Amazon has whacked our affiliate account. Hosting Donations/Commitments $2063 of $1920 (Sept 13/18). In Hand $1466 (Lump sum payments minus paypal graft). Paypal Donation Link Here

Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Sepiche
Posts: 7799
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 12:00 pm
Location: Olathe, KS
Sepiche’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Sepiche » Thu May 03, 2018 1:12 pm

I'm sure some of it is income, I'm sure some of it is the lack of advertising for the ACA Exchanges in red states, but there's also the fact that the only rhetoric some of these Republicans hear is how horrible the ACA is.

User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by gilraen » Thu May 03, 2018 2:30 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 12:34 pm
I'm sure they'll all tell the ambulance to eff off, this was their choice, and they stand by it. Especially if their daughters are there freakin' out, watching their dad die.
They can go ahead and just die off, then. We'll happily give them what they want. The rest of us will be better off in the long run.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39183
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by GreenGoo » Thu May 03, 2018 2:33 pm

gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 2:30 pm
GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 12:34 pm
I'm sure they'll all tell the ambulance to eff off, this was their choice, and they stand by it. Especially if their daughters are there freakin' out, watching their dad die.
They can go ahead and just die off, then. We'll happily give them what they want. The rest of us will be better off in the long run.
Until then they still get to vote that the rest of you don't get health insurance either.

User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by gilraen » Thu May 03, 2018 3:31 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 2:33 pm
gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 2:30 pm
GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 12:34 pm
I'm sure they'll all tell the ambulance to eff off, this was their choice, and they stand by it. Especially if their daughters are there freakin' out, watching their dad die.
They can go ahead and just die off, then. We'll happily give them what they want. The rest of us will be better off in the long run.
Until then they still get to vote that the rest of you don't get health insurance either.
Yep, that's the plan - if they are dead or too sick to vote, the rest of humanity wins.

User avatar
Remus West
Posts: 32675
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Not in Westland

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Remus West » Thu May 03, 2018 3:57 pm

gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:31 pm
GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 2:33 pm
gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 2:30 pm
GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 12:34 pm
I'm sure they'll all tell the ambulance to eff off, this was their choice, and they stand by it. Especially if their daughters are there freakin' out, watching their dad die.
They can go ahead and just die off, then. We'll happily give them what they want. The rest of us will be better off in the long run.
Until then they still get to vote that the rest of you don't get health insurance either.
Yep, that's the plan - if they are dead or too sick to vote, the rest of humanity wins.
You miss his point that until they do get sick and die they are fucking the rest of us over with their idiotic votes for evil bastards.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 33140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Kraken » Thu May 03, 2018 4:05 pm

I think the real plan is for two competing Americas: One with low taxes, minimal education, few services, a token safety net, healthcare only for those who can afford it, Jesus in every classroom, no abortion rights, harsh drug laws, open discrimination, and guns everywhere...and one that's the opposite of all that. If each could go its own way without trying to reform the other, we'd all be happier for it. But I don't think they can coexist as one country. Doesn't seem to be working out so far, anyway.

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26872
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Rip » Thu May 03, 2018 4:22 pm

Kraken wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 4:05 pm
I think the real plan is for two competing Americas: One with low taxes, minimal education, few services, a token safety net, healthcare only for those who can afford it, Jesus in every classroom, no abortion rights, harsh drug laws, open discrimination, and guns everywhere...and one that's the opposite of all that. If each could go its own way without trying to reform the other, we'd all be happier for it. But I don't think they can coexist as one country. Doesn't seem to be working out so far, anyway.
We already have that. The other country is called Canada. Just go north until people start apologizing to you.

Jeff V
Posts: 30750
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Jeff V » Thu May 03, 2018 4:42 pm

Kraken wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 4:05 pm
I think the real plan is for two competing Americas: One with low taxes, minimal education, few services, a token safety net, healthcare only for those who can afford it, Jesus in every classroom, no abortion rights, harsh drug laws, open discrimination, and guns everywhere...and one that's the opposite of all that. If each could go its own way without trying to reform the other, we'd all be happier for it. But I don't think they can coexist as one country. Doesn't seem to be working out so far, anyway.
You forgot plentiful quality jobs working the coal mines. With an expected roll-back of tobacco taxes, hardly anyone will need health insurance to be treated for black lung if they are already dead from lung cancer.

