The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Screwed

[Big RR]

Which reminds me, how's that First Hundred Days list of accomplishments coming?

Well even though her has done more in his first hundred days than all other presidents in their entire administrations combined, and even though his accomplishments are so good it's scary, he is a good businessman (no the greatest business man who ever lived) and he realizes that this is not enough--that his ultimately legacy will be sooooooooooo much more that people will construct statues of him in solid gold and worship them forever. So let's do away with these artificial deadlines, a god cannot be measured by mortal standards.

[oldr_n_wsr]

god would not be worthy of our worship if we could understand him with our intellect.


that statement helped me a great deal in getting sober, but seems appropriate here too, but in a different way

[Big RR]

but seems appropriate here too, but in a different way

Really? In what way?

And do you really think that something is not worthy or worship (or respect, which is pretty much the same IMHO) just because you have an idea or understanding of it? There are many incomprehensible things that are not even worthy of a second thought, from gibberish and double talk, to how a magician does a trick. Personally, I have more of a chance of respecting something I can pretty comprehend/understand at least pretty well.

[Lord Jim]

worship (or respect, which is pretty much the same IMHO)

Wow, we're on entirely different planets on that one...

I respect many people, but I would never consider "worshiping " any of them...

Some of the people I respect, I don't even like...

Also, you can "respect" a person's abilities or accomplishments, in a partial way, in some areas, even if you detest them...

(I respect Trump's abilities as a con artist and self-promoter for example)

On the other hand, I could never "worship" someone I detested...

(In fact I could never "worship" any purely mortal entity period, no matter how much respect I had for them...or how much love I had for them...for me, "worship" is a very unique and singular sort of thing...)

[RayThom]

Isn't that one of the tenets of religious faith -- believing in it even if you don't understand it?

Sheeple.

"O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" Romans 11:33

[Lord Jim]

Isn't that one of the tenets of religious faith -- believing in it even if you don't understand it?

That's why they call it "faith"...

[Lord Jim]

how's that First Hundred Days list of accomplishments coming?

I doubt it was original with him, but I heard Howard Dean earlier this week get off a good one in response to Trump's claim that he has had "the best first 100 days of any President"...

"'The best first 100 days?' He's probably had the worst first 100 days for any President except for William Henry Harrison, who died before he made it to 100 days"...

[Crackpot]

If we could be so lucky.

[Guinevere]

how's that First Hundred Days list of accomplishments coming?

I doubt it was original with him, but I heard Howard Dean earlier this week get off a good one in response to Trump's claim that he has had "the best first 100 days of any President"...

"'The best first 100 days?' He's probably had the worst first 100 days for any President except for William Henry Harrison, who died before he made it to 100 days"...

I love that Howard is back, and mouthy again!

[Burning Petard]

I guess I read Big RR's comment ion a different way. I took it that he was thinking of Respect and Worship as sort of the same thing, but Worship being on the extreme end of the process.

For me, inability to fully understand is part of a deity worthy of worship, but not the only requirement, and certainly there are other entities that I will never understand but are not worthy of worship. Some I respect, and some I detest.

snailgate.

[Lord Jim]

Second verse, same as the first...

GOP struggles to find ObamaCare repeal votes

The Republican bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare appears to lack sufficient votes to pass the House, despite hopes from GOP leaders and the White House that it might be approved by the lower chamber this week.

According to The Hill's whip list, 21 Republicans oppose the bill — the maximum number of GOP defections that can be afforded — assuming every Democrat also votes against it.

The latest Republican to announce his opposition is Rep. Billy Long (Mo.), a staunch conservative who often says he was “Tea Party before Tea Party was cool.”

He told The Hill he wouldn't support the bill because of the impact it could have on people with preexisting conditions.

“I have always stated that one of the few good things about ObamaCare is that people with pre-existing conditions would be covered,” Long said in a statement to The Hill.

“The MacArthur amendment strips away any guarantee that pre-existing conditions would be covered and affordable.”

An amendment authored by Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.) would allow states to apply for waivers to two ObamaCare provisions: essential health benefits, which mandates what services insurers must cover, and “community rating,” which essentially bans insurers from charging people with preexisting conditions more for coverage.

While the AHCA keeps an ObamaCare provision banning insurers from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, allowing states to waiver out of community rating means insurers could charge sick people more.

States that get that waiver would have to have a high-risk pool as a backstop for people priced out of coverage. But those pools, in the past, have seen waiting lists, high premiums and other issues.

The Hill’s whip list includes some Republicans who were ready to vote for the bill before changes made the language backed by MacArthur and Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), the Freedom Caucus chairman.

They include Reps. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.) and Fred Upton (Mich.).

Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) went from being a yes on the bill to a no.

And four members of the GOP Whip team, Reps. David Valadao (Calif.), Erik Paulsen (Minn.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.) and Kevin Yoder (Kansas) are undecided on the bill.[Gee, when you don't even have the whole whip team on board, you've got a real problem... ]

Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) told CNN that she's talked to centrist Republicans who say they won't back the bill because they don't like it, and because they don't think it will be approved by the Senate even if it does pass the House.

