http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...es-Obamacare-replacement-Senate-collapse.html McConnell said in a statement that the Senate would move to pass a House bill that sets a two-year sunset for Obamacare, giving Congress ample time to design something that would go in its place. 'Regretfully, it is now apparent that the effort to repeal and immediately replace the failure of Obamacare will not be successful,' McConnell said. 'So, in the coming days, the Senate will vote to take up the House bill with the first amendment in order being what a majority of the Senate has already supported in 2015 and that was vetoed by then-President Obama: a repeal of Obamacare with a two-year delay to provide for a stable transition period to a patient-centered healthcare system that gives Americans access to quality, affordable care.' (Buh bye)
The effort to "repeal and replace the failure of Obamacare"... They wanted to replace Obama's failure with their own. But they failed even in that.
The fact is, the Republicans never had any intention of 'repealing and replacing" the Affordable Care Act. It was a bogeyman. A stick to beat President Obama with. ANY new system is buggy (Windows 95, remember?) In an effort to get Republican votes, numerous Republican-sponsored amendments were accepted that weakened the ACA and made it more convoluted (then they all voted against it anyway). But every bug became 9/11 and Pearl Harbor and Fort Sumter rolled into one. There were 7 years to repeal and replace. If they had a bill they would have rolled it out by now. They did not. The point was to whip up phony scares of "death panels" and "government takeover of your healthcare" and "job killers". People dying in groves waiting for healthcare. And of course, the even more cynical racist appeals. Rush Limbaugh called the ACA "reparations" for slavery. In the midst of a recession and a "recovery" that a lot of people never "recovered", if you white people, I mean real Americans, don't have good jobs and nice things it's because the Kenyan Muslim socialist is giving Blah people and "illegals" free health care. Unfortunately, with the best negotiator ever, no one makes better deals, he will replace Obamacare with "something wonderful" his first day and it will be beautiful, we will have beautiful health care cheaper, their bluff was called. They HAD to come up with something and could not. Because if they had a plan they would have proposed it before now. All they could come up with was the Republican cure-all of tax cuts for the rich. And when the "fake media" actually reported on what was in their bill, the population rebelled. If they repeal ACA with no replacement they are proclaiming they can't govern. They have the Senate, House, presidency, majority of governors, majority on Supreme Court and can't pass a single law. So we have one political party that can't win elections and another that can't govern when they do. Oi vey.
Last time we had republican congress and president, they recklessly spent us into debt and deficits that were then dwarfed by 2 years of the opposite. At least they're trying to be more fiscally responsible this time. Last time we had republican control of congress and the White House, W was reflected, and congress twice.
"Fiscally responsible" = huge tax cuts for the wealthy + increase in military spending. Makes sense: obviously the poor are bad with money, because they're poor. So it's just responsible to put money in the hands of people who know how to keep it.
A clean repeal bill is a pipe dream, and McConnell is probably doing this as a message to Trump (showing that "his way" won't work) or as a gambit to make conservatives vote for something they don't want before they can even get to a clean repeal bill (the repeal would be an "amendment" to the House bill, and conservatives in the Senate don't like the House bill because it is not, itself, a full repeal) so that they are also on the record for not allowing a clean repeal bill through.
...and that's three Repub.s against just repeal. [Sad trombone sound.] http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/republican-senator-murkowski-wont-back-repeal-only-health-bill/
Murkowski and Heller were being bought off by earmarks for their states in the old bill. Assuming a "clean repeal" wouldn't have give-aways to specific states, I assume Heller will also be a no.
Fiscally responsible == deficit and debt reduction. Like it or not, the republican proposals did cut as much as $320B+ from the deficits and thus future debt. AND REDUCED FUTURE PREMIUM COSTS FOR EVERYONE. Meanwhile, for every one person without health insurance before ObamaCare, there are 2 who reject it (pay the fines, still uninsured) since. It seems rather obvious that a man paying for insurance that covers his pregnancy is a waste of money.
Dems ain't any better. Where are the proposals to fix the problems with Obamacare? Where are the logical discussions on how do we provide the best possible healthcare at a reasonable price to the average american? Because that ain't insurance. Both parties are just pounding square pegs into round holes.
You don't get it? Insurance is overly expensive because it covers unnecessary things. One size fits all, instead of just the right amount of insurance for the individual's needs.
Democrats do want to make fixes to the ACA, like authorizing the CSR payments officially. They would also like to implement things like Medicare for everyone, but they don't push that as a party because it's still viewed as too radical. However, with the Overton window on health care shifting (now it's clear Americans view access to health care as a public good, which is why the Republican bills gutting Obamacare were so unpopular) perhaps they should be embracing it on a party-wide level. Even during the Obamacare process in 2009, most Democrats and Obama wanted a public option, but the "blue dog" Democrats (those in red states) weren't keen on it, plus the Democrats moderated their own bill with concessions to Republicans to avoid the appearance that they were doing it alone (though that appearance came through anyway, so they probably shouldn't have bothered).
Just as it is obvious that a man with no children paying for public education is a waste of money. Or a man who doesn't care who governs him paying for elections is a waste of money. Or someone who doesn't mind if Mexicans come here paying for ICE is a waste of money. Or a pacifist paying for a military is a waste of money. Or a person who hates Trump paying for him to swan around and go golfing with secret service protection is a waste of money. But there's more: if I pay car insurance and don't have a crash, I should get my money back. Or if they won't give it back, I absolutely should crash my car, otherwise I'm being cheated. Wow, so many things are "rather obvious" when you're incredibly selfish and stupid.
Here's the silver lining for Repubs: if they actually repealed Obamacare, it would be so disastrous for so many people that there would be a real groundswell for a "single-payer" or Medicaid-for-all system. But this way we'll just continue with the Frankenstein that is Obama-, or really, RomneyCare and not get true socialized medicine.
Medicare isn't that good. Saying "medicare for everyone" sounds good, but look at the benefits and cost. The free medicare (part A) only covers hospitalization and home care. Medicare Part B covers the stuff we expect insurance to cover (dr. visits, tests, etc.) but has a premium starting at $134/mo per person. Plus you pay 20% of everything. I had a recent test done that would have cost me $1500 with Medicare. It cost me $30 co pay with Blue Shield. None of that covers prescriptions. Some plan.