User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by gilraen » Thu May 03, 2018 4:58 pm

Remus West wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:57 pm
gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:31 pm
Yep, that's the plan - if they are dead or too sick to vote, the rest of humanity wins.
You miss his point that until they do get sick and die they are fucking the rest of us over with their idiotic votes for evil bastards.
I'm not missing that point, I just don't see that we can do anything else about it in the meantime.

User avatar
Remus West
Posts: 32675
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Not in Westland

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Remus West » Thu May 03, 2018 5:09 pm

gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 4:58 pm
Remus West wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:57 pm
gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:31 pm
Yep, that's the plan - if they are dead or too sick to vote, the rest of humanity wins.
You miss his point that until they do get sick and die they are fucking the rest of us over with their idiotic votes for evil bastards.
I'm not missing that point, I just don't see that we can do anything else about it in the meantime.
Get involved?
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26872
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Rip » Thu May 03, 2018 6:55 pm

Remus West wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 5:09 pm
gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 4:58 pm
Remus West wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:57 pm
gilraen wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:31 pm
Yep, that's the plan - if they are dead or too sick to vote, the rest of humanity wins.
You miss his point that until they do get sick and die they are fucking the rest of us over with their idiotic votes for evil bastards.
I'm not missing that point, I just don't see that we can do anything else about it in the meantime.
Get involved?
I tried but she just slapped me in the face..........

Toe
Posts: 3244
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 9:51 am
Location: A small world west of wonder

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Toe » Tue May 08, 2018 2:39 pm

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 588867002/
BATON ROUGE — Louisiana's Department of Health will begin sending nursing home eviction notices Thursday to more than 30,000 residents who could lose Medicaid under the budget passed by the state House of Representatives.

"The Louisiana Department of Health is beginning the process of notifying all impacted enrollees that some people may lose their Medicaid eligibility," Department of Health spokesman Bob Johannessen said. "The goal of the department is to give notice to all affected people as soon as possible in order that they begin developing their appropriate plans."

User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 12665
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Pac-12 Country

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Skinypupy » Tue May 08, 2018 5:07 pm

Toe wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 2:39 pm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 588867002/
BATON ROUGE — Louisiana's Department of Health will begin sending nursing home eviction notices Thursday to more than 30,000 residents who could lose Medicaid under the budget passed by the state House of Representatives.

"The Louisiana Department of Health is beginning the process of notifying all impacted enrollees that some people may lose their Medicaid eligibility," Department of Health spokesman Bob Johannessen said. "The goal of the department is to give notice to all affected people as soon as possible in order that they begin developing their appropriate plans."
Hopefully they die soon and with a minimum of fuss. My tax dollars shouldn't go towards their bad decision of getting old. MAGA!!
“Don’t tickle the wall clown.” - MST3K

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 38574
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Smoove_B » Tue May 08, 2018 5:11 pm

Twitter is telling me they really did just cut $800 million from child healthcare programs? Absolutely disgusting.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7271
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Max Peck » Tue May 08, 2018 6:02 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 5:11 pm
Twitter is telling me they really did just cut $800 million from child healthcare programs? Absolutely disgusting.
From what I see in the WaPo, Twitter may be confused, and conflating two different proposed cuts.

Trump calls on Congress to pull back $15 billion in spending, including on Children’s Health Insurance Program
President Trump is sending a plan to Congress that calls for stripping more than $15 billion in previously approved spending, with the hope that it will temper conservative angst over ballooning budget deficits.

Almost half of the proposed cuts would come from two accounts within the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that White House officials said expired last year or are not expected to be drawn upon. An additional $800 million in cuts would come from money created by the Affordable Care Act in 2010 to test innovative payment and service delivery models.
Are Republicans really proposing to cut funding for poor kids’ health insurance?
The Trump administration is asking Congress to approve a $7 billion cut to the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of a package to reduce a range of previously agreed upon federal spending.

