Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

House Passes Trumpcare

House Passes Trumpcare

Barely…

The House voted to repeal Obamacare Thursday afternoon. And by a slim vote — 217 to 213, the American Healthcare Act passed.

Prior to the final tally being read aloud, some legislatures began singing:

The bill now heads to the Senate where as Politico reports, “Republicans have expressed deep reservations about it.”

Senate Majority Leader McConnell responded to the bill’s passage saying:

“Obamacare has failed the American people and must be repealed and replaced. Today’s vote in the House was an important step. We are now closer to giving our constituents freedom from the increased costs, diminishing choices, and broken promises of Obamacare. I want to congratulate Speaker Ryan, his leadership team, the Republicans who supported this legislation, and President Trump and Vice President Pence for a job well done.

“As Congress considers this legislation, the administration will continue working to deliver relief and stabilize health markets, and Congress will continue to act on legislation to provide more choices and freedom in health care decisions.

“The status quo is unacceptable. The pain caused by Obamacare is real for millions of Americans. We must repeal and replace this failed law.”

The bill stripped most funding from Planned Parenthood.

Life News reports:

The pro-life bill would eliminate more than $390 million (over 86%) of over $450 million in annual federal funding to Planned Parenthood, from all mandatory spending programs. The measure also redirects funding to community health centers which outnumber Planned Parenthood facilities 20 to 1 and offer a wider array of health care services, but not abortion. AHCA also repeals Obamacare abortion subsidies, adds reforms to give states more flexibility and lower costs, and provides families more options.

It’s up to Congressional Republicans and the White House to undo the damage caused by the ACA.

Seeing as the vote immediately preceding the Obamacare repeal vote was to exempt Congress from their own health insurance legislation, I remain fairly skeptical of what lies ahead.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

buckeyeminuteman | May 4, 2017 at 2:39 pm

Repeal has been preached for the last 7 years by the GOP. I never heard of repeal and replace until this past fall. We’ve been duped again…shame on us.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to buckeyeminuteman. | May 4, 2017 at 2:44 pm

    They are Lucy, we’re Charlie Brown, and the campaign promises are looking very much like a football.

    The freedom caucus tanked the bill a month ago, holding out for a better deal.

    In the meantime, Trump started breaking promises left and right (starting April 6) and signed the Democrat’s budget. So, the freedom caucus realized that, contra rhetoric, Trump isn’t on their side and passed a bill that is the best that they will get.

UnCivilServant | May 4, 2017 at 2:39 pm

I’m not seeing a repeal. I’m seeing a joke, and it’s on us.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to UnCivilServant. | May 4, 2017 at 2:45 pm

    It’s just a name change. A four door Lincoln was called a Continental for years; the name was changed to Town Car. Still the same thing: a Lincoln.

      Tom Servo in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | May 4, 2017 at 3:23 pm

      I’m not gonna argue that this was a particularly good bill, or that anything like what passed today will pass the senate.

      But while I was originally for repeal, I had to recognize – like those who voted for that bill today – that pure repeal is no longer possible. That’s why the original passage of Obamacare was such a tragedy, it changed the playing field forever. Too many employer plans have been dumped, too many insurance programs have been changed, too many people have been cut out of any kind of insurance other than this, during the course of the last 7 years. We can’t ever go back to the way it was, it just isn’t possible anymore.

      I don’t think this plan will work that much. Honestly, I am beginning to think that health care has been wrecked so completely that we really will be left with no option in the end other then a single payer (ie, government run) health care system. Face it, for anyone over 65, and anyone who’s low income, and for children, and for the disabled, and basically for anyone who doesn’t work for a living, we’re already there already.

        Liz in reply to Tom Servo. | May 4, 2017 at 3:55 pm

        I’m glad that they passed something. I didn’t bother to read this draft since it is going to be changed in the Senate and then in reconciliation. It’s going to look very different, if anything else gets passed.

        tom swift in reply to Tom Servo. | May 4, 2017 at 4:03 pm

        we really will be left with no option in the end other then a single payer (ie, government run) health care system.

        That’s not an option. A government system won’t be anything resembling “health care”, it will be an insult, like the VA hospital system. The government controls that completely—there’s no way to blame anyone else—and it’s a disgrace.