“They're being asked to walk the plank on a bill they know won't survive,” she said.[And a lot of GOP house members remember how that worked out for the Dems who voted for "cap and trade" back in 2009...They remember, because they now hold those seats...]

In another bad sign for the GOP’s whip count, Appropriations Committee Chairman Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) on Monday refused to say if it had his support.

Frelinghuysen came out against the bill shortly before it was pulled from the floor last month and told reporters Monday he was “still looking” at the changes.

“I'm focusing on the appropriations bill for 2017, so that's my focus,” he said.

“My position is that I'm focused on the appropriations process, trying to get the bill across the finish line. I haven't been focused on anything else.”

Although Vice President Pence was on Capitol Hill on Monday seeking to sway Republicans, the White House acknowledged the GOP’s American Health Care Act doesn't yet have the support to pass and wouldn't put a timeline on a vote.

“We’re getting closer and closer every day, but we’re not there yet,” Spicer said when asked if there are enough votes in the House to put a bill on the floor.[the reports I've seen have them further away from 216 then they were on Friday]

A few Republicans are saying that a vote could be held this week.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), who is in the conservative Freedom Caucus and is also a member of the GOP whip team, said the legislation has the votes to pass by a slim margin because the latest changes had moved some moderates from no to yes.

He said a vote would “probably” happen this week and suggested that some lawmakers could be strong-armed into backing the new bill, as they would “rather be a no vote but if it needs their vote to pass then they'll support it.”

He said he is not privy to the official whip count but has “knowledge of individual votes that I've talked to plus a general feel for the way the House is.”

Barton offered no names, however, and Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), co-chairman of the moderate Tuesday Group, said Friday the amendment didn't move any moderates from 'no' to 'yes.'

“I’m not aware of any members of the Tuesday Group who were a ‘no’ and became a ‘yes’ because of it,” he said.

“I suspect there were some who were maybe inclined to move in the other direction, either to undecided or a no. So, they didn’t pick up anybody from our group.”[The Tuesday Group has 50 members; larger than The Freedom Caucus which has 35]

If a bill is not approved by the House this week, it will significantly reduce the chances of ObamaCare repeal being approved at all. The House will go on recess next week, and lawmakers are moving on to tax reform and spending bills for next year.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/33 ... peal-votes

Gee, so for every vote they're picking up from the Randians by making the bill harsher, they're losing at least one from the moderates?

Nobody could ever have predicted that...

Here are a couple of other whip counts:

20
No

21
Undecided or unclear

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... count.html

Several Republicans have come out Monday against the current measure to repeal and replace Obamacare, bringing CNN's whip count to 21 Republicans -- mostly moderates -- opposed to the bill with at least 17 lawmakers still undecided.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/01/politics/ ... alth-care/

What every whip count I've seen has in common, is that the declared opposition is within one or two votes of sinking the bill, meaning that Ryan and Co. will have to practically run the table with those who have not yet taken a position (a substantial number; somewhere between the high teens and the low 20s) to get this thing get through the House ...

Not bloody likely...

ETA:

The NY Times count is particularly illustrative of just what a daunting task Ryan faces...

If you follow that link you'll see that they also show the representatives names in both categories ("No" and "Undecided or unclear" ) designated by whether they are identified as being "Hard-Line Conservatives" or "Moderate Wing".

In the "undecided or unclear" category, only 2 of the 21 are "Hardline Conservatives" (Only one "Hardline conservative among the 20 "no votes")

This means that the GOP House leadership has pretty much maxed out in terms of bringing more votes by satisfying hardliners, and they are still way short...

Good luck convincing 15-17 of the undecided moderates to vote for a bill that's more hardline then the last one...

Especially when they know it's going to be DOA in the Senate...

[oldr_n_wsr]

It's the plan.
Never get any kind of replacement passed and let obamacare slowly die.

[rubato]

god would not be worthy of our worship if we could understand him with our intellect.


that statement helped me a great deal in getting sober, but seems appropriate here too, but in a different way

Now just hold on a minute there. Hold on. I worship Sophia Loren and I can understand her, uuh, ok you do have a point it isn't exactly with my mind.


yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

It's the plan.
Never get any kind of replacement passed and let obamacare slowly die.

And then what?

[Scooter]

It's the plan.
Never get any kind of replacement passed and let obamacare slowly die.

You voted for them.

[Lord Jim]

Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, who until January had been chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main health care legislating committees in Congress, officially came out against the bill on Tuesday.

Upton made the announcement during a local radio interview, and his office confirmed to me that he is a “no” vote on the bill.

Upton had said late last week that he was uncomfortable with changes to the bill that won over the conservative House Freedom Caucus. Those changes would allow states to opt out of some of Obamacare’s insurance rules, which prohibited insurers from charging sick people more than healthy people and required plans to offer more comprehensive coverage — changes that potentially mean even more people would lose insurance than the 24 million estimated under the previous version of the bill.

A number of moderates have balked at those changes, arguing that they undermine promises Republicans and President Donald Trump have made to protect people with preexisting medical conditions.

Upton had been the co-author of previous Obamacare repeal-and-replace plans. He has also helped author other major health care legislation, including a bill that overhauled Medicare payments to doctors and the 21st Century Cures Act, which sought to speed up drug approvals and medical innovation. Losing him means the latest push toward a repeal bill may be doomed yet again.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... upton-vote

The NYT whip count I posted earlier gets updated when they get new information, so with the addition of Upton, the "nos" are now at 21, and also the "undecided or unclear" category has ballooned from 21 to 27 since this morning...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... count.html

[BoSoxGal]

It's the plan.
Never get any kind of replacement passed and let obamacare slowly die.

And then what?

oldr doesn't care - he's got his already.

[Long Run]

Those changes would allow states to opt out of some of Obamacare’s insurance rules, which prohibited insurers from charging sick people more than healthy people and required plans to offer more comprehensive coverage — changes that potentially mean even more people would lose insurance than the 24 million estimated under the previous version of the bill.

A number of moderates have balked at those changes, arguing that they undermine promises Republicans and President Donald Trump have made to protect people with preexisting medical conditions.l

The problem with dealing with pre-existing conditions is that people mean different things when they talk about it. If someone incurs a condition while they are covered, then the vast majority of people (and politicians) think the person should be able to continue to be covered under a general health rating and have guaranteed renewability, as well as reasonable portability. That is the whole point of buying insurance -- to have it when you really need it. And prior to the ACA, most people had this under the group plans, and many had it with their individual policies.

In contrast, if someone incurs a condition while not covered, or lets their coverage lapse for a significant period of time, then their pre-existing condition should be counted against them, and it should be expensive to get coverage. Pre-ACA, such persons would have to go into high-risk pool individual policies (more expensive). If they joined a group, they were not individually rated, but their pre-existing condition was excluded for 6 months. After the ACA, people who went without insurance and then incurred a condition could not get Exchange coverage outside the open enrollment period -- so the ACA implemented its own pre-existing condition exclusion to protect the Exchange plans from adverse selection (i.e., wait until you get sick, then buy insurance). It is only the group plans that were forced by the ACA to accept these high-claim individuals without any period of exclusion, which meant, of course, that all of the responsible people pay more to make up the difference for the irresponsible.

[Lord Jim]

Oh goody, Trump's getting personally involved to try to sway votes; that worked so well the last time:

Trump to meet with key Republicans opposed to health care bill

(CNN)President Donald Trump will meet with two House Republicans opposed to the current health care bill Wednesday as the White House tries to salvage its effort to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Reps. Billy Long of Missouri and Fred Upton of Michigan will meet with the President to participate in negotiations on how pre-existing conditions are covered, Long said.

The President called about a dozen wavering Republican lawmakers throughout the day on Tuesday, urging them to back the health care bill, a White House official said.[that may explain why the undecided rose from 21 to 28 over the course of the day]

It's very much an open question, though, how helpful this may be, because the President often is suggesting on some calls he's more open to changing the bill to win over moderates, each call creating a new dynamic.[Which of course would start switching Freedom Caucus members back to the "no" column.]

But he is urging them to pass the bill, declare victory and move on for now.

As he meets with Long and Upton Wednesday morning, he is also set to talk to other members.

The future of the bill "as uncertain as we've seen it," a Republican involved in the health care talks said.
How to handle coverage for Americans with pre-existing conditions has been a struggle for Republicans seeking to fulfill their longstanding desire to repeal Obamacare. Upton cited the issue as his reason not to back the current measure.

"From day one, I've supported the rights of those with pre-existing illnesses to be covered, and in my view this undermines that effort, and I can't be a part of it," Upton told reporters Tuesday, explaining his decision to vote against the current bill. "Yes, there are ways to fix it. But the proposal that's on the table now doesn't work."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/02/politics/ ... care-bill/

The people that Trump is trying to persuade know three things:

1. Trump has no idea what is in the bill.

2.No promises that he makes to them can be trusted, because he just wants a "win" and will say anything to get it.

3.He doesn't have strong support in their districts.

If Trump was unable to move the Freedom Caucus members the last time around despite having run up huge margins in most of their districts in the election, he's got a zippo chance of persuading congress members who represent districts where his support isn't all that strong...

[Big RR]

It is only the group plans that were forced by the ACA to accept these high-claim individuals without any period of exclusion, which meant, of course, that all of the responsible people pay more to make up the difference for the irresponsible.

True, but then that is the way group coverage has existed for a very long time through employer group policies, isn't it? People who were laid off and without insurance for a long time could get coverage day one when they got a new job.

Jim--but he's sooooooooo good a negotiator, he can close the deal with these rubes. You're underestimating his genius (and he is a genius, just ask him).