Republicans say none of the money being cut was going toward helping children and that their plan would just strike money that has been approved but is not being spent on a specific program. Democrats are accusing Republicans of trying to cut a program that provides health insurance for 9 million children in the United States, many of whom live in poverty.

So, which version is right?

Some of the funds Republicans want to cut aren't going to children right now, but they are funds that could go to children in the future. Specifically, they are set aside as something of a rainy-day fund if the program found itself with more children enrolled than it had funds to support.

The Trump administration is asking Congress to cut about $2 billion from CHIP's special contingency fund, which was created to direct emergency money to the states that administer the program if they run out of funds, said Joan Alker, executive director of the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University.

The White House wants to cut the other $5 billion from CHIP's “budget authority” — money that the federal government cannot use without additional congressional authorization. As that money was not yet approved to spend, the debate over whether the White House proposals count as “cuts” is mostly focused on the other $2 billion.
So they're "cutting" $7 billion from CHIP, not $800 million, depending on whether you're ideologically inclined to see them as cuts in the first place.
There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7281
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by geezer » Tue May 08, 2018 7:33 pm

Max Peck wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 6:02 pm
Smoove_B wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 5:11 pm
Twitter is telling me they really did just cut $800 million from child healthcare programs? Absolutely disgusting.
From what I see in the WaPo, Twitter may be confused, and conflating two different proposed cuts.

Trump calls on Congress to pull back $15 billion in spending, including on Children’s Health Insurance Program
President Trump is sending a plan to Congress that calls for stripping more than $15 billion in previously approved spending, with the hope that it will temper conservative angst over ballooning budget deficits.

Almost half of the proposed cuts would come from two accounts within the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that White House officials said expired last year or are not expected to be drawn upon. An additional $800 million in cuts would come from money created by the Affordable Care Act in 2010 to test innovative payment and service delivery models.
Are Republicans really proposing to cut funding for poor kids’ health insurance?
The Trump administration is asking Congress to approve a $7 billion cut to the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of a package to reduce a range of previously agreed upon federal spending.

Republicans say none of the money being cut was going toward helping children and that their plan would just strike money that has been approved but is not being spent on a specific program. Democrats are accusing Republicans of trying to cut a program that provides health insurance for 9 million children in the United States, many of whom live in poverty.

So, which version is right?

Some of the funds Republicans want to cut aren't going to children right now, but they are funds that could go to children in the future. Specifically, they are set aside as something of a rainy-day fund if the program found itself with more children enrolled than it had funds to support.

The Trump administration is asking Congress to cut about $2 billion from CHIP's special contingency fund, which was created to direct emergency money to the states that administer the program if they run out of funds, said Joan Alker, executive director of the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University.

The White House wants to cut the other $5 billion from CHIP's “budget authority” — money that the federal government cannot use without additional congressional authorization. As that money was not yet approved to spend, the debate over whether the White House proposals count as “cuts” is mostly focused on the other $2 billion.
So they're "cutting" $7 billion from CHIP, not $800 million, depending on whether you're ideologically inclined to see them as cuts in the first place.
I've never really been a fan of hysterical labeling of reduced increases in future expenditures as MASSIVE CUTS!!!! but when on one hand you're refusing to allocate money to feeding or insuring kids but on the other hand cranking untold billions into unneeded military expenditures, I have to conclude that you're a giant wanker.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 59978
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by LordMortis » Fri May 11, 2018 4:01 pm

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1IC2C0
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday blasted drugmakers and healthcare “middlemen” for making prescription drugs unaffordable for Americans, but healthcare stocks rose as it became clear the administration had avoided taking aggressive and direct measures to cut drug prices.