        At least we can show some respect for the English language, and call any such program “Health Disaster”.

      Connivin Caniff in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | May 4, 2017 at 4:11 pm

      This ain’t no Lincoln.

Republicans never fail to disappoint.
What happened today is downright shameful, and Paul Ryan just became the new Nancy Pelosi.

    Although, in a fit of TOTAL cluelessness, Pelosi came out and said that the result of this bill will be “tattooed on the foreheads” of everyone who voted for it.

    Coming from Ms. “We-Have-To-Pass-It-To-Find-Out-What’s-In-It”, that’s pretty damn rich.

JackRussellTerrierist | May 4, 2017 at 2:59 pm

Well, hubby and I wrote in Ted Cruz last November. News of late suggests that was a good call, notwithstanding the overwhelming, gullible hillbilly vote that went for Trump bigly in the primary.

I hope every last one of them loses their coverage.

    You and your spouse threw your votes away in favor of a Hillary Presidency. Cruz is a regional niche candidate with no chance to beat Hillary in national contest.

    So you think the people who voted for Trump are stupid hillbillies (and you and your spouse are part of the elitist “smart” crowd by inference). Why don’t you just call Trump supporters “deplorables”. You know that’s what you really want to say.

      Same Same in reply to garybritt. | May 4, 2017 at 4:14 pm

      When I think of all the RINOs who owe their careers to this idiotic reasoning, I start to wonder if people like you aren’t a bigger problem than the Dems.

        Liz in reply to Same Same. | May 4, 2017 at 4:27 pm

        I have always voted the the most conservative & reasonable candidate for the job (Mayor, state Reps & Senators, Federal Rep, Sen, Prez, etc) but my choices sometimes did not make it to the finals. So, I’ve voted for the best of the rest.

        I voted for Cruz in the primaries and was really frustrated with friends who were for Trump. But, once Trump was the candidate, I voted for him over Hillary.

        Go call your senators & rep to give them your opinion – I know that I’ll be calling mine.

        I am a conservative. I’ve been one all my life. It does not make me a RINO to recognize that Cruz couldn’t beat Trump and that means he would get killed by Hillary in national election.

        Also, in the 30 years since Reagan and seeing how the globalist chamber of commerce brand of conservatism has destroyed the middle class and blue color jobs in this country, I began to realize that pure conservatism as in pure free trade without worrying about FAIR TRADE is crazy and not good for the country. That doesn’t make me a RINO. It makes me a realist and a conservative/nationalist anti-globalist.

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 4, 2017 at 8:40 pm

          “This election isn’t about conservative principles”.

          Gary (The Liar) Britt.

          You are no more a “conservative” than is T-rump, your man-crush.

          Yes I stated many times the reality of this election that it was not about which candidate was the most conservative. Usually in response to one of yours or fuzzy’s scribes about Cruz being the pure and perfect conservative as though that was all one needed to know. Sort of the GOP equivalent to Hillary’s vote for me I have a vaginal reasoning.

          I was right and you were a wrong headed windage with a child’s demeanor and a potty mouth.

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 5, 2017 at 9:09 am

          No. You were wrong, as is being proven virtually every day.

          And you lied and lie constantly.

          Nobody every portrayed Cruz as “perfect”. We just knew your Great God Cheeto for the false-flag fraud he is.

          You came so close to admitted it a few days ago. But you just reverted into your craven crouch before your cult leader.

          Disgusting.

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 5, 2017 at 10:29 am

          rags wrote:
          Nobody every portrayed Cruz as “perfect”.

          Tell us rags, where was Ted less than perfect? What failures to adhere to (your definition of) strict conservative doctrine do you find acceptable?

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 5, 2017 at 8:31 pm

          Post an instance where Fuzzy or I…or ANY Cruz supporter…asserted his “perfection”, VAPigman.

          Go ahead…

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 5, 2017 at 10:11 pm

          rags,
          I’m agreeing with you – Ted is not perfect. I asked which of his imperfections you were willing to overlook to vote for him. The question is not about Ted’s imperfection, but yours. Where are you willing to deviate from conservative dogma?

