Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

[Scoop20906]

I don't have the link handy, but the Maureen Dowd op-ed in the failing NYTimes this morning was a thing of beauty.

Here you go

This snippet best sums it up for me:

You were humiliated right out of the chute by the establishment guys who hooked you into their agenda — a massive transfer of wealth to rich people — and drew you away from your own.

You sold yourself as the businessman who could shake things up and make Washington work again. Instead, you got worked over by the Republican leadership and the business community, who set you up to do their bidding.

That’s why they’re putting up with all your craziness about Russia and wiretapping and unending lies and rattling our allies.

They’re counting on you being a delusional dupe who didn’t even know what was in the bill because you’re sitting around in a bathrobe getting your information from wackadoodles on Fox News and then, as The Post reported, peppering aides with the query, “Is this really a good bill?”

You got played.

[Scoop20906]

Wow you guys are optimistic. Why do you think Drumpf or the Repubs are interested in now suddenly fixing the issues with Obamacare? A. They don't give a shit about non-covered Americans. B. Drumpf doesn't care about anything but his image of winning.

Just don't see any desire on their part to try to better something with Obamas name on it.

I'm optimistic because there is a chance that Trump who is so desperate to be liked will realize his own party is at war with the majority of his base and that making a compromise with the democrats might be his best way to win. Desperate times call for desperate solutions.

[hepcat]

Trump will sleep with anyone that tells him he's pretty.

[Rip]

Trump will sleep with anyone that tells him he's pretty.

Ahh, so now we know how you hooked up with him.

[tgb]

Excellent analysis

[Isgrimnur]

Excellent analysis

Calling this debacle a goat rodeo would be an insult to the noble men and women of the goat rodeo industry who work hard to organize novelty livestock shows for your entertainment.

[Combustible Lemur]

Wow you guys are optimistic. Why do you think Drumpf or the Repubs are interested in now suddenly fixing the issues with Obamacare? A. They don't give a shit about non-covered Americans. B. Drumpf doesn't care about anything but his image of winning.

Just don't see any desire on their part to try to better something with Obamas name on it.

I'm optimistic because there is a chance that Trump who is so desperate to be liked will realize his own party is at war with the majority of his base and that making a compromise with the democrats might be his best way to win. Desperate times call for desperate solutions.

Fwiw Kasich was super riled up todat about the extremists in his party, and fully supported reform without repeal compromised with moderate dems.

Then he said he wasn't running for any more office. Sigh.

[Scoop20906]

Wow you guys are optimistic. Why do you think Drumpf or the Repubs are interested in now suddenly fixing the issues with Obamacare? A. They don't give a shit about non-covered Americans. B. Drumpf doesn't care about anything but his image of winning.

Just don't see any desire on their part to try to better something with Obamas name on it.

I'm optimistic because there is a chance that Drumpf who is so desperate to be liked will realize his own party is at war with the majority of his base and that making a compromise with the democrats might be his best way to win. Desperate times call for desperate solutions.

Fwiw Kasich was super riled up todat about the extremists in his party, and fully supported reform without repeal compromised with moderate dems.

Then he said he wasn't running for any more office. Sigh.

Yeah, he also seemed miffed that Trump didn't know how to surround himself with smart people and let them do the work for him. It seems Trump doesn't trust them after repeatedly asking his staff, "Is this a good bill?". I think even he realized he was pushing something that the majority of the country didn't want. I wonder how many of his "base" feel betrayed by this?

[dfs]

Then he said he wasn't running for any more office. Sigh.

How do you know a politician isn't telling the truth?
His lips are moving.
If Kasich were so uninterested in running for office he wouldn't be commenting.

[Fireball]

If things continue as they have been going for Donald, I could see a Kasich primary challenge. What would Kasich have to lose?

At this point, I think Democrats should work with their grassroots to keep up pressure on the Trump Administration to keep executive sabotage to a minimum, and next year, in the run-up to the midterms, unveil a "Obamacare 2.0" agenda on healthcare to repair the major problems — something that's very broad, to give the base motivation to turn out in support in November. If they retake the House, they can then pass a big Obamacare fix bill to the Senate, and put all the weight in this situation on Trump and the Republicans — "we passed a bill to fix Obamacare, why won't the Republican Senate do their part and send it to the President?"

[El Guapo]

Kansas (overwhelmingly Republican) Senate approves Medicaid expansion, 25-13.

This is the other pending big news on this. With the AHCA going down in flames and the GOP suddenly making peace with Obamacare for at least the short term, and with the Medicaid expansion now polling well, there's a pretty good chance that a bunch of states will suddenly discover the policy merits of adopting the Medicaid expansion.

[Grifman]

Kansas (overwhelmingly Republican) Senate approves Medicaid expansion, 25-13.

This is the other pending big news on this. With the AHCA going down in flames and the GOP suddenly making peace with Obamacare for at least the short term, and with the Medicaid expansion now polling well, there's a pretty good chance that a bunch of states will suddenly discover the policy merits of adopting the Medicaid expansion.

'

Point taken but unfortunately their ideologue of a governor plans to veto it.

[Remus West]

Kansas (overwhelmingly Republican) Senate approves Medicaid expansion, 25-13.

This is the other pending big news on this. With the AHCA going down in flames and the GOP suddenly making peace with Obamacare for at least the short term, and with the Medicaid expansion now polling well, there's a pretty good chance that a bunch of states will suddenly discover the policy merits of adopting the Medicaid expansion.

'

Point taken but unfortunately their ideologue of a governor plans to veto it.

What happens then? Will their Senate overturn the veto?

[El Guapo]

Kansas (overwhelmingly Republican) Senate approves Medicaid expansion, 25-13.

This is the other pending big news on this. With the AHCA going down in flames and the GOP suddenly making peace with Obamacare for at least the short term, and with the Medicaid expansion now polling well, there's a pretty good chance that a bunch of states will suddenly discover the policy merits of adopting the Medicaid expansion.

'

Point taken but unfortunately their ideologue of a governor plans to veto it.

What happens then? Will their Senate overturn the veto?

Seems like they at least have a shot at a veto override.

Main point is that if this is the situation in Kansas, it bodes well for Medicaid expansion generally in Republican states. And no state is likely to undo the Medicaid expansion.

[Remus West]

Kansas (overwhelmingly Republican) Senate approves Medicaid expansion, 25-13.

This is the other pending big news on this. With the AHCA going down in flames and the GOP suddenly making peace with Obamacare for at least the short term, and with the Medicaid expansion now polling well, there's a pretty good chance that a bunch of states will suddenly discover the policy merits of adopting the Medicaid expansion.

'

Point taken but unfortunately their ideologue of a governor plans to veto it.

What happens then? Will their Senate overturn the veto?

Seems like they at least have a shot at a veto override.

Main point is that if this is the situation in Kansas, it bodes well for Medicaid expansion generally in Republican states. And no state is likely to undo the Medicaid expansion.

That was my take away from the numbers you posted. Given that spread I wonder how many voted for it based off the idea it would get vetoed and will make some lame excuse about voting against an override. I do agree with your assessment regarding the Medicaid expansion in most States.

[Sepiche]

Kansas (overwhelmingly Republican) Senate approves Medicaid expansion, 25-13.

This is the other pending big news on this. With the AHCA going down in flames and the GOP suddenly making peace with Obamacare for at least the short term, and with the Medicaid expansion now polling well, there's a pretty good chance that a bunch of states will suddenly discover the policy merits of adopting the Medicaid expansion.

'

Point taken but unfortunately their ideologue of a governor plans to veto it.

There's a chance of an override. The main thing to know about politics here right now is, despite the last few years, Kansas has always been a fairly moderate right leaning state, and despite Brownback fooling the masses in the last governors election, people have started to wake up to the fact his economic policies are BS. Even though Republicans did well in the state and nationally in the last presidential election, it was actually mostly moderate anti-Brownback Republicans that got elected here as well as a few Democrats. That's given the legislature some room to maneuver and the votes to override the worst of Brownback's policies.

Still a lot of Teabagging Brownback loyalists around, but the new blood in the Statehouse are overwhelmingly reasonable moderates who have no problem with expanding Medicaid.

[Fireball]

Even if this overridden, the fact that it passed will give the Democratic candidate next year a good issue to run on, and the Republican candidate next year a good reason to not oppose expansion, making it very likely to occur in 2019.

[El Guapo]

The Daily 202: New momentum for Medicaid expansion, as more Republicans conclude Obamacare won’t get repealed.

Apparently Medicaid expansion already passed 81-14 in the KS House. Brownback has said he'll veto, as others have noted, but he's also probably getting appointed (to an ambassadorship, I think), so he probably won't be around too much longer. Seems generally inevitable in Kansas.

Also updates on a few other states.

[malchior]

Round 2 incoming?

[msteelers]

Round 2 incoming?

Should not be a surprise. Republicans have to be under immense pressure from conservatives to repeal Obamacare. Plus making it look like they are doing something will keep GOP Governors from expanding Medicare, and we all know how much republicans hate it when the government helps poor people. Plus if they keep up this charade long enough they'll be able to campaign on it next year.

[El Guapo]

Round 2 incoming?

Should not be a surprise. Republicans have to be under immense pressure from conservatives to repeal Obamacare. Plus making it look like they are doing something will keep GOP Governors from expanding Medicare, and we all know how much republicans hate it when the government helps poor people. Plus if they keep up this charade long enough they'll be able to campaign on it next year.

Yup. Remains to be seen whether anything comes of this, though. My guess is not - the same factors that kept them from forming a real, reasonable policy the first time (lack of agreement whether the government should be doing anything to help poor people get insurance, political need to gut Obamacare preventing any democratic votes) remain. And I imagine representatives are not super eager to go through another debacle like the last one without some expectation that the Senate is going to do something.

Seems like the only plausible ways anything ultimately gets passed are: (1) GOP leadership decides that they are ok with cobbling together a series of ACA fixes and calling that "repeal and replace". Freedom Caucus loses their shit, but it passes with some democratic votes; or (2) The Senate bill which would basically keep the ACA in states that want it passes.

Though writing those out those both seems fantastical. #1 would involve Ryan giving up on his permanent tax cut AND the GOP bucking the Freedom Caucus. #2 would I think be stopped by the filibuster.

So I think the most likely scenario is that this is just "we're doing something!" noise for the base, then they immediately set about not doing anything. Second most likely scenario is that Ryan proposes something nonfunctional and very conservative (straight repeal bill + a few conservative talking points like insurance across state lines), Senate democrats filibuster it, GOP blames democrats and moves on. Though actually not sure that even that would work, since presumably the CBO score on that kind of bill would be brutal, and GOP moderates would not be thrilled to go on the record voting for it.

[Fireball]

They have to say they're going to come back to healthcare, or else the pitchforks would come out as their base storms the castle. I don't see anything passing — Democrats won't vote for anything that substantially dismantles Obamacare, and Republicans can't get their shit together on how to dismantle it. Now, if they wanted to they could pass a straight up repeal bill in the House, but that would die in the Senate. Or they could work with Democrats to reform the ACA, but there's no trust there to do that.

[El Guapo]

They have to say they're going to come back to healthcare, or else the pitchforks would come out as their base storms the castle. I don't see anything passing — Democrats won't vote for anything that substantially dismantles Obamacare, and Republicans can't get their shit together on how to dismantle it. Now, if they wanted to they could pass a straight up repeal bill in the House, but that would die in the Senate. Or they could work with Democrats to reform the ACA, but there's no trust there to do that.

Yeah, this seems like the situation. I do wonder what the hell would happen, though, as 2018 approaches and nothing has happened on health care.

[RunningMn9]

Why are these people so stupid?

Price outlined how his department could make insurance plans cheaper by scaling back several federal mandates, including what the ACA currently defines as “essential benefits” in coverage.

IF YOU MAKE INSURANCE PLANS CHEAPER BY MAKING THEM COVER FEWER THINGS, THE COST OF HEALTHCARE GOES UP.

I mean, come on.