Trump said his administration would take aim at the “middlemen” in the drug industry who became “very very rich,” an apparent reference to health insurers and pharmacy benefit managers. He also said the pharmaceutical industry is making an “absolute fortune” at the expense of American taxpayers.
And then the stopped clock! I can now more or less find something specific for "how divided are we" where I am willing to sit at the table!!!!
Foreign governments “extort” unreasonably low prices from U.S. drugmakers, Trump also said in a speech delivered as his health deputies released a series of proposals to address high drug costs.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45201
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by LawBeefaroni » Fri May 11, 2018 4:10 pm

LordMortis wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:01 pm
Foreign governments “extort” unreasonably low prices from U.S. drugmakers, Trump also said in a speech delivered as his health deputies released a series of proposals to address high drug costs.
Only because drugmakers and their lobbyists aren't able to get foreign governments to horse-trade the health of their citizens. What he calls "extortion" is to the rest of the world fighting the good fight. The problem isn't that

And it's not just US drugmakers getting "extorted". Merck, Astra, Sanofi, all of them gouge the US while bending to less buyable foreign regulators.

Novartis dropping $1.2M in beer money to Cohen is a perfect example.

Trump, of course, does his best to make it sound like an attack on US market capitalism or some kind of trade issue. Quite possibly because he belives whatever the drug companies tell him on FOX.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7271
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Max Peck » Sat May 12, 2018 12:21 pm

My take is pretty much the same as Eichenwald's, although even in Tweet form his words are better than any I'd have written. Except for that "4" thing. I hate that he does that.
There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 57950
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Isgrimnur » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:35 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:51 pm
Slate
Scott Lloyd has devoted a significant chunk of his yearlong tenure in the federal government to a single crusade: attempting to prevent undocumented minors from terminating their unwanted pregnancies. Lloyd, the director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, issued a new policy in March 2017 prohibiting all federally funded shelters from taking “any action that facilitates” abortion for unaccompanied minors without his “direction and approval.” At least five teenagers have since requested abortions; Lloyd has denied all five requests. The American Civil Liberties Union has sued successfully to protect these minors’ constitutional right to abortion access. In March, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan blocked the ORR from interfering with any undocumented minors’ reproductive health care in any capacity. (The Justice Department plans to appeal.)
NYT
The Supreme Court on Monday turned away a request from the Justice Department to discipline lawyers with the American Civil Liberties Union for assisting an undocumented teenager to obtain an abortion.

In an unsigned opinion with no noted dissents, the court vacated an appeals court ruling that had allowed the teenager to obtain the procedure, saying the dispute was moot. That wiped out the appeals court’s ruling as precedent.

The case attracted wide attention after the Justice Department, in an unusual Supreme Court filing in November, accused the A.C.L.U. of serious professional misconduct in the case of the teenager, who was known as Jane Doe. She obtained an abortion in October over the government’s objection after an appeals court allowed it.
Silver - 3k

People who are wrong often get mad at people who are right. (I have surprisingly never been shot.) (h/t Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar)

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 38574
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Smoove_B » Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:07 pm

STIGGIN IT
ASlavitt: BREAKING: The biggest health care news of the year. The Trump DOJ tonight just told the courts to dismantle pre-existing conditions protections and other consumer protections. This may seem predictable, but these actions are unprecedented. More coming. Follow if interested.


I'm not exactly sure how the DOJ is able to tell the courts to do anything, but hey, nothing matters anymore.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 57950
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:21 pm

What I gathered is someone is suing the government over the ACA, and the DOJ, who is supposed to defend it just went, “eh...”
Silver - 3k

People who are wrong often get mad at people who are right. (I have surprisingly never been shot.) (h/t Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar)

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 33140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Kraken » Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:21 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:07 pm
STIGGIN IT
ASlavitt: BREAKING: The biggest health care news of the year. The Trump DOJ tonight just told the courts to dismantle pre-existing conditions protections and other consumer protections. This may seem predictable, but these actions are unprecedented. More coming. Follow if interested.


I'm not exactly sure how the DOJ is able to tell the courts to do anything, but hey, nothing matters anymore.
Some red states are suing on the premise that the ACA is unconstitutional because -- stay with me here -- the individual mandate was only constitutional as long as the government enforced it with a fine. Congress killed the fine in the tax bill, hence the mandate is now unconstitutional, and btw so is the whole ACA because it depended on the mandate. Ergo, the preexisting conditions requirement is also unconstitutional. The DOJ, rather than defending the law as is its duty, sided with the states that are suing, which this Slavitt fellow interprets as "telling" the courts.

The story I read indicated that they are on shaky legal ground and unlikely to win, but the Trump administration never misses a chance to side with evil. Should they prevail, Medicaid expansion is all that will be left of the ACA and the insurance industry can run amok as god intended.

User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7281
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by geezer » Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:03 am

So my piece of shit criminal Texas state AG is the driving force behind this attempt to make sure that my wife can be denied health insurance, and the clowns at DoJ and, no surprise, the tool in the White House are totally behind it.

Now understand that I'd never wish cancer on anyone and I'm not much into schadenfreude, But you people that voted for Trump and support Texas' special brand of "conservatism" - and I know some of you are reading this - you people have my complete and utter contempt and disdain, and I hope that, someday when someone you love nfortunately suffers because of this, you remember that it's at least partly your fault, you miserable pieces of subhuman garbage.

Yeah, it's personal, and yeah, this triggers the shit out of me, because I have a heart and people that care about me and vice-versa. Fuck you.

User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 13346
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Zarathud » Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:04 am

Republicans lost the mantle of "personal responsibility" the moment they turned against requiring people to insure themselves. Bear the risk you might some day become ill, and require the market to insure that risk.

Everyone wins and a fair market is created. And people who can develop life-threatening illnesses aren't left to die or depend upon charity.

It's personal for me, too. My wife's second job is fighting with my new firm's shitty Ohio based insurance company. Because they're hoping the doctors will suddenly decide my kids aren't insulin dependent diabetics anymore. Or because the insulin manufacturer was happy to keep paying $1 million to Cohen in case he might influence Trump.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal. - Nixon
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867

User avatar
Default
Posts: 5928
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 9:01 pm
Location: Handling bombs.

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Default » Fri Jun 08, 2018 9:17 am

This is the shit that drives me insane. "B-b-b-but that's SOCIALISM!!!" is the objection from the douchebags.



And this is my fist in your nose.
"pcp, lsd, thc, tgb...it's all good." ~ Kraken

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by El Guapo » Fri Jun 08, 2018 9:52 am

Kraken wrote:
Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:21 pm
Smoove_B wrote:
Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:07 pm
STIGGIN IT
ASlavitt: BREAKING: The biggest health care news of the year. The Trump DOJ tonight just told the courts to dismantle pre-existing conditions protections and other consumer protections. This may seem predictable, but these actions are unprecedented. More coming. Follow if interested.


I'm not exactly sure how the DOJ is able to tell the courts to do anything, but hey, nothing matters anymore.
Some red states are suing on the premise that the ACA is unconstitutional because -- stay with me here -- the individual mandate was only constitutional as long as the government enforced it with a fine. Congress killed the fine in the tax bill, hence the mandate is now unconstitutional, and btw so is the whole ACA because it depended on the mandate. Ergo, the preexisting conditions requirement is also unconstitutional. The DOJ, rather than defending the law as is its duty, sided with the states that are suing, which this Slavitt fellow interprets as "telling" the courts.

The story I read indicated that they are on shaky legal ground and unlikely to win, but the Trump administration never misses a chance to side with evil. Should they prevail, Medicaid expansion is all that will be left of the ACA and the insurance industry can run amok as god intended.
Yeah, this is incredibly shaky legal grounds. Now, shaky conservative arguments tend to get more traction than they deserve these days, on account of the Supreme Court and all, but the Roberts could has upheld the ACA twice now (the last one by a 6-3 margin). The odds that the Roberts court is going to buy this tripe is close to zero. There's a pretty good chance that it doesn't make it to the Supreme Court at all, unless they get a good circuit court draw and two appellate lunatics agree with it.

This may put the ACA back in the headlines, which is probably good for the Democrats these days going into the midterms, but there's also the danger that Trump sees Obamacare in the headlines a lot and his lizard brain goes back into "SMASH OBAMACARE!!!" mode.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by El Guapo » Fri Jun 08, 2018 9:54 am

geezer wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:03 am
So my piece of shit criminal Texas state AG is the driving force behind this attempt to make sure that my wife can be denied health insurance, and the clowns at DoJ and, no surprise, the tool in the White House are totally behind it.

Now understand that I'd never wish cancer on anyone and I'm not much into schadenfreude, But you people that voted for Trump and support Texas' special brand of "conservatism" - and I know some of you are reading this - you people have my complete and utter contempt and disdain, and I hope that, someday when someone you love nfortunately suffers because of this, you remember that it's at least partly your fault, you miserable pieces of subhuman garbage.

Yeah, it's personal, and yeah, this triggers the shit out of me, because I have a heart and people that care about me and vice-versa. Fuck you.
Every time ACA repeal / suit stuff comes into the press, I get a renewed fresh of rage at what a shitshow the media coverage of the 2016 election was. It was ENTIRELY predictable that if the GOP got the presidency and held Congress, they would do something to slash the ACA. They'd been harping on little else for 7 years. It was fair to question whether they would try to repeal outright, or just reform it, or gut it in some intermediate way, but it was inevitable that they would do something. And yet, did health care get any goddamn media attention? No, that all went to the all important policy area of e-mail security.

Goddamnit.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45201
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by LawBeefaroni » Fri Jun 08, 2018 10:48 am

For a laugh, or a cry, start this thread over with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7281
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by geezer » Fri Jun 08, 2018 11:41 am

El Guapo wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 9:54 am
geezer wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:03 am
So my piece of shit criminal Texas state AG is the driving force behind this attempt to make sure that my wife can be denied health insurance, and the clowns at DoJ and, no surprise, the tool in the White House are totally behind it.

Now understand that I'd never wish cancer on anyone and I'm not much into schadenfreude, But you people that voted for Trump and support Texas' special brand of "conservatism" - and I know some of you are reading this - you people have my complete and utter contempt and disdain, and I hope that, someday when someone you love nfortunately suffers because of this, you remember that it's at least partly your fault, you miserable pieces of subhuman garbage.

Yeah, it's personal, and yeah, this triggers the shit out of me, because I have a heart and people that care about me and vice-versa. Fuck you.
Every time ACA repeal / suit stuff comes into the press, I get a renewed fresh of rage at what a shitshow the media coverage of the 2016 election was. It was ENTIRELY predictable that if the GOP got the presidency and held Congress, they would do something to slash the ACA. They'd been harping on little else for 7 years. It was fair to question whether they would try to repeal outright, or just reform it, or gut it in some intermediate way, but it was inevitable that they would do something. And yet, did health care get any goddamn media attention? No, that all went to the all important policy area of e-mail security.

Goddamnit.
Werd... But... When most of the country approves of the ACA but disapproves of "Obamacare" I have to wonder just how much hand holding of stupid people the media is supposed to do, or how much difference it would make. Ultimately I'm all for one person, one vote, but if you don't even know that the two are the same and you're still making decisions that impact my family's healthcare... just... damn.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by El Guapo » Fri Jun 08, 2018 11:46 am

geezer wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 11:41 am
El Guapo wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 9:54 am
geezer wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:03 am
So my piece of shit criminal Texas state AG is the driving force behind this attempt to make sure that my wife can be denied health insurance, and the clowns at DoJ and, no surprise, the tool in the White House are totally behind it.

Now understand that I'd never wish cancer on anyone and I'm not much into schadenfreude, But you people that voted for Trump and support Texas' special brand of "conservatism" - and I know some of you are reading this - you people have my complete and utter contempt and disdain, and I hope that, someday when someone you love nfortunately suffers because of this, you remember that it's at least partly your fault, you miserable pieces of subhuman garbage.

Yeah, it's personal, and yeah, this triggers the shit out of me, because I have a heart and people that care about me and vice-versa. Fuck you.
Every time ACA repeal / suit stuff comes into the press, I get a renewed fresh of rage at what a shitshow the media coverage of the 2016 election was. It was ENTIRELY predictable that if the GOP got the presidency and held Congress, they would do something to slash the ACA. They'd been harping on little else for 7 years. It was fair to question whether they would try to repeal outright, or just reform it, or gut it in some intermediate way, but it was inevitable that they would do something. And yet, did health care get any goddamn media attention? No, that all went to the all important policy area of e-mail security.

Goddamnit.
Werd... But... When most of the