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 7:53 am

          What a monumentally stupid question.

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 9:17 am

          rags,
          It’s not at all a stupid question. It follows logically from your behavior on LI the last 6 months and your admission in this thread that you too were willing to vote for a less than perfect candidate. For the last 6 months you have been relentless in your attacks on the intelligence and integrity of Trump and those who voted for him. The slightest deviation from conservative orthodoxy is met by you with with a barrage of personal attacks (“T-rump suckers”,”POS”, and other epithets), and claims that they are not conservatives. Since the election you self proclaim your (supposed) superior intelligence and conservative integrity with a barrage of “toldja”s. You judged us and found us unworthy; guilty of being duped, of selling out, of not remaining true to the principles of conservativism. But now you’re a self admitted whore, willing to sell out some of your conservative ‘principles’ in the name of political expediency in the form of Cruz. So it’s fair to ask of the man who claims, as you do, that he is worthy to judge the rest of us – by what standard? Just what are you selling out? How far will you go? How far can one deviate from conservative orthodoxy and still be a ‘principled’ conservative? Are you fit to be the judge you claim to be, or are you a sinner reaching above his station?

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 9:57 am

          We should all refer to you as Mr. Bell & Howell, you are such a projector.

          You are not any part of a “conservative” or you could not use a term as stupid and false as “conservative dogma”. You are a Gary Britt level liar.

          Nor could you embrace the idea of “some socialism” to provide for the “pre-existing” via the central government, as you do down-thread.

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 10:32 am

          rags,
          So, you’re a conservative and I’m not. End of discussion. Got it.

          Thank you. In one succinct reply you managed to prove every point I made.

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 8:25 pm

          You never approach making a point.

          You just smear like a true Stalinist ThoughtPolicing goon.

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 8:53 pm

          You just keep digging.

          LMAO!

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 6, 2017 at 9:39 pm

          …and you keep on hallucinating.

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 7, 2017 at 6:44 am

          The nice thing about our little discussion is that the days are gone when you could pretend to be pure as Caesar’s wife. You’ve been strutting your stuff with your nose in the air, telling all the girls that you wasn’t no cheap ho like them. Now we all know that you were willing to put out for a John named Ted. You were Cruisin’ for Cruz!

          It could be interesting the next time the Cruz-bitch calls someone a T-rump sucker.

          rags-the-ho is pure no mo.

          Life on LI just got more interesting.

          Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | May 7, 2017 at 7:54 am

          You are seriously sick, VA Pigman.

          And that won’t even work in you diseased “mind”.

          You’ve exposed yourself as just another Collectivist stooge, and not via some twisted logic of mine, but your own words, Mr. “A Little Socialism Is OK”.

          Heh…!!!

          VaGentleman in reply to garybritt. | May 8, 2017 at 7:11 am

          rags-the-ho,

          So, you’re a conservative and I’m not. End of discussion. Got it.

          Thank you. In one succinct reply you managed to prove every point I made.

          (Have we had this discussion before?)

          You misquote me as: Mr. “A Little Socialism Is OK”.

          Well, here’s a challenge for you. I doubt you will take it up, but let’s see. You rebuke me because I said:
          As a society, we have to decide if we want to provide coverage to those who the free market rejects. I think that we have already determined that we want to. That’s going to inject a certain amount of socialism into the free market. What congress is trying to decide is how much and how.

          You rejected that.
          You claimed then: The free market has “rejected” nobody.
          You now add that any socialism in the market is a bad thing.

          So, my challenge for you: Take this case – a 40 yr old male, married w/ 2 teen age kids. He and the kids are healthy, wife has MS. He’s been out of work for 2 years and his COBRA is expired and he has run through the 6mo expenses he had in savings. He’s drained his retirement fund to keep the (upside down) mortgage current, and he’s now broke with only a $300/wk unemployment check. Explain specifically (not generalities or slogans, but practical steps) how he gets health insurance coverage under your proposed ‘free market only’ system. (This is an example, but the underlying question really is ‘how do those without the $ to buy into the market at the market’s price point get coverage’?)

          I don’t think you can do it. I don’t see a way that a pure free market deals with this case or the millions like it. Free market is the best system we know of, but it isn’t perfect. How does this guy get health coverage under your system? Or do you just write him off?