[Chaz]

That's got to be the path forward for the administration though, right? They won't be able to repeal Obamacare in the foreseeable future, so they're just going to use all the levers they have to take the knees out from under it while leaving things in place. Just choke off funding for the subsidies, stop enforcing the mandate at the IRS (which they already did), stop maintaining or improving the exchange website, and stop efforts to get more people to enroll, and boom, suddenly everything's imploding. Yes, it'll be your fault, but that's a nuance that will probably get lost in the shuffle.

[El Guapo]

That's got to be the path forward for the administration though, right? They won't be able to repeal Obamacare in the foreseeable future, so they're just going to use all the levers they have to take the knees out from under it while leaving things in place. Just choke off funding for the subsidies, stop enforcing the mandate at the IRS (which they already did), stop maintaining or improving the exchange website, and stop efforts to get more people to enroll, and boom, suddenly everything's imploding. Yes, it'll be your fault, but that's a nuance that will probably get lost in the shuffle.

Yeah, this is the main risk, especially since there's not much people can do to stop it, especially as to states with Republican governors. BUT there are some risks with it too (for Trump): people tend to blame the party in power when things are bad, so to the extent that health care causes people's situations to get worse, that may complicate Trump's / GOP's efforts to blame democrats. Also, having publicly said that he's going to sabotage Obamacare may also complicate those efforts.

Also, the Trump administration is generally incompetent, so it seems possible that they may be bad at being bad at Obamacare.

[Chaz]

That's kind of the main hope, though hoping that they're bad at stuff isn't something I love relying on. The other down side is that while yeah, the blame for bad stuff usually falls on the party in power, the X factor here is the unreasonable level of hate a certain segment of the public has for Obama. It remains to be seen how much traction the GOP and Trump will get using "It's Obama's fault" as their go-to line. You'd hope it would be none traction, but maybe not. I'm sure we'll find out though, because you know that's a well they're going to keep going to.

[RunningMn9]

That's got to be the path forward for the administration though, right? They won't be able to repeal Obamacare in the foreseeable future, so they're just going to use all the levers they have to take the knees out from under it while leaving things in place. Just choke off funding for the subsidies, stop enforcing the mandate at the IRS (which they already did), stop maintaining or improving the exchange website, and stop efforts to get more people to enroll, and boom, suddenly everything's imploding. Yes, it'll be your fault, but that's a nuance that will probably get lost in the shuffle.

Hey, remember that time that the President and the Justice Department announced that they were no longer going to pursue enforcing DoMA? Having the Executive Branch decide which laws they want to enforce, probably not the greatest idea.

[Carpet_pissr]

They have to say they're going to come back to healthcare, or else the pitchforks would come out as their base storms the castle. I don't see anything passing — Democrats won't vote for anything that substantially dismantles Obamacare, and Republicans can't get their shit together on how to dismantle it. Now, if they wanted to they could pass a straight up repeal bill in the House, but that would die in the Senate. Or they could work with Democrats to reform the ACA, but there's no trust there to do that.

Interestingly enough, I came across a very misleading article title the other day about Lindsey Graham's town hall, the day after the Ryan failure - the headline was: "Sen. Graham Faces Raucous Town Hall The Day After GOP Fails To Repeal Obamacare"

If you actually listened to the complaints though, I didn't hear ONE person complaining about the lack of Obamacare repeal. 95% of the anger was about Voss, not enough pushback on Trump, and Russian meddling. And as a side note, I do think the complaint that he is not doing enough to stand up to Trump madness re: Russia was unfair (and he pretty much said so) since he seems to pushing back quite a bit on the administration for answers.

Has anyone seen actual, vocal outcries in all these town halls, about lack of repealing Obamacare? I hear the R Congressmen saying how they were sent to DC specifically to dismantle it, but where are these people?

I'm beginning to wonder if the actual opponents to the ACA are common folk, or political higher ups and puppet masters? I assume there are plenty of "normal" people opposed to it, but are they VOCAL about it, and jumping up and down with anger that it wasn't dismantled? Living in the heart of a conservative state, I just don't hear people bring it up as a problem, certainly not a hotbutton issue that determines who they vote for like some other issues.

[Zarathud]

Donors want to repeal Obamacare. Republicans are also remembering the Tea Party and in the process ignoring the Resistance. It will only matter if the Resistance shows up to primary and vote against the opposition.

