall higher than with Obamacare as the Medicaid expansion candidates will be shifted to more-expensive private insurance.

  107. 107.

    Chris

    I can’t figure out the politics of the GOP kicking the ever living snot out of their base of people who are 50+.

    Old white conservative voters might as well be walking around with a “KICK ME” sign. It’s no surprise that they’d be taken up on it.

  108. 108.

    Corner Stone

    I just turned on the TV and saw the chyron “WH Rejects CBO’s Analysis”
    And I was like, Of course they did. So how bad was it?
    then…
    .
    .
    BAM!! WHAT IN THE FUCKETY FUCK? 24M+ LOSE COVERAGE??!

    I have to admit I chortled with glee it was so bad a number. Wonk that! Motherfucker.

  111. 111.

    Timurid

    I can’t figure out the politics of the GOP kicking the ever living snot out of their base of people who are 50+.

    Because they think 2016 was the last real election, and they’ll never need the votes of those (or any other) people again?

  112. 112.

    goblue72

    @Nicholas: The only lesson our fearful Democratic betters in Congress will take away from this is to avoid healthcare reform for the next 20 plus years and if they do ever pick it up again, it will most certainly involve tax credits.

  113. 113.

    Kropadope

    Emergency care and vaccinations are still required by law. If Republicans would rather pay more to care for the poor through their premiums rather than less through their taxes, that’s their business. All I know is if this passes, I’m dropping my coverage immediately. If I go 30% of a year without getting sick, I’ve broken even. Why should I pay an arm and a leg for a tax break to insurers?

  114. 114.

    Chris

    @Lizzy L:

    I try really really hard not to hate these people — but God, I hate these people.

    I don’t like that I feel this way because it can’t possibly be healthy. But if someone can tell me how else you can possibly respond to people whose increasingly only guiding light at the voting booth is to support whatever screws me the hardest, because it’s going to screw me the hardest, without being a masochist, I’d love to hear it.

  118. 118.

    Kropadope

    @FlipYrWhig:

    “Lower the deficit” sounds like it means “kick off the moochers.” That’s what Ryan and Fox are going to latch on to.

    Except their plan enables moochers and rewards CEOs for existing, rather than actually doing anything of value. There may be some overlap between the two categories.

  121. 121.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @goblue72: you know what would be a totally sick burn on me, Dwight, if you weren’t so shy and modest about your many achievements, and you told us all the facts about your super-duper successful grassroots organizing and the details on the totally rad legislation you wrote and passed through CA lege. You really did!

    Do you even remember that costume you tried on a couple weeks ago?

  123. 123.

    Corner Stone

    @The Ancient Randonneur:

    CBO says it will lower the deficit. Hence, it’s eligible for a reconcilition vote so the deficit hawks will eat this up. Killing off a few million moochers is a small price to pay for another tax cut.

    That awful smell you’re sensing? It’s the hair that’s on fire of several R Senators who want to murder anyone in the House who passes this bill as is.

  125. 125.

    Kay

    It doesn’t work for health care because it isn’t a health care plan. It’s a huge tax cut for millionaires. It works great!

    People said “Betsy DeVos doesn’t know anything about public education”. That would matter if Trump was interested in providing public education, but he isn’t, so it doesn’t.

  127. 127.

    Kay

    Trump flat out lied to people on Medicaid. All those retirees who voted for him better grab on to Social Security. He’s coming for that next.

  128. 128.

    Corner Stone

    @Kay: It is so hilariously bad that even now, after all that has happened recently, I am still stunned the media isn’t pointing and laughing at Paul Ryan right now.
    I was going crazy when he gave his presentation the other day. This is just reality. We can’t let the media normalize shit like this shit bill.

  130. 130.

    Corner Stone

    This countdown clock until the Hayes / Sanders Townhall bullshit is giving me agita.

  131. 131.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @bystander: Yup, he’s gone full time to CNN

    He’s been trying so hard to normalize trump and sell it as gimlet-eyed contrarianism that cuts through all the hype. I hope he and Andrea Mitchell can still get together for lunch.

  134. 134.

    Peale

    @Nicholas: Nope. Unfortunately I don’t think Democrats are going to touch a single payer approach unless one of the states goes that route or either insurance companies bankrupt themselves (so they aren’t a factor any longer to work against reform), or the providers really start to fail. At some point, the trifecta of business groups, payors and providers have to be weakened considerably. People will hate this “reform” as it is obviously bad, but the voters have not exactly indicated that they will embrace any reform that makes them better. We tried to stabilize the insurance markets and make the product that at least is fair. Democrats did not or were not able to touch the big problem – that neither providers nor healthcare manufacturers have any incentives to ever control costs. Those “bend the curve” provisions were put off and now those will be gone, too.

    We are now opting to “hope” that healthcare provider costs stay in line with inflation (hahahahahaha!). And hope that by removing the ability of anyone to pay for those services means that prices will go down

    I know it sounds callous, but the system at this point will need to fail a lot more than poor people before the Dems will be able to put forward anything comprehensive again. The medical establishment now knows how to fight reform and completely obliterate it. Until that establishment is wounded, why bother?

  136. 136.

    David Anderson

    @The Moar You Know: Except that Republican Senators have to run in state wide races instead of heavily gerrymandered districts and don’t want to see accurate attack ads of people crying on camera that it is either there insurance or their retirement as they are in their late 50s or early 60s. And oh yeah, the insurance that they are paying an extra $15,000 for as a 62 year old has a $12,000 deductible

    The Senate won’t pass this.

    They might pass a pile of bullshit, but they won’t pass this. As is, this bill has trouble clearing 43 votes in the Senate

  137. 137.

    danielx

    You’ve gotta be cruel to be kind, in the right measure
    Cruel to be kind, it’s a very good sign

  138. 138.

    Kay

    @Corner Stone:

    I don’t think anyone really cares whether poor and low wage people get health care. The vast majority of the coverage of the health care bill was people buying insurance on the exchanges. They only started covering the Medicaid piece after Trump was elected.

    The truth is covering all those low wage adults didn’t help Democrats any politically, so maybe Republicans decided taking their coverage away won’t hurt Republicans. It’s not that bad a bet. There just isn’t much political payback for poor people programs. It doesn’t translate into votes. Republicans get more votes demonizing poor people than Democrats do covering poor people. From a purely political view no politician ever has to do anything to benefit low wage workers. It just doesn’t pay. That’s what the Medicaid expansion shows.

  142. 142.

    Wapiti

    @Baud:

    Can you say Bill of Attainder?

    That’s the first thing I thought when I read those subparagraphs in the last few days. It’s nice of the CBO to spell it out, without quite saying it, to help Planned Parenthood in court.

  143. 143.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Dave Weigel‏Verified account @ daveweigel 50s50 seconds ago
    Sen. Cassidy not impressed by cost savings seen by CBO: “Society is going to pay for health care whether it’s through insurance or not.”

    Dave Weigel‏Verified account @ daveweigel 6m6 minutes ago
    Sen. Perdue (R-GA), usually pretty supportive of Trump, says of CBO score that Rs should “slow down” and “get this right.”

  145. 145.

    goblue72

    Here’s what you don’t get because you were too busy having a circle wonk. GOP doesn’t care what the CBO says about uninsured rates. They only cared about what actually mattered – getting the bill to be deficit neutral or “better” so they could ram it through via reconciliation. That runway is now clear. And notice how quickly they came up with a bill? So fast the LOBBYISTS are playing catch-up. How long did Democrats spend wanking each other off to get the Rube Goldberg ACA? Couldn’t just lower the eligibility age of Medicare and call it a day, now could we?

    Ryan will eventually herd his cats & the GOP will pass this monstrosity in the House. There may be more kabuki in the Senate, but they will eventually get their 50+1 – quite possibly via a tie broken by Pence. This is going to happen and it will be mostly this bad and its not going to take that long. And Trump will sign it, claiming its HUGE-ly better than that awful Obamacare and no he didn’t break any promises. Because its Trump – he lies so much he never makes any promises. But please, lets go burn some sage and pray for Susan Collins to save us.

    And the Republican base will eat this up, because the GOP is doing EXACTLY what they told THEIR voters they would do – repeal Obamacare.

    And then they will move onto an equally obnoxious tax cut bill that will be mostly welfare for the rich and big business, with some fig leaf cuts for everyone else. And the Republican base will eat THAT up, because the GOP will be doing EXACTLY what they told THEIR voters they would do – cut taxes.

    And they will likely even get some form of wall funded in part, even if it involves gutting the safety net. And the Republican base will eat THAT up, because the GOP will be doing EXACTLY what they told THEIR voters they would do – kick the Mexicans out, kick the “moochers” off “welfare” and drown government in a bathtub.

    And Democrats will be as clueless as to how to respond as Democrats in Wisconsin were when the kept getting their butts beaten by Scott Walker and the Wisconsin GOP. (That would be state GOP that Reince Priapus used to run before running the RNC.) But I am totally sure that losing to Scott Walker repeatedly is totally because of Comey and the emails. And totally not because Democrats pre-compromise before their first cup of coffee in the morning. (Card check? What’s that? We passed that nothing burger called Lilly Ledbetter – you should be happy with that.)

  146. 146.

    danielx

    @NR:

    Trump made a shit ton of promises during the campaign. Very few of them will be fulfilled.

  147. 147.

    hueyplong

    The way I see it, saying that 24MM will lose healthcare is the way to get wavering GOPers on board. It assures passage.

  148. 148.

    Brachiator

    @NR:

    Trump made a very specific promise during the campaign: that Trumpcare would be better than Obamacare.

    As it stands now, it simply is not.

    Who ever said or expected Trump to keep a promise?

    Suckers!

    ETA: Trump is deferring to Ryan and to the Tea Party Republicans if he continues to back the GOP plan. So much for Trump the populist. But at least they can say with pride that they helped get rid of that awful Obamacare. Because they knew, they just knew that it was bad for them. They thought that Trump might stand between them and the GOP ideologues. But… what’s that word, again?

    Suckers!

  149. 149.

    Yarrow

    @Peale:

    Democrats did not or were not able to touch the big problem – that neither providers nor healthcare manufacturers have any incentives to ever control costs.

    No for profit company ever does the right thing on its own. They have to be forced to. Safety features added to vehicles? Required by law. Stopping dumping toxic chemicals into rivers and streams? Required by law. Any “incentive” to control costs will be in the form of a law requiring them to do it. Otherwise it’s tin can cars with no seat belts, rivers that catch on fire and no cost controls for health insurance.

    I do not understand why people think any corporation will do anything because it’s the right thing to do. They will do it because they’re forced to.

  150. 150.

    SiubhanDuinne

    Just got here and haven’t scrolled through comments yet, so forgive me if this has already been discussed — but WTF?

    CBO estimates monthly health insurance premium for a single 64-year-old who makes $26,500 would jump more than 700% (from $1,700 to $14,600)

    That can’t possibly be right! I mean, it’s a lot of money even for an annual premium, but monthly?? Please tell me this is a mistake.

  151. 151.

    Kropadope

    @schrodingers_cat: People around here seem to vacillate on the matter. Nevertheless, I disagree with goblue on a lot, but this post, while not offering a solution, didn’t merit the sort of reaction it drew from Jim, whom I know from experience to be unnecessarily hostile and prone to alternative facts.

    Sorry if I was out of turn, but my trigger to defend people’s right to dissent around here has been recalibrated to be a little sensitive over the last year or so.

  153. 153.

    Kay

    Wow. 45% of all births are paid for by Medicaid?

    The Best Private Health Care System in The World seems to be leaving a lot of people out.

  154. 154.

    Corner Stone

    @Kay: Sadly, I agree with you. No one ever got to the top of the mountain championing teh poors.
    However! There are a few categories of people harmed by this bill that actually do vote. And they are easily led to understand they will not be coddled by this bill.
    I don’t think gaining healthy youngs at the expensive of attentive olds is going to be a net gain.
    They already have the wealthy, so meh.

  155. 155.

    Jeffro

    I’m just glad I will still have that fabled “access” that’s awesome!

    Ah well… maybe a little green day and against me! tonight at the Verizon Center will take care of these blues…

  156. 156.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Brachiator: Because they knew, they just knew that it was bad for them. They thought that Trump might stand between them and the GOP ideologues.

    I would say a lot of trump voters don’t know what an ideologue is, much less what Paul Ryan’s ideology is. Trump told them that it was all simple, he’s the most successful businessman ever (have you seen his plane? his helicopter? his wife?) and he’d get them better insurance for lower premiums and deductibles. Enough of them believed him for him to win the EC, with a little help from various friends.

  157. 157.

    Kropadope

    @Corner Stone:

    They already have the wealthy, so meh.

    The have the wealthy assholes. Now they’re freeing up the income of the non-assholish wealthy to donate to Democratic candidates.

  158. 158.

    debbie

    Paul Krugman‏Verified account
    @paulkrugman

    And here we go: CBO estimates Trumpcare would save <0.2% of GDP and lead to 24 million losing insurance. But freedom

    Great ROI, jackasses.

  159. 159.

    D58826

    @Kay: And I believe we have the highest infant morality rate of any developed nation. But we do protect zygotes better than anyone on the planet

  160. 160.

    debbie

    CBO estimates monthly health insurance premium for a single 64-year-old who makes $26,500 would jump more than 700% (from $1,700 to $14,600)

    The more I read about this, the more obscene it becomes. This must not be allowed to pass.

  161. 161.

    Mister Forkbeard

    @debbie: Would be nice if the CBO could also issue a report using “non-dynamic scoring”, or what we call “actual math”.

  162. 162.

    goblue72

    @Peale: I have this occasional daytime fantasy that California will attempt something, if only to stick a finger in the eye of the GOP. Back when Bush was President and made various kabuki like noises to mollify the Christo-fascists by preventing the Feds from funding stem cell research, my fellow voters wound up floating a state bond to pay for a stem cell research program to the tune of $3 billion in response.

    Granted, this would be way bigger, but nothing gets a California voter going like the chance to stick it to knuckle draggers in other parts of the country.

  163. 163.

    Corner Stone

    @Mister Forkbeard:

    Would be nice if the CBO could also issue a report using “non-dynamic scoring”, or what we call “actual math”.

    Shit just got real but it don’t get *that* real.

  164. 164.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Lizzy L:

    I try really really hard not to hate these people — but God, I hate these people.

    I’m right there with you. I know this level of hatred plays merry havoc on my heart, blood pressure, digestion, and overall mood — and I’m quite sure it’s not good for my immortal soul, assuming I have one. But what comes out of the White House is mentally disturbed, incurious, stubborn and incompetent, and what comes out of Congressional Republicans is flat-out evil. It’s really hard not to hate them all.

  166. 166.

    Kropadope

    @debbie:

    Paul Krugman‏Verified account
    @paulkrugman
    And here we go: CBO estimates Trumpcare would save <0.2% of GDP and lead to 24 million losing insurance. But freedom

    Great ROI, jackasses.

    Don’t think of the single hair of money shaved off the deficit as the ROI; the 7.5% of the population who can’t afford healthcare coverage, that’s the ROI.

    @Steeplejack (phone): Haven’t you learned yet that Bernie Sanders is history’s greatest monster?

  167. 167.

    Brachiator

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: RE: Because they knew, they just knew that it was bad for them. They thought that Trump might stand between them and the GOP ideologues.

    I would say a lot of trump voters don’t know what an ideologue is, much less what Paul Ryan’s ideology is.

    They understood Trump’s promise to be a super Republican who would be better than both sides of the Establishment. Pretty simple.

    And now he is backing Paul Ryan’s tax plan. Again, pretty simple.

    If his base accepts this and accepts the foot up the ass that they are getting, the result will also be pretty simple.

    Also, the GOP is committed to dumping Obamacare, by any means necessary. Trump has publicly said that he will work to push the GOP plan.

    Trump’s only play now is to say that the CBO lies and the free market will solve everything before 2018.

    It’s simple.

  171. 171.

    debbie

    O/T, but I’m hoping this turns into something fun:

    U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur today visited Cleveland, the site of the 2016 Republican National Convention, to urge all residents, political leaders, cab drivers, restaurant operators, passersby and visitors of any stripe who may have been in the presence of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak or any advisers to President Donald Trump at the RNC to come forward and share what they may know. This marks the first time in her career that Kaptur has made such a request of her constituents and of the American public.
    …
    The brief press conference came in the wake of revelations that a number of conversations between Trump’s presidential campaign advisers and the Russian ambassador likely took place during the RNC. Carter Page, an apparent one-time adviser to Trump, said last week that he had spoken with Kislyak and emphasized the RNC connection: “I never met him anywhere outside of Cleveland.”

  174. 174.

    NR

    @Baud: Pushing for a system that would cost less and provide better health care than we have today is by no means a stupid thing to do.

  178. 178.

    goblue72

    @Kropadope: Thanks. I get a little pissy – and should not – with some of the obsessives who seem completely deaf to their bubble. That some folks childishly go around referring to BS as “Wilmer” is just the icing on the cake because god forbid anyone should have a robust debate about how far down the losing path that Democrats are. (I get a little fed up with the insistence to immediately circle the wagons and ‘unify’ – as if that was an actual strategy).

    Pressed for potential “answers”, part of it IMHO involves actually being a real ally to Labor and not just one on paper, and the other would be getting away from overcomplicated safety net policy ideas that involve means-tested tax subsidies and the like, and instead just offer some easy to understand bennies that are NOT means-tested.

    Have a kid? Here’s a childcare subsidy. (Maybe if you are poorer, you get more, but EVERYONE should get something, even if for upper income households its a modest amount. But something, so that nobody is left feeling like THOSE folks are getting something and I don’t get nothing.) Etc.

  181. 181.

    goblue72

    @Kay: Precisely. DeVos is a fantastic Sec of Education if you are a Republican. DeVos (or rather her puppeteers) will lead the charge to end the ESEA as we know it and turn it into a block grant program for vouchers so that the Chrisitianists get the government to pay to send their kids to Christian fundamentalists schools and the wealthy elites and big business get a means to under teachers unions, which unions are a key supporters and funder of the Democratic party. (I can’t recall the exact numbers, but a large % of DNC attendees at the DNC convention last year were members of a teachers union)

  182. 182.

    goblue72

    @David Anderson: I believe the decoder ring for dynamic scoring involves randomly pulling a stock quote off a Bloomberg terminal while listening to a recording of CNBC’s Sqwack Box backwards.

  183. 183.

    gene108

    I can’t figure out the politics of the GOP kicking the ever living snot out of their base of people who are 50+

    It has been a winning strategy for decades now. Why quit something that has a proven track record.

    Reagan started it with allowing all sorts of M&A activity that sucked out manufacturing and other blue collar industries, and they love him for it. Hell, Hollywood put in corporate raiding-down sizing-sell-off-the-assets into Wall Street, when Gordon Gecko buys about Charlie Sheen’s dad’s airlines and proceeds to gut it.

    And white folks love Reagan for unleashing that hell on the American workers.

    Bush, Jr.’s tax cuts were one of the biggest upward transfers of wealth in U.S. history and white folks loved Bush, Jr. until no one could lie about how crappy Iraq was going, and then the economy went to hell in 2007 and 2008.

    And every attempt by Democrats to mitigate has lead to a Republican waive election/voter backlash.

    Happened with Clinton in 1994 and Obama in 2010.

    It’s a good strategy for Republicans to kick the shit out of older white folks. They like voting for fewer government benefits and struggling more and more to get by.

  184. 184.

    Kropadope

    @David Anderson:

    This was non-dynamically scored. The CBO did not have enough time to select the right augery for dynamic scoring

    I’m not sure what augery means, but is it something along the lines of “the CBO didn’t know what rosy, unprovable assumptions the Republicans wanted baked into the analysis?”

  185. 185.

    Brachiator

    @goblue72:

    Pressed for potential “answers”, part of it IMHO involves actually being a real ally to Labor and not just one on paper, and the other would be getting away from overcomplicated safety net policy ideas that involve means-tested tax subsidies and the like, and instead just offer some easy to understand bennies that are NOT means-tested.

    I’m not seeing how this allies to Labor. I don’t see that Labor is a meaningful category anymore, in the US or elsewhere.

    But I understand how your plan is simple. Socializm for Everyone. No questions asked. Got a cost projection?

  186. 186.

    gene108

    @Nicholas:

    So can the Democrats stop being fucking cowards and push for single payer, like today?!?! There is no better time than right now.

    The tax increase to provide single payer for everyone would be hard to sell.

    Also, too Republicans would gut it the first chance they get, and we would not have the “safety net” of employer coverage, Medicare, etc. to mitigate the fuckery of Republican evil because we’d all be in the single-payer system.

    And Republicans would love to kick everyone off of insurance, so long as the super rich get a tax cut out of it.

  187. 187.

    George Spiggott

    Speaker Paul “ZEGS” Ryan: Mr. President, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as Conservatives and for the life of our Party. Now, truth is not always a pleasant thing. But it is necessary now to make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless *distinguishable*, post-election environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got 400 wealthy families upset at not receiving massive tax cuts.
    President Shirkin Shitgibbon: You’re talking about mass murder, Speaker, not healthcare!
    Speaker “ZEGS” Ryan: Mr. President, I’m not saying we wouldn’t get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

  188. 188.

    D58826

    @David Anderson: The local Walmart was out of chicken entrails? Certainly shows a lack of effort on the CBO’s since there must be some road kill nearby that they could have used as a substitute..

    Different topic was Der Fuhrer supposed to issue an executive order about re-organizing the executive branch at 4:30?

  189. 189.

    Kropadope

    @Brachiator:

    I’m not seeing how this allies to Labor. I don’t see that Labor is a meaningful category anymore, in the US or elsewhere.

    Well, I don’t know about you, but I’d love to see a resurgence of unions. Outside of protecting their very existence, though, I don’t see how the Democrats can force this outcome.

  190. 190.

    NR

    @goblue72:

    Pressed for potential “answers”, part of it IMHO involves actually being a real ally to Labor and not just one on paper,

    Per recent polling, 39% of union households have a favorable opinion of the Democratic party, while 50% have an unfavorable view.

    People can tell when the party isn’t really working for them anymore.

  191. 191.

    goblue72

    @Brachiator: Voters don’t give a shit about cost projections. You wanna adopt the framing of the DC media, go right ahead. But voters don’t care.

  192. 192.

    Kropadope

    @NR:

    People can tell when the party isn’t really working for them anymore.

    Well, can they tell when the other party is working aggressively against them?

  194. 194.

    Miss Bianca

    @Kropadope:

    Outside of protecting their very existence, though, I don’t see how the Democrats can force this outcome.

    If only Democratic pushback against years of right-wing propagandizing against unions, against labor, against the right to choose, against family leave, against anything a decently progressive society might desire as SOCIALISM!!11!! and therefore BAD and UNAMERICAN were as *easy* as some folks here make it sound! If only these folks would run for office, win election and show us how easy it is! Just wave your hands and make it so – single-payer health care! Tax credits for child care! Obviously it’s easy, any idiot ought to be able to get it done, and it’s only some sort of failure of will or something on the part of neoliberal Wall-Street-loving squishy Democratic legislators that it hasn’t happened yet.

    Then please , please – let any idiot here who thinks a Democratic Socialist agenda ought to be so easy to promote and pass, RUN FOR OFFICE AND SHOW US HOW IT’S DONE.

    Or, you know, maybe shut up about how it’s our political allies who are sticking it to us worse than our enemies.

    ETA: And with that, I’m off to a Democratic Party Central Committee meeting. To, you know, discuss how easy it’s going to be now to persuade all these white conservative ranchers out here to start supporting universal health care.

  195. 195.

    goblue72

    @Kropadope: well, that’s the point. I think Erik Loomis at LGM has a pretty solid argument that government supporting unions and unions support progressive govt are mutually reinforcing thing. That is – despite how much unions may invest in organizing drives or other union expansion strategies, unions were at their strongest when the Federal govt was most supportive of unions. (with the Federal govt being most supportive of unions when unions were at their strongest – and when unions were strong, Democratic politicians benefitted).

    So its a back and forth thing, but at end of day, the path to things getting actually better would involve Democratic politicians being truly held to account for actually sticking their necks out and pushing some real legislation helping unions over the finish line.

  196. 196.

    goblue72

    @NR: Unsurprisingly, voters are in part transactional and actually are aware enough to know if they are getting what they want out of the transaction.

    Liberals have spent way too many years scratching their heads over “what’s the matter with Kansas”, as if Republican voters in Kansas aren’t getting what they voted for, merely because what Democrats perceive as Republican voters self-interest is somehow supposed to be what Democrats think their self-interest should be. Instead of what Republican voters self-interest actually is.

  197. 197.

    Brachiator

    @goblue72:

    Voters don’t give a shit about cost projections. You wanna adopt the framing of the DC media, go right ahead. But voters don’t care.

    Can you provide a cost projection, or a reference to a source that does provide this info in a relatively brief format?

    A simple question. I am not trying to get into a fight with you about this, nor am I dismissing it out of hand.

  198. 198.

    Kropadope

    @goblue72:

    So its a back and forth thing, but at end of day, the path to things getting actually better would involve Democratic politicians being truly held to account for actually sticking their necks out and pushing some real legislation helping unions over the finish line.

    So, how do we do this? What do unscrupulous employers do to prevent their employees from unionizing? Make union activists reveal themselves before forming a union? Ok, isn’t that why the nearly all the Democrats supported card-check (that’s what I think it was called, feel free to correct me)? Force second votes on union contracts? I’ve never heard of a Democratic Labor secretary pushing for such a thing. Right to work mooch off of unionist efforts? Democrats fight that tooth and nail. Anti-union propaganda during training? Would it be going to far to have the government control what employers can say to their employees? Probably.

  199. 199.

    FlipYrWhig

    If working class people both inside and outside of unions don’t want to vote for Democrats anymore, mostly because of The Blacks and The Mexicans and The Terrorists, why exactly are Democrats supposed to try so hard to please them? College professors don’t vote for Republicans anymore, and Republicans handle this not by coming up with some elaborate plan to win them back, but by mocking them and telling them to fuck off. Let’s do that. If they have problems, and feel very sad and left behind, let them go complain to Republicans to solve them, or not, I don’t really give a shit at this point.

  200. 200.

    Uncle Ebeneezer

    Dems need to frame this as “Republicans: eager to kill FIVE TIMES as many Americans as Al Qaeda did on 9/11. EVERY YEAR!!”

  201. 201.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Kropadope: The workers themselves don’t want to unionize because they think it will be corrupt or make them vote for Democrats or something. Helping people join unions will be about as well rewarded as helping them have health insurance. They’re resentful assholes who hate us and like being that way. There is not a winning hand to play by helping them. It is moral and ethical and nice to do it, but it will win zero support and swing zero elections.

  203. 203.

    FlipYrWhig

    @NR: Point taken. Nonetheless, I don’t recall any instance of Republicans reacting to people turning against them by making generous promises of how much they’ll help if they just come back. People who aren’t voting for Democrats aren’t doing it because of something something unions, they’re doing it because they think black people are out of control and there are too many brown people in places they didn’t use to be. People on the left are only hung up on unions and the brawny working class because they’ve been wishing real hard for a proletarian revolution for 170 years. And it’s happened zero times, and it’s not going to happen now.

  204. 204.

    Kropadope

    @FlipYrWhig:

    The workers themselves don’t want to unionize because they think it will be corrupt or make them vote for Democrats or something.

    If that’s actually true, then people have flat out rejected the idea that we can work together to accomplish more than we could alone. That would mean that people don’t see common cause with their colleagues.

    Personally, I’m not that pessimistic about people. Still. Somehow.

  205. 205.

    Corner Stone

    If that’s actually true, then people have flat out rejected the idea that we can work together to accomplish more than we could alone. That would mean that people don’t see common cause with their colleagues.

    I…uhh…i…the brokening. it gotjust my brain now

  207. 207.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Kropadope: Look at Volkswagen in Tennessee. The _company_ wanted a union. It’s part of the corporate culture. The employees voted against it. That’s a pretty instructive fable.

  208. 208.

    Kropadope

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Look at Volkswagen in Tennessee. The _company_ wanted a union. It’s part of the corporate culture. The employees voted against it. That’s a pretty instructive fable.

    It’s also a single instance in one of the strongest bastions of the Republican hive-mind. Counterpoint: Aren’t fight for 15 activists trying to unionize their workplaces?

    @Corner Stone:

    I…uhh…i…the brokening. it gotjust my brain now

    Only just now? Not buying it. Nice try, though. Don’t try to pin you problems on me.

  209. 209.

    different-church-lady

    @NR: You’re talking about the same people who can’t tell that every word out if Trump’s mouth is a lie, yes?

  210. 210.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Kropadope: I suppose I was leaping to thinking about burly industrial guys with names ending “-owski.” Those are the ones who used to be part of the Democratic fold and then strayed, and that’s what the focus of How Can Democrats Improve kinds of questions tends to be. SEIU and AFSCME and such are completely different stories. They haven’t drifted.

  211. 211.

    PhoenixRising

    @goblue72:

    (Maybe if you are poorer, you get more, but EVERYONE should get something, even if for upper income households its a modest amount. But something, so that nobody is left feeling like THOSE folks are getting something and I don’t get nothing.)

    You are describing the actual ACA: If you don’t have group coverage, here, you get to join a group called ‘all the SMB owners/staff’ and buy something; if you have group coverage, here, have some things you can rely on gaining for your premium; if you have Medicaid, here, your state is now required to be less stupid about throwing money away so you get better drugs & more providers.

    Literally no person in this country got nothing from the ACA; everyone who went to a doctor or might need to go to a doctor benefits.

    You are suggesting a form of underpants gnome magic and you don’t seem to realize it.

  212. 212.

    PhoenixRising

    @FlipYrWhig: Yeah, the Polacks and Irish who don’t work at the steel mill that closed and are out on disability after their backs got hurt from humping drywall are Republican voters now. Let them go. They don’t care if their kids die from ODing on painkillers as long as my kid can’t get the medicine she needs because it can also prevent pregnancy.

    Let them go. Open question: How do we hang this tire fire of a bill around the necks of Congressional Republicans?

  213. 213.

    seaboogie

    So we know how much happier the Villagers are when the GOP is in the WH – grownups, and such. Here is where a link to a questionnaire takes you from a POTUS (not the realdonaldtrump) tweet takes you at Whitehouse.gov….

    Linky for comments is “Share your Obamacare disaster story”. So grown up, that. Also, the commenters are mostly in favor of Obamacare, sprinkled in with MAGA trolls.

    Trump was right – I am tired of all this *winning*.

  214. 214.

    Chris

    @gene108:

    There was a somewhat racist comment in one of the Ian Fleming novels (shocking, I know) where Bond comments that the Russians “simply don’t understand the carrot. Only the knout has any effect. That’s why they were so happy under Stalin. He gave it to them.”

    I’m beginning to think this describes Republican voters as much as the sadism.

  215. 215.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @FlipYrWhig: If working class people both inside and outside of unions don’t want to vote for Democrats anymore, mostly because of The Blacks and The Mexicans and The Terrorists, why exactly are Democrats supposed to try so hard to please them?

    To say nothing of guns, bibles, gay people in their bathrooms and “life”
    ETA: The Ohio Teamsters union endorsed Rob Portman

  216. 216.

    D58826

    @Kropadope:

    Look at Volkswagen in Tennessee. The _company_ wanted a union. It’s part of the corporate culture. The employees voted against it. That’s a pretty instructive fable.

    The union was voted down at the new Bowing plant in S. Carolina a couple of weeks ago. So that’s 2 data points

  217. 217.

    J R in WV

    @Mikefromarlington:

    Wouldn’t a Deathcare Act need to be paying for funerals?

    That costs as much as health care in many circumstances – depending upon how quick you die without health care, right?

Comments are closed.