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to garybritt. | May 4, 2017 at 6:11 pm

      Not really, gary. We live in a DEEP red state and Trump was way ahead. We had the luxury of voting for whomever we wanted to.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to garybritt. | May 4, 2017 at 6:25 pm

      Far too many of the people around here are uneducated, ignorant of how systems and institutions work or, in many cases, even exist, and know zip zilch nada about the outside world.

      They are the most willfully ignorant people I’ve ever seen. They don’t prosper and they don’t advance. They’re the laziest, most incompetent POS I’ve ever had the misfortune of knowing. All they do is stuff their fat, gooey, potato faces with their pudgy fingers and watch TV or play video games. Their living is EBT and petty drug sales. They’re a bunch of losers.

        Where the heck do you live?

        You comment that you live in a deep red state but everyone is an idiot. Specifically…”the most willfully ignorant people I’ve ever seen. They don’t prosper and they don’t advance. They’re the laziest, most incompetent POS I’ve ever had the misfortune of knowing.”

        Those comments don’t seem to go with each other…I would think that the lazy people would be voting for the best deal that they could get and that would be from the Ds.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Liz. | May 4, 2017 at 7:25 pm

          It’s a southern state. The druggies around here don’t vote. The bible-thumpers have always voted red, and always will……because they always have. That same mindset that consistently benefits conservatives is the same mindset that rules all their actions and thought…because “that’s the way we’ve always done it.”

          These people are unhealthy, uneducated, unmotivated, uninspired and have very low standards and expectations. No large businesses will ever come here, no matter how much improvement we see elsewhere, because there is no skilled labor to draw on. They will never be more than what they are now, which is losers.

          To be blunt, they are to the ‘pub party what blacks are to ‘rats – political party plantation dwellers.

          You said, “I would think that the lazy people would be voting for the best deal that they could get and that would be from the Ds.” One doesn’t have to be a loser to vote ‘pub, right? 🙂

    Cruz wasn’t going to win against Clinton – nor against the GOPe.

    If you can’t fathom the size of the bullet we dodged by Trump beating Clinton, reconsider the situation.

      Anonamom in reply to TheFineReport.com. | May 4, 2017 at 5:31 pm

      Yep. And every time I read “Justice Gorsuch” and not “Justice Garland” I am glad that Pres. Trump beat Sen. Clinton.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Anonamom. | May 4, 2017 at 6:46 pm

        Trump only won in the sense that Hillary lost. Most or all of the other candidates, if elected, would have done his/her best to appoint constitutionalist justices, too. Gorsuch was not some magic genie that Trump pulled out of a bottle. Trump was counseled at great length in compiling the list. He was such a dubious and flaky candidate that he had to use that list to get votes, lol.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to TheFineReport.com. | May 4, 2017 at 6:36 pm

      I guess some are too stupid to grasp what I’m saying. There was no need for us to vote for someone we didn’t like because Trump was up almost 30 points over the corruptowitch.

      We like Cruz. We should vote for whom we please in a primary. We voted for Cruz in the primary, knowing it was going to be a Trump landslide. We wrote in Cruz in the general because it was going to be a Trump landslide. If the general had been close in our state, we would have held our noses and voted for Trump. But we didn’t have to.

      Get it? Or do you need a schematic decision tree?

        healthguyfsu in reply to JackRussellTerrierist. | May 4, 2017 at 10:47 pm

        If the freeriders don’t vote, who voted for Trump overwhelmingly in your state?

        And it’s not that I can’t comprehend if explained properly…however, you have rambled on in multiple posts making it a bit difficult to follow what you are responding to and exactly what you mean along the way.

        Please go back to whatever hellhole drug ridden state you came from.

        You’ll be happy and us stupid southerners will be happy.

        Same tune you always sing. Where did you come from that is such a paradise? And why the hell did you leave? And why don’t you go home?

RINO – Repeal In Name Only

This bill, in no sense, REPEALS Obamacare. THIS IS NOT ANY KIND OF A REPEAL BILL. The biggest problem with this bill is that it does nothing to address the root cause of overwhelming healthcare insurance costs, OVERWHELMING HEALTHCARE COSTS.