[Carpet_pissr]

Donors want to repeal Obamacare.

That's what I suspect as well. And in a plutocracy such as ours, that's really all that matters.

[El Guapo]

Donors want to repeal Obamacare.

That's what I suspect as well. And in a plutocracy such as ours, that's really all that matters.

I don't doubt that there was legit mass opposition (in conservative areas) to the ACA during passage, and to a lesser degree during Obama's term. During passage, people were freaked out because it was a big complicated bill impacting something of huge importance to them (health insurance and health care), and people worry about big change (especially when people are scaremongering). Plus mix in a fair amount of partisanship.

Now, the same status quo fear of change will help to preserve the ACA. On top of that, Obama's departure probably helps, because before people thought of it in terms of their general opposition to Obama, whereas now that part drops out to a fair extent.

[Smoove_B]

I guess this is what the new face of partisan politics looks and sounds like in the House:

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) in an interview to be broadcast early Thursday said he does not want to work with Democrats on healthcare legislation, breaking with President Trump's recent comments.

“I don’t want that to happen,” Ryan told Norah O’Donnell on "CBS This Morning."

So...you're not going to work with other legislators, just the people in your own party. That seems like a perfectly reasonable strategy. How on earth then will you motivate members of your own fractured party to help?

"[If] the Republican Congress allows the perfect to be the enemy of the good, I worry we'll push the president into working with Democrats. He's been suggesting that as much," he said, adding merely retooling ObamaCare is "hardly a conservative thing."

Ahh...shame. Work with me or you risk the President working with our enemies. I'm never going to hate anyone more than I hate Mitch McConnell, but Paul Ryan is certainly trying.

[malchior]

Trump declared limited war on the Freedom Caucus this morning. Wasnt the failure to repeal the Dems fault?

[LordMortis]

IAhh...shame. Work with me or you risk the President working with our enemies. I'm never going to hate anyone more than I hate Mitch McConnell, but Paul Ryan is certainly trying.

You sound like me. Only I think Ryan is a success or two away from surpassing McConnell. McConnell is the biggest piece of shit but Ryan as piece of shit that has been actively been trying to weaponize pieces of shit of everywhere.

[Scoop20906]

ACA in its present form is a pain in the ass to work with. Its hardly been a smooth role out. People have rightly bitched about it. It needs attention especially some of the bureaucratic BS involved. But when you start talking about removing protection and benefits in the law people rightly get upset about that too.

When you talk about removing protections and benefits to provide a tax break for people earning over $250,000 a year people get pissed. Repubs are idiots for trying that.

[El Guapo]

I guess this is what the new face of partisan politics looks and sounds like in the House:

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) in an interview to be broadcast early Thursday said he does not want to work with Democrats on healthcare legislation, breaking with President Trump's recent comments.

“I don’t want that to happen,” Ryan told Norah O’Donnell on "CBS This Morning."

So...you're not going to work with other legislators, just the people in your own party. That seems like a perfectly reasonable strategy. How on earth then will you motivate members of your own fractured party to help?

"[If] the Republican Congress allows the perfect to be the enemy of the good, I worry we'll push the president into working with Democrats. He's been suggesting that as much," he said, adding merely retooling ObamaCare is "hardly a conservative thing."

Ahh...shame. Work with me or you risk the President working with our enemies. I'm never going to hate anyone more than I hate Mitch McConnell, but Paul Ryan is certainly trying.

Ryan has risen to his current position mainly on the basis of one elite-level skill of his - his capacity to sound through the media like a smart, data-driven policy wonk. It's unclear, however, whether he's any good at the actual legislative process (or whether he has other elite-level skills). So far, there's some promising early indications that he might be terrible at his job.

Which would be great for democrats and the Republic.

[Smoove_B]

Right, but having just come off of a clear failure based on partisan-related issues (i.e. completely relying on the House GOP to support the repeal), it seems like a colossal blunder to come out and state that you're not working with the very group of people that helped ensure that your first official attempt failed. I mean, I get that it's all about party loyalty and doubling-down on your position, but to come out a week later and tell everyone? I've never proposed federal legislation, so maybe I don't quite understand the nuances of being a policy wonk (LOL), but it seems pretty clear (to me) that they're more likely to get support from right-leaning Democrats than the Ultra-right Freedom Caucus.

I'm still in the camp that believes this best describes the current GOP:



While it's great to hope for their continued failure, I still think they're doing damage - even without being effective.

[malchior]

Ryan has risen to his current position mainly on the basis of one elite-level trait - his photogenic media friendly look and feel.

Mortoned.

It's unclear, however, whether he's any good at the actual legislative process (or whether he has other elite-level skills). So far, there's some promising early indications that he might be terrible at his job.

Yup. All signs point to him being a wannabe McConnell. Boehner from afar predicted an outcome very similar to what we saw weeks ago around the AHCA. His approach was clumsy and reckless. He is badly damaged now. And it is nearly all his own fault.

[LordMortis]

I'm still in the camp that believes this best describes the current GOP:



While it's great to hope for their continued failure, I still think they're doing damage - even without being effective.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSkWrpH3H3Q

You're idea of not being effective and my idea of not being effective are two different things. Lots and lots and lots is "being accomplished"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03 ... rders.html

An order signed an executive order establishing the President’s Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis.

An order initiating a review of the Clean Power Plan, which restricted greenhouse gas emissions at coal-fired power plants.

An order revoking Obama-era executive orders on federal contracting.

An order directing a top-to-bottom audit of the Executive Branch.

A revised order suspending the refugee program and entry to the U.S. for travelers from several mostly Muslim countries, in response to objections from courts. As before, the order will suspend refugee entries for 120 days, but doesn't suspend Syrian refugees indefinitely and no longer includes Iraq in the named countries. In signing this order, the original one was revoked.

An order moving the HBCU (Historically Black College and Universities) offices back from the Department of Education to the White House.

An order requiring every agency to establish a Regulatory Reform Task Force to evaluate regulations and recommend rules for repeal or modification.

Three orders establishing three Department of Justice task forces to fight drug cartels, reduce violent crime and reduce attacks against police.

An order directing the Treasury secretary to review the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial regulatory law.

A memorandum instructing the Labor Department to delay implementing an Obama rule requiring financial professionals who are giving advice on retirement, and who charge commissions, to put their client's interests first.

An order instructing agencies that whenever they introduce a regulation, they must first abolish two others.

A memorandum to restructure the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council.

A memorandum directing the Secretary of Defense to draw up a plan within 30 days to defeat ISIS.

An order to lengthen the ban on administration officials working as lobbyists. There is now a 5 year-ban on officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government, and a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.

An executive order imposing a 120-day suspension of the refugee program and a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from citizens of seven terror hot spots: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Sudan.

Two multi-pronged orders on border security and immigration enforcement including: the authorization of a U.S.-Mexico border wall; the stripping of federal grant money to sanctuary cities; hiring 5,000 more Border Patrol agents; ending “catch-and-release” policies for illegal immigrants; and reinstating local and state immigration enforcement
partnerships.

A memorandum calling for a 30-day review of military readiness.

Two orders reviving the Keystone XL pipeline and Dakota Access piplines. He also signed three other related orders that would: expedite the environmental permitting process for infrastructure projects related to the pipelines; direct the Commerce Department to streamline the manufacturing permitting process; and give the Commerce Department 180 days to maximize the use of U.S. steel in
the pipeline.

An order to reinstate the so-called "Mexico City Policy" – a ban on federal funds to international groups that perform abortions or lobby to legalize or promote abortion. The policy was instituted in 1984 by President Reagan, but has gone into and out of effect depending on the party in power in the White House.

A notice that the U.S. will begin withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. Trump called the order "a great thing for the American worker.

An order imposing a hiring freeze for some federal government workers as a way to shrink the size of government. This excludes the military, as Trump noted at the signing.

An order that directs federal agencies to ease the “regulatory burdens” of ObamaCare. It orders agencies to “waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision or requirement” of ObamaCare that imposes a “fiscal burden on any State or a cost, fee, tax, penalty, or regulatory burden on individuals, families, healthcare providers, health insurers, patients, recipients of healthcare services, purchasers of health insurance, or makers of medical devices, products, or medications.”