Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
iggy Offline OP
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
OP Offline
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
Discuss

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
yuge


go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
Donald's doing his part. It's the rest of his party WHO VOTED TO REPEAL IT REPEATEDLY WHILE OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT, AND NOW WON'T who are dropping the ball. Cowards.

That said, I don't think the Republicans should vote for repeal/replace. The moment they do, it becomes their baby and no longer the Democrats'. And even if it were 90% correct in "replace", Democrats and the liberal media will demonize them and only mention that 10%.

I see the only way for Republicans is to leave it alone and pass tax reform or something else. Let Obamacare implode as it is already doing and burn to the ground under its own weight. Let it run its course and be a thorough and complete failure for the Democrats. And then, only then, present a well-thought-out replacement so Republicans can fully present their success vs. the Democrats' failure.

And I want Republicans to present their plan for full scrutiny, not like they initially tried to ram through, in a way disgustingly akin to Nancy Pelosi's "You have to pass it to see what's in it." No votes for new legislation (like the lying deceitful bastard Democrats) over Thanksgiving weekend, or Christmas weekend, or New Years weekend, to ram something through hidden from the American people.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Yeah because nobody will blame the party in control for not doing what they campaigned on for years. That's a partial Pelosi quote btw.
“You’ve heard about the controversies, the process about the bill…but I don’t know if you’ve heard that it is legislation for the future – not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America,” she told the National Association of Counties annual legislative conference, which has drawn about 2,000 local officials to Washington. “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it – away from the fog of the controversy.”

I understand why you guys took it of context but it doesn't work if you know the full quote.


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Yeah because nobody will blame the party in control for not doing what they campaigned on for years.


If Obamacare is as wonderful and popular as you've always claimed why would anybody be mad that it wasn't repealed?

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Your party has been good at bitching but I think whatever it comes up with is going to be less popular than Obamacare ever was.


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Non-responsive. You first said they'd be blamed for doing nothing to repeal and replace and now you're answering my question by assuming they did/will repeal and replace.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: WB
And I want Republicans to present their plan for full scrutiny, not like they initially tried to ram through, in a way disgustingly akin to Nancy Pelosi's "You have to pass it to see what's in it." No votes for new legislation (like the lying deceitful bastard Democrats) over Thanksgiving weekend, or Christmas weekend, or New Years weekend, to ram something through hidden from the American people.


 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Yeah because nobody will blame the party in control for not doing what they campaigned on for years. That's a partial Pelosi quote btw.
“You’ve heard about the controversies, the process about the bill…but I don’t know if you’ve heard that it is legislation for the future – not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America,” she told the National Association of Counties annual legislative conference, which has drawn about 2,000 local officials to Washington. “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it – away from the fog of the controversy.”

I understand why you guys took it of context but it doesn't work if you know the full quote.



What subtle shaving of half-truth are you trying for?

Both quotes say the same thing, that Pelosi asked her party to vote on legislation they hadn't read, to ram through something the public would reject if seen in the light of day and if the public had a chance to read it in advance. Deception of the public being key to their passing of Obamacare.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29



Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: WB
And I want Republicans to present their plan for full scrutiny, not like they initially tried to ram through, in a way disgustingly akin to Nancy Pelosi's "You have to pass it to see what's in it." No votes for new legislation (like the lying deceitful bastard Democrats) over Thanksgiving weekend, or Christmas weekend, or New Years weekend, to ram something through hidden from the American people.


 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Yeah because nobody will blame the party in control for not doing what they campaigned on for years. That's a partial Pelosi quote btw.
“You’ve heard about the controversies, the process about the bill…but I don’t know if you’ve heard that it is legislation for the future – not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America,” she told the National Association of Counties annual legislative conference, which has drawn about 2,000 local officials to Washington. “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it – away from the fog of the controversy.”

I understand why you guys took it of context but it doesn't work if you know the full quote.



What subtle shaving of half-truth are you trying for?

Both quotes say the same thing, that Pelosi asked her party to vote on legislation they hadn't read, to ram through something the public would reject if seen in the light of day and the public had a chance to read it in advance. Deception of the public being key to their passing of Obamacare.


They had a lot more town halls and transparency than the GOP is with their failed attempts. There wasn't even a token attempt at bipartisanship with you guys either. Pelosi was just saying that with time the benefits of the bill would become apparent. It wasn't passed in secrecy but in a "fog of controversy ". And the program has indeed gained in popularity over the years. If it wasn't I suspect your party would have a much easier time trying to replace it.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
Non-responsive. You first said they'd be blamed for doing nothing to repeal and replace and now you're answering my question by assuming they did/will repeal and replace.


I was responding to WB's hypothetical. Do you really think the GOP base would accept keeping Obamacare after how your party worked the issue over the years? I think they have to pass something. I know they're hypocrites but your party has plenty of voters that bought into it.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: M E M
They had a lot more town halls and transparency than the GOP is with their failed attempts.



I think even the Washington Post liberal media Factcheck site would dispute that. At one point when Democrats were debating Obamacare policy, they literally locked the doors of the meeting room to prevent Republicans from participating or even hearing their creation of Obamacare policy. As I've said repeatedly, Republicans offered a lot of suggestions and tried to participate, but were completely shut out and ignored. And as a result, Republicans have no stake in preserving Obamacare.

I would agree that I don't want to see Republicans similarly shut out Democrats in a replacement healthcare bill. But Obamacare is destructive and has to be completely repealed.
A replacement bill has to:
1) Not have a mandate where you are forced to buy it against your will.
2) It has to be private care, with reforms that incentivize competition that lowers prices, such as allowing insurance to be sold across state lines, and allowing individuals to pool insurance to let individuals get lower rates.


 Originally Posted By: M E M
There wasn't even a token attempt at bipartisanship with you guys either. Pelosi was just saying that with time the benefits of the bill would become apparent. It wasn't passed in secrecy but in a "fog of controversy ". And the program has indeed gained in popularity over the years. If it wasn't I suspect your party would have a much easier time trying to replace it.


I want Republicans to be as inclusive as possible, and one person I definitely want them to include is Sen. Manchin (D-WV), possibly the only moderate left in the Democrat party. But I do want Republicans to be inclusive of Democrat ideas in the replacement bill.

But aside from Sen. Manchin, I haven't heard one Democrat say they would be on board for repeal of Obamacare, and it has to happen, it is collapsing (which was ALWAYS THE PLAN, see Jonathan Gruber above), to deceitfully create a system that was designed to collapse that would require a federal bailout and become a federal-entitlement single payer system, like that of Canada or the U.K. (i.e., rationed care, i.e., diminished quality of care, as we are already seeing).

I don't buy what you said about Pelosi. It is a fact that Democrats voted to create Obamacare without even reading the legislation they voted on, it is a fact that they used a calculated web of deceptions to ram it through. It is a fact that 53% OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC OPPOSED ITS PASSING, AND THAT NUMBER ACTUALLY GREW TO 56% IN THE YEARS AFTER ITS PASSAGE.
It is a fact that the CBO estimated that 25 million would enroll for Obamacare, and currently only 10 million are utilizing it, and tens of millions of others were forced to lose the private care they were perfectly happy with.
It is a fact that Obamacare, that was touted to lower insurance costs, has actually raised costs an average of over $3,000 per person.

The only people who are happy with Obamacare are the ones who are being subsidized and not picking up the tab.
50% of people making less than $50,000 a year have opted to pay the penalty for not purchasing the mandated Obamacare insurance --THE VERY LOW INCOME PEOPLE OBAMACARE WAS ALLEGEDLY CREATED TO HELP!

And needless to say, the loss of jobs and loss of full time work that Obamacare has created, stifling economic growth.

So... I don't buy that Obamacare is "more popular" now. People despise it. The only reservation is what to replace it with.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Was the Passage of Obamacare Just as Secretive as GOP Efforts to Repeal It?

This covers every metric you can to measure transparency.

WB I do hope you get better cheaper insurance but it isn't looking good.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Was the Passage of Obamacare Just as Secretive as GOP Efforts to Repeal It?

This covers every metric you can to measure transparency.

WB I do hope you get better cheaper insurance but it isn't looking good.



I don't see any attempt to interview Republicans to explain why they began conceiving the bill the way they did with "just 13 Republican Senators behind closed doors" as is alleged. This looks like an editorial hit-piece disguised as a "factcheck" to me, it only gives one point of view.

One part of it that doesn't pass the smell test for me:
 Quote:
Another tool intended to promote transparency and open governance is an independent audit of the financial ramifications of a bill by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). While numerous bills eventually coalesced into what became the ACA, the CBO provided numerous reports on multiple aspects of the law ahead of its vote in the Senate.


The CBO has been criticized for having a liberal bias. They have been criticized for giving more speculatively bad numbers to Republican bills, while on Obamacare (or ACA), for example, they projected optimistically low numbers, that just since late 2013 when Obamacare launched, have been more than double what the CBO projected it would cost!

I suspect Republicans (in the initial phases of drafting repeal/replace healthcare legislation) wanted to draft it among themselves to get their ducks in a row before they went public with it. Because they know as soon as anything is announced it will be picked apart unfairly by the 80% liberal media (93% liberal among Washington reporters). Remember what happened with Paul Ryan's announced plan to save Medicaid. Its details were picked apart and demagogued by Democrats in the year or so before the 2012 election.

That said, certainly (as I already said in posts above) I want Republicans to set a better example, and when their bill comes to a vote (which it hasn't yet) I want it to be fully available for public view, online and elsewhere, before the vote. I want the Republicans to get it done right, not just done fast. And to set a better example than the Democrats.

But since the Republicans haven't gotten to the floor yet for a vote, I think this Snopes hit-piece isn't a fair comparison to the Republican efforts. Snopes also doesn't address the blatant dishonesty of depending on "the stupidity of the American voter", "if you like your healthcare plan you can keep your healthcare plan", and "you have to pass it to see what's in it". Since none of these aspects can be spun with a liberal bias by Snopes, they are selectively ignored.

And I don't recall any votes by House and Senate Republicans held over weekends of Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's, the way Democrats rammed through Obamacare when the voters weren't watching.




Also:

Just sayin'.





  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
The CBO gets criticized by some republicans if they don't like the results other times if they do like them they cite them. Same thing with the news/media or fact checks. Other than attacking the sources what do you have that shows the GOP being more transparent in passing healthcare now?


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
The CBO gets criticized by some republicans if they don't like the results other times if they do like them they cite them. Same thing with the news/media or fact checks.


In other words, in many ways they treat news and polls just like the Democrats, citing the sources that support their position, or citing the factual errors or biases of the sources that attack them. I see the Republicans more often citing the facts.

 Originally Posted By: M E M
Other than attacking the sources what do you have that shows the GOP being more transparent in passing healthcare now?


I think I've been vocal about my dissatisfaction with the Republican healthcare efforts. I'd like to see them vote on what they passed when Obama was president (and Obama predictably vetoed it). I've made it clear I want them to demonstrate a level of openness, posting the bill online and publicly for review well before the vote, when a bill is eventually put up for a vote, that the Democrats never did in 2010.

But that said, the party that said it depends on the "stupidity of the American voter" (Gruber), "if you like your plan you can keep your plan" (Obama, voted by a factcheck site as the lie of the year!), and "You have to pass it to see what's in it" (Pelosi) has absolutely no claim on truth, or on moral superiority, when its legislation of Obamacare was so blatantly deceitful.



  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Actually I would argue that in the case of sources I see you and other conservatives attacking a source if you don't like the information coming out. The CBO for example was good enough for conservatives to cite when the dems were passing Obamacare. I don't remember dems trashing the whole department because it gave the GOP ammunition. I'm pretty sure you probably even used them when it's findings were useful.

Do you have any metrics to present showing the GOP being more transparent?


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man

Do you have any metrics to present showing the GOP being more transparent?


Washington Post: Obama promised transparency. But his administration is one of the most secretive

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
The gripe there was he wasn't doing more interviews with reporters. The writer doesn't offer any numbers between Obama and previous Presidents to back up their headline. And these days reporters must be longingly looking at those days as Trump attacked the press on his first day and now cameras are not allowed at press briefings. Is there any measure that Trump is actually more transparent than past Presidents?


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29


Certainly during the campaign, Trump was one of the most interviewed and accessible presidential candidates in history.

Trump has done quite a few interviews and press conferences in his first 6 months as well. And he is at exactly 6 months right now.

But if Trump WERE to limit his press conference appearances, who could blame him? Never before has the press so obviously been hostile to a president, and tried at every turn tried to distort his message to bring down his presidency. In that environment, who could blame him for controlling the message.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
So his being less transparent is a matter of the media's fault?


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man

Do you have any metrics to present showing the GOP being more transparent?


Washington Post: Obama promised transparency. But his administration is one of the most secretive




 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
The gripe there was he wasn't doing more interviews with reporters.


Obama administration sets new record for withholding FOIA requests:

  • The Obama administration set a record again for censoring government files or outright denying access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press.

    The government took longer to turn over files when it provided any, said more regularly that it couldn’t find documents and refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy.

    It also acknowledged in nearly 1 in 3 cases that its initial decisions to withhold or censor records were improper under the law — but only when it was challenged.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29


Interesting also that a Clinton Foundation attorney was appointed to Meuller's "independent" special investigation committee, whose job for the Clinton Foundation was precisely to obstruct those FOIA requests:

Special counsel team members donated to Dems, FEC records show

 Quote:
Only about 30% of the donations were for elections in 2016. But Quarles and Jeannie Rhee, who also left WilmerHale to work on the Russia probe, gave the maximum contribution of $2,700 to Clinton's campaign last year.

Rhee was the second-largest donor among Mueller's known team. Rhee has donated more than $16,000 since 2008, all to Democrats. She maxed out to the Clinton campaign in 2016 and 2015, totaling $5,400. She also gave a total of $7,300 to Obama's two presidential campaigns. She has already received attention for representing the Clinton Foundation in a racketeering lawsuit brought by a conservative advocacy group, and also represented Clinton herself in a lawsuit seeking access to her private emails.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man

Do you have any metrics to present showing the GOP being more transparent?


Washington Post: Obama promised transparency. But his administration is one of the most secretive




 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
The gripe there was he wasn't doing more interviews with reporters.


Obama administration sets new record for withholding FOIA requests:

  • The Obama administration set a record again for censoring government files or outright denying access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press.

    The government took longer to turn over files when it provided any, said more regularly that it couldn’t find documents and refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy.

    It also acknowledged in nearly 1 in 3 cases that its initial decisions to withhold or censor records were improper under the law — but only when it was challenged.


He did try to address this on his way out but yeah it was disappointing that in that measure he continued the trend of less foi requests. I suspect Trump will be far less transparent though. Right at the beginning he wouldn't release his taxes and hiding the amount of golfing, press accessibility and visitor logs for example.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: iggy
Ironic statement about the Trump administration not repealing Obamacare


Uh huh. Now who do you think is taking the blame for it? Trump or congress?

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
Senate Rejects Straight Repeal of Obamacare

 Quote:
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans delivered another blow in their effort to dismantle the Affordable Care Act when they failed to pass a repeal of the Obama-era law on Wednesday afternoon.

The vote, which is one of many expected during the ongoing health care debate, only garnered the support of 45 Republicans, short of the 50-votes necessary.

Sens. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., Susan Collins, R-Maine, Dean Heller, R-Nev., and John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rob Portman, R-Ohio, Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and surprisingly Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., the chair of the Senate Health Committee, joined all Democrats in voting against it. The defeat eliminates the chances of Congress sending a nearly-full repeal of the law to President Donald Trump to sign.

"I don’t think Tennesseans would be comfortable canceling insurance for 22 million Americans, and trusting Congress to find a replacement in two years," Alexander said in a statement after the vote referring to the repeal bill that would have gone into effect in two years. "Pilots like to know where they’re going to land when they take off, and we should too."

The vote was contrary to a seven-year long campaign promise by most Republicans to repeal Obamacare — a point noted by some Republicans. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., criticized his colleagues for not passing the measure.

"Today’s vote is a major disappointment to people who were promised full repeal. We still have a long, long way to go — both in health policy and in honesty," Sasse wrote in a statement.

It was their second effort to dismantle the current health care law in as many days. Their first attempt to undo the Obama-era law with a vote to partially repeal and replace Obamacare, also failed to pass Tuesday night.

Wednesday's vote was on the same measure that passed both the House and the Senate in 2015 and was vetoed by President Barack Obama.

Conservatives enthusiastically voted for it, but some Republicans, especially moderates, are concerned that it would leave too many people without insurance. They would prefer to have something to replace it with, but Republicans have so far been unable to reach agreement on the details of how to do that. Just 43 Republicans voted for the most recent version of the Senate replacement bill Tuesday night.

The Senate will now move on to vote on a series of amendments on individual health care reform measures. Those that pass would then likely be cobbled together into a bill, known as a “skinny” repeal.

“The end game is to be able to move something at the end of this process across the senate floor that can get 50 votes and get it to conference with the House,” said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.

Leaders think the end product will likely include a repeal of the tax on medical devices, something that even Democrats don’t like. And GOP leaders hope it will also include a repeal of the mandates that require individuals and employers to purchase insurance.

But Democrats are putting on the full-court press to try and stop even a slimmed-down version of repeal to pass.

While Republicans are trying to figure out what their next iteration of a bill is, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that Democrats would not offer any amendments during the rest of the health care debate until Republicans unveiled their proposal.

"Once the majority leader shows his hand, reveals what his bill will actually be, Democrats will use our opportunity to try to amend the bill," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "But we have to see it first. And we ought to see it soon, in broad daylight, not at the 11th hour. Until we see the real bill, Democrats will offer no further amendments."

Democrats also requested an analysis from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office of what they think the "skinny repeal" might consist of. The CBO says under the plan 16 million people would lose health insurance and premiums would rise 20 percent.

They also released a letter from a bipartisan group of 10 governors urging Republicans to reject the modified repeal.

"We agree with Senator John McCain that the Senate should 'return to regular order' working across the aisle to 'provide workable solutions to problems Americans are struggling with today," the governors, including Republicans John Kasich of Ohio and Brian Sandoval of Nevada, wrote.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump continues to publicly pressure Republicans. He singled out Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, in an early morning tweet for voting against yesterday's motion to proceed with the debate. Murkowski joined Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, as the only two Republicans to oppose that vote.

Murkowski defended her vote, saying she did what she though was best for Alaska. She said that despite the president seemingly threatening her re-election.

“I am in an position where I'm not looking to a reelection until 2022. That's a long time away. And quite honestly I don't think it's wise to be operating on a daily basis thinking about what a statement or a response that causes you to be fearful of your electoral prospects,” Murkowski told NBC News.

While Republican leaders have been telling their members that a final bill could be worked out in conference with the House of Representatives, two aides said that conference is the least preferable route and is only one of several options.

A conference committee presents a challenge for Republicans because Democrats would be included and would be able to raise objections and slow down the process.

Other options include an informal conference that doesn't include Democrats where Republicans would work out a bill. Another option is for the House to take up whatever the Senate ends up passing, but some members might object to this idea because senators are being told they can get a broader bill in conference.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said that he is expecting a much more comprehensive bill to come out of conference.

"If it's just a skinny bill ... that will not be success. We're not going to trick our constituents," Graham said.

But others are worried about a conference committee, including Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah. Conn Carroll, his spokesman, said that Lee is worried about the outcome of a bill that could be written in conference.

A House leadership aide said that it's too early to determine a path forward because the Senate hasn't yet passed anything.

The House appears divided on the next steps, too.

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said there's "zero chance" a "skinny" repeal could pass in the House. He said that conference is the only option.

But Rep. Tom MacArthur, R-N.J., a moderate who played a major role in passing the House health care bill, said conference will be "a challenge."

"We had enough trouble getting it out of the House, they’ve had enough trouble getting it out of the Senate. I am not sure how it gets simpler if you put everyone together," MacArthur said.


As I've stated before, I don't much like the ACA. It was largely penned by insurance-sector representatives and does very little to mitigate actual cost, instead hiding it behind subsidies - much of which winds up in the pockets of insurers. I would like to see a solution that addresses the real problems of cost without stranding millions of citizens without coverage or placing obstacles before those with pre-existing conditions. That didn't happen, so this attempt to simply get rid of the ACA without an alternative took place. It failed because of extensive citizen action as well as the objections of individuals like the governor of my state, where there's a large population of seniors with chronic health issues as well as an epidemic of opioid abuse, meaning Ohio would be hit tremendously hard by the removal of a coverage safety net - even one as flawed as the ACA - without an alternative.

What needs to happen now is bipartisan, cooperative action. I'm aware the ACA was decidedly not a bipartisan piece of legislation, the AHCA less so. I'm sick to death of the demands for "ideological purity" from both extremes. No less a free-market proponent than Friedrich Hayek advocated a nationalized healthcare system, and while I don't think it'd be necessary to go that far, we can do a lot better than this. There are innumerable opportunities to cut wasteful government spending than in the health sector - you wanna talk about egregious private-sector subsidies, go see what Boeing and GM are up to. At any rate, I'm hoping legislators realize the best solution for everyone - even the folks who didn't vote for them - will be somewhere in between, and we can address tort reform and other factors directly impacting the actual cost instead of lobbyist-approved sleight-of-hand involving the perceived price.

Last edited by Captain Sammitch; 2017-07-27 12:54 PM. Reason: emphasis added to article

go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Yeah it will have to be bipartisan but where is the middle ground for both sides to move towards? I can't see the Dems supporting anything that leaves more people without healthcare.


Fair play!
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
iggy Offline OP
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
OP Offline
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: iggy
Ironic statement about the Trump administration not repealing Obamacare


Uh huh. Now who do you think is taking the blame for it? Trump or congress?


Ummm...both sides are getting blamed for it fairly equally outside of the pro-Trump bubble, Pariahmod!

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: iggy
Ummm...both sides are getting blamed for it fairly equally outside of the pro-Trump bubble, Pariahmod!


By whom? Or are you still assuming that the msm represents the people?

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
If it had passed wouldn't rump have taken the credit? Rhetorical question, lol


Fair play!
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
iggy Offline OP
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
OP Offline
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: iggy
Ummm...both sides are getting blamed for it fairly equally outside of the pro-Trump bubble, Pariahmod!


By whom? Or are you still assuming that the msm represents the people?


Yes...save this post for when Trump wins by a very clear majority and I'll give you that the MSM's and my belief in where the people are and who represents them is completely wrong. Until then, you are daft and I wish you well working through this stage of your life. You aren't the first. You won't be the last. Just don't get stuck there in fringeville.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
Beyond the insults, precisely what is it you're trying to say, Iggy? On topic, that is.

You're just hurling insults without saying anything lucid.

Trump won in an electoral landslide. The mainstream media (MSM) got it wrong in virtually every poll.
Democrats, with aid of the mainstream media, have tried to circumnavigate the election with every dirty trick possible, and when that failed, they moved on to the "Russian collusion" narrative.

Trump is still a nationalist who is trying to secure our borders, lower taxes, reduce federal regulation, rebuild our military, and create economic growth. For all your insults, Trump is largely doing all those things. Despite the occasional wrong move or twitter outburst.
The stock market has risen 20% in Trump's first 6 months.
Illegal immigration is down by 70%, what other president has ever done that?

No administration is error-free. But Trump is doing a lot right.
Even Mexico has acknowledged that far less illegals are entering Mexico now, because they know they won't be able to cross the North Mexican border into the U.S., and many are choosing not to even make the attempt.

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
If it had passed wouldn't rump have taken the credit? Rhetorical question, lol


If it, or the previous bill, had passed. Trump would be fucked.

He knew that neither of them would, though. And that's the point. People don't want the bill weakened. They want it destroyed.

Getting congress to vote on multiple bills allows Trump to expose its principle proponents and profiteers while putting the blame for the failure to take action almost exclusively on the senate.

Inevitably, it will be Trump to take all the glory when he finally uses executive action to do away with it under the auspices of an obstructionist congress that bears nothing but contempt for the people.

 Originally Posted By: iggy
Yes.


[INSERT LOL EMOTICON HERE]

We both know you don't believe that. If you were convinced that Trump were a principally unpopular figure, then you would have been professing his toxicity prior to the election. But aside from the occasional Iggian snide remark that neither affirms nor denies anything, you kept your mouth shut all the way up to the election.

Now that the media and friends are desperate to destroy Trump by any means necessary--and you now have extra incentive to virtue-signal from within the liberal-infested college culture--none of their claims are too "fringe" for you to embrace, and everything they say is a reflection of the people's beliefs. What you refuse to acknowledge however, is that Hillary wasn't the populist candidate. Trump was.

As I already told you in the past: We are Rome. Stop thinking that you can parade the narrative as an argument and continue to get away with it. The days when those tactics were effective died when Trump was elected.

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
iggy Offline OP
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
OP Offline
Society's Discontent
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,040
Likes: 24
Honestly, I think Trump stands a good chance of losing the momentum the markets have had since his win in November and it could hit with an equities market correction that is long overdue. Another issue is that the gains still aren't really kickstarting wage growth that needs to move along with it. Also, keep an eye on the growing divide between selling and buying of stocks. Selling is starting to drift ahead of buying in a bad way.

That said, I'll give him that the market is gangbusters at the moment and that July jobs numbers did a lot to correct after June dipped and April/May were readjusted down.

Also, let's think about the idea that he wants Obamacare to implode. Something that could put a large swath of the economy in the tank. Sure, you can point and say it was Obama's fault but there is also a good chance people are going to say it happened under your watch and you cheered it on.

Think how much more "winning" could be going on right now if he actually governed as opposed to tweetingstorming for his sycophantic base. And, hey, cool if getting Kelly as CoS may be the first move toward this.

Lastly, 46.1% of the electorate went for Trump. I do not believe that is representative of the majority of the people. He hits 50% in 2020 and I'll call it a mandate.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29

Iggy, every poll I've seen says that Trump would win by a larger margin than he did back in November 2016. And that the Democrats would lose more House and Senate seats. Whatever mis-steps, that is what the polls say.

And as G-man frequently points out, Bill Clinton won with 43% of the vote, and yet TIME magazine (at that time a relatively conservative publication) called it a "mandate to govern".

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
I have a suspicion that eventually Trump is going to decide to support single-payer.

Trump used to be a democrat. His children/top advisors were democrats. During the campaign Trump expressed support for a Canadian-style "socialized" healthcare system (before backing off when he realized that was an antithesis to the average GOP primary voter).

I have a bad feeling that, at some point, Trump is going to be frustrated enough to let Ivanka and company whisper in his ear that this could be his great legacy and he's going to join forces with Schumer and Pelosi and any "moderate" republicans he can to bring us "Medicare for all."

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29

If so, that would be the ultimate betrayal, for the majority of us who voted for him. Along with border security and de-regulation/tax reduction to stimulate business growth and jobs creation, repeal of Obamacare was among his firmest campaign issues, I think the one that got him the most votes. A majority really hate Obamacare, the mandate, the high cost, and its suppression of business and hiring.

In the last round, it only lost by 3 Senate votes, I don't see that as insurmountable. I hope you're not right on this one.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,233
Likes: 15
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..."
15000+ posts
Offline
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..."
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,233
Likes: 15
Originally Posted by Pariah
Trump will win in a landslide both in the popular vote and the electoral college.


"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?"

[center][Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com] [/center]

[center][Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com][/center]

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5