But, fear not. We’ll very likely never see any of this bill get into law during the next four years. This bill will simply die in the Congress until after the midterms. Then, depending upon what occurs in those elections, it could remain dead or be replaced by either a bill which will change a much greater portion of Obamacare or one which will change less. But large-scale government subsidized healthcare insurance is here to stay.

    snopercod in reply to Mac45. | May 4, 2017 at 4:35 pm

    The biggest problem with this bill is that it does nothing to address the root cause of overwhelming healthcare insurance costs

    That’s just not true. What this bill does is create “high-risk pool” which the states can use to create “insurance” (it’s really not) for those with pre-existing conditions. That in itself will allow insurance companies to lower rates. Secondly, it allows the states to determine what are and are not “essential” benefits which insurance companies must provide. No longer will men be forced to pay for maternity coverage. The best thing is that the Republicans respected the concept of federalism and left it up to each state whether they want to stay with Obamacare or opt out. The blue states will stay with it, of course, to their own detriment. This is only the first step.

      Close The Fed in reply to snopercod. | May 4, 2017 at 5:22 pm

      In Agreement with SnoperCod:

      For those ACTIVE PLAYERS:
      What this means is, if passed, the battle will pass to your STATE, will they finally get rid of the “Essential Health Benefits” so that insurers can offer plans with varying levels of benefits, and enable them offer a RANGE of medical insurance products, rather than only high-cost plans which cover everything.

      This means more variability in coverage, premiums and deductibles. This is essential.

      Now, what will states do? If you care, make sure you get involved and contact your state representative, by which I mean, find out who he is, where you can meet him, who is on the committees that writing insurance legislation and start pushing.

      Blue states might unwisely refuse to alter EHBs. Ultimately, I think they will, because customers will want to be able to buy a plan they can afford, and insurers will want to be able to sell a product people can afford to buy, and they can profit from, rather than lose money.

      It’s a start.

        I agree – it should be at a state level or states, if they decide to simplify things and get into insurance pools.

        I don’t need maternity care, pediatric dental and eye care or mental health care coverage. I need basic accident coverage as well as whatever ails older folks. Heck, I would even agree to a health exam to determine the cost to me for coverage.

        It seems like insurance is just a prepayment for part of the expense for healthcare. It is not true insurance.

        If I want to engage in risky behaviors which impact health (drinking, eating, unsafe sex, high risk sport activities), then I need to pay for those risks. If I watch my weight, exercise, get annual physicals, live a low risk life, then let me pay at that level. It works for auto insurance, well except for the $$ that I have to pay to cover uninsured motorists.

      Liz in reply to snopercod. | May 4, 2017 at 5:28 pm

      I was in a high risk pool but lost it because of Obamacare. My “sin” was that I got a blood clot in my 30’s. Never had an issue with that since then, but I was labeled a risk when I tried to get private insurance when I went self-employed.

      And, my rates have doubled since I was kicked out of the pool due to Obamacare. I have never cleared my deductible since my hospital visit in 1984. I will admit that I do get the benefit of the insurance company rate schedule, so I am not paying the suggested retail price for anything. But, my premiums are paying for someone!

      Mac45 in reply to snopercod. | May 5, 2017 at 12:39 pm

      As with most people, you segregate the costs of health insurance polices from the cost of health care. You can’t do that, as they are inexorably linked.

      Long before the ACA [Obamacare] ever appeared on the scene, the cost of medical care was rising at a rate 4 times that of inflation, on average. This rise in the cost of medical care is what drove the need for medical care insurance, to begin with, and what has driven up the cost of healthcare insurance ever since. All that the ACA did was accelerate the insurance increases by forcing the insurers to 1) provide premium plans for everyone and 2) allow healthcare providers to increase medical service charges as more people now had a guaranteed means of payment. The problem that Americans face with healthcare is not the cost of healthcare insurance, but the cost of healthcare services which make healthcare insurance necessary in the first place. And, that problem was heavily influenced by the guaranteed 3rd party payer system enacted by federal government in 1965, Medicare.

      All that the AHCA [Trumpcare} does is to shift the control of the healthcare insurance industry to the states, who are not any more likely to enact changes, while still providing huge levels of federal funding to the insurers. It does nothing to address the root of the problem, healthcare costs, directly. The biggest problem with the AHCA is that it was sold on a lie. People WILL lose their insurance policies. People will find themselves unable to pay for needed, long-term medical services. There will be no universal healthcare insurance and what is there will not be better or more affordable than what exists today. It is all a lie. But, the biggest lie of all is the one that this has any meaningful chance of being enacted into law. Just as with the the bills repealing the ACA which were vetoed by President Obama, this bill is politically safe, for Republicans, because it will not survive the process to pass in any meaningful manner.

All the problems with this bill are the result of the filibuster rule in the senate plus too many RINO liberals in the house and the senate.

“Seeing as the vote immediately preceding the Obamacare repeal vote was to exempt Congress from their own health insurance legislation, I remain fairly skeptical of what lies ahead.”

I think you’ve got that backwards.

While I appreciate the bill is not perfect, quite frankly I am thrilled.

1) There are a lot of Americans who have been scared by the Democrats scare tactics and the information presented by their media minions. As this gets implemented, and Americans discover that the scare-mongering was based on lies, they will be more supportive of further phases.

2) This shows that President Trump will continue working on behalf of the American people, no matter how many road-blocks put up by the Democrats, their media minions, and anti-Trump Republicans.

3) It affirms the key trajectory that is driving Trump’s presidency…hitting the “undo” button on everything Obama did. Because this portion has been “showy”, he has been able to accomplish quite a bit quietly:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447291/gop-regulatory-repeal-congress-reducing-red-tape

This win is more impressive for the fact President Trump is facing an opposition that will not negotiate in good faith. Part of the success of our constitutional model is reliance on representatives who are willing to concede and compromise for the good of the Republic. The Democratic Party #Resistance campaign, supported and heralded by the press, shows that they have tossed out the concept of negotiating in good faith entirely.

Mindful that this bill has to face #TheResistance in the Senate, this is probably as good as good have been achieved….FOR THIS PARTICULAR PHASE.

It looks like the Fourth was with Trump, on this Star Wars day!

    tom swift in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 4, 2017 at 4:07 pm

    reliance on representatives who are willing to concede and compromise for the good of the Republic.

    I don’t see a lot of good for the Republic in the collected works of Congress. Conceding and compromising for the good of themselves, now, that they have down solid.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 4, 2017 at 4:29 pm

    I’m neither thrilled nor throwing fuel on the fire. Trump has to work within the parameters of Congress. It’s not at all clear to me that a better bill could be had. So the only other choice was to let Obamacare implode, for which Trump and Republicans certainly would be blamed, or try at least to repeal as much as could be repealed and replace as much as could be replaced.

      snopercod in reply to William A. Jacobson. | May 4, 2017 at 4:38 pm

      Obamacare is still going to implode, but this bill throws a lifeline to the states that choose not to go down with the ship. (Sorry for the mixed metaphor.)

    nordic_prince in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 4, 2017 at 7:55 pm

    I sincerely hope you’re right. I’ve been busy today so I’ve not had time to peruse the details, but my wish list would include 1) repealing the #$#@^!# mandate, 2) opening up the market to competition by allowing individuals to purchase insurance across state lines, and 3) tax deductions for premium payments. Somehow I doubt any of these are on this bill.

some legislatures began singing:
**********************************
legislators maybe?
unless multiple state legislatures started singing LOL 🙂

Connivin Caniff | May 4, 2017 at 4:09 pm

All hail the Swamp.

Kemberlee: Thanks for the dumpster fire photo. I’ve missed that.

The democrats went down in flames because of a corrupt fool named Hillary Clinton.

We are going down in flames because of two corrupt fools, Ryan and McConnell.

The party is ours to take back, if we want it.

Until the political class, the media class and the voters come to understand that coverage for pre-existing conditions is anything but ‘insurance’, the entire present health care system is going over the cliff. The Republicans will only slow the rapid and ultimate conclusion, the fatal flaw if you will, that is requiring a company to cover pre-existing medical conditions.

    snopercod in reply to Redneck Law. | May 5, 2017 at 8:31 am

    I also think we need to clarify the term “pre-existing”. Obviously, if you have stage 4 pancreatic cancer, that’s a pre-existing condition and nobody in their right mind would sell you cancer insurance. But that kind of situation where a person has already developed a disease is not what we’re really talking about. Insurance companies play the odds (which is only good business of course) and deny insurance to people who are more likely to develop some condition in the future. Smokers, for example are more likely to develop a range of diseases, but haven’t developed them yet. If you’re overweight or (as Liz mentioned earlier) had some kind of episode in their youth, you may be more likely to develop problems in the future, so they won’t sell you insurance at all. If you have been diagnosed with Type II Diabetes, for example, you can forget about getting health insurance at any cost. Fibromyalgia is another of the many disqualifying conditions that insurance companies won’t touch. (These examples all refer to pre-Obamacare insurance, of course. Now they HAVE to sell you “insurance” regardless.)

    What I would like to see is customized individual insurance with the coverage and price based upon the actual risk. If you’re a smoker, for example, why couldn’t they sell you a policy that would exclude coverage for lung cancer, COPD, heart attack, and stroke, but cover you for everything else? If you have Type II Diabetes which is under control, why couldn’t insurance companies sell you insurance at increased cost to account for the additional risk?

Can Oregon keep their website?

Ragspierre | May 4, 2017 at 9:02 pm

“”Make no mistake, this is a repeal and a replace of Obamacare. Make no mistake about it.” – President Trump

That is a load of bullshit.

And there are many here trying to polish it.

Disgusting.

legalizehazing | May 4, 2017 at 10:01 pm

We’re going to have to pass it to see what’s in it. Hopefully this Easter egg is full of goodies not crap. I mean it can’t be worse right? Right?

If we can get this passed we can move onto tax reform and then an actual budget not a continuing resolution. Guy remember budgets?

VaGentleman | May 5, 2017 at 12:36 am

Americans for Tax Reform supports ACHA.
————–
http://www.atr.org/atr-statement-support-american-health-care-act

Congress will soon vote on the American Health Care Act (AHCA), legislation that repeals Obamacare and implements numerous reforms toward a system of patient-centered, free market healthcare.

Members of Congress should have no hesitation supporting and voting “YES” on the AHCA to begin the process of repealing Obamacare.

The AHCA makes important changes to entitlements, updates and improves HSAs and gives American middle class families and businesses important tax relief. It implements an efficient age-adjusted tax credit that is vastly superior to the existing credit and is not an entitlement. The legislation also begins the process of removing burdensome insurance regulations while leaving room for HHS Secretary Price to alleviate the burden of other regulations.

It is an excellent first step in implementing a healthcare system that works for all Americans.
——————

Americans for Tax Reform’s List of Obamacare Taxes Repealed:
———
http://www.atr.org/americans-tax-reform-will-rate-vote-ahca-hr-1628-0#top-about

The American Health Care Act (HR 1628) passed by the House today reduces taxes on the American people by over $1 trillion. The bill abolishes the following taxes imposed by Obama and the Democrat party in 2010 as part of Obamacare:

-Abolishes the Obamacare Individual Mandate Tax which hits 8 million Americans each year.

-Abolishes the Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax. Together with repeal of the Individual Mandate Tax repeal this is a $270 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare’s Medicine Cabinet Tax which hits 20 million Americans with Health Savings Accounts and 30 million Americans with Flexible Spending Accounts. This is a $6 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare’s Flexible Spending Account tax on 30 million Americans. This is a $20 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare’s Chronic Care Tax on 10 million Americans with high out of pocket medical expenses. This is a $126 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare’s HSA withdrawal tax. This is a $100 million tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare’s 10% excise tax on small businesses with indoor tanning services. This is a $600 million tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare health insurance tax. This is a $145 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare 3.8% surtax on investment income. This is a $172 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare medical device tax. This is a $20 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare tax on prescription medicine. This is a $28 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare tax on retiree prescription drug coverage. This is a $2 billion tax cut.
————

daniel_ream | May 5, 2017 at 2:43 am

Until the political class, the media class and the voters come to understand that coverage for pre-existing conditions is anything but ‘insurance’

This entire “debate” only exists because of the deliberate conflation of health care with health insurance. Insurance can’t pay for a pre-existing condition or it ceases to become insurance.

The fix is to get the various state-by-state regulatory strangleholds out of the way and reduce the cost of healthcare by capping judgments for “pain and suffering” in malpractice suits, but given the current mess and the fact that so many Americans have now lost their insurance…I’m not sure I see a way out of this thicket. It’s not feasible to do a complete reset back to 2007.

    Mac45 in reply to daniel_ream. | May 5, 2017 at 1:00 pm

    The debate, over pre-existing conditions” exists because most people can not afford to pay for medical care without insurance or other 3rd party payers. The cost of the medical care has been priced out of reach of much of the American public.

    Those people who are defined as having “pre-existing” conditions covers everyone who has any chronic condition or a history of health conditions which can be said to increase the likelihood that a serious medical condition will occur in the future. Now, these are exactly the groups of people who really need heath care insurance. But, these were also the groups that the health insurance industry will not insure. So, what to do?

    The same thing happened in the homeowners insurance industry in Florida, in 1993. Following Hurricane Andrew in 1992, the homeowners insurance industry largely abandoned the state of Florida. Now, as most people were required to maintain homeowners insurance, by their mortgage holders, the State of Florida was forced to start their own insurance company, Citizens Insurance Corporation, to provide windstorm insurance coverage for its residents. 25 years later, the home owners insurance companies have not returned, to the state, in any meaningful way. Nor will they. The same thing is happening today in the area of health insurance. What do you think that the rsult is going to be?

      VaGentleman in reply to Mac45. | May 5, 2017 at 2:52 pm

      Good point, Mac45, on the homeowners insurance. Another example of a situation that the free market does not handle well (at least from the point of view of those who need coverage). Free markets rely on rational economic decisions based on feedback and self interest. The clear signal to the insurers in either case (hurricane alley or pre-existing conditions) is; ‘there be lots of claims here – avoid them’. The rational decision is to heed the advice.

      As a society, we have to decide if we want to provide coverage to those who the free market rejects. I think that we have already determined that we want to. That’s going to inject a certain amount of socialism into the free market. What congress is trying to decide is how much and how.

VaGentleman | May 5, 2017 at 7:06 am

Kemberlee wrote,

“Seeing as the vote immediately preceding the Obamacare repeal vote was to exempt Congress from their own health insurance legislation, I remain fairly skeptical of what lies ahead.”

It didn’t happen.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/nyt-correspondent-falsely-reports-house-voted-exempt-themselves-gop-health-care-bill/

“A day earlier, reporters noticed that a provision in the American Health Care Act would exempt lawmakers and their staff from losing some of the repealed Obamacare provisions. In response to the criticism, House leadership announced they would vote separately on the issue.

The House voted 429-0 to pass a bill rectifying the mistake, preventing lawmakers from being exempted. But the New York Times‘ chief White House correspondent, Peter Baker, apparently misunderstood the vote.

Baker eventually … apologized for the mistake.”

    Mac45 in reply to VaGentleman. | May 5, 2017 at 1:06 pm

    So, what happened was that the House attempted to slip through a waiver exempting them from the provisions of the Trumpcare bill and got caught. After which the “leadership” said that it would revisit the exemptions later, in a separate bill. Not that they were NOT going to grant themselves these exemptions. Only that they would vote on granting the exemptions to themselves, in a separate bill, at a future date.

    Gotta love it.

      VaGentleman in reply to Mac45. | May 5, 2017 at 2:20 pm

      Sorry, Mac45, not so. First they passed the bill with the exemption, then passed the bill removing the exemption 429-0. It’s already a done deal. (They had to pass the bill with the exemption before they could repeal the exemption – else they would repeal an exemption that didn’t exist.)
      Read the article again. Follow the at 429-0.

Ragspierre | May 5, 2017 at 8:42 pm

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/05/trump-no-really-australia-everyone-else-better-health-care-systems/

Turd polishers needed on aisle T=rump.

Bring your own 5 gallon buckets of Mr. Establishment polish…

Others will be air-lifted in directly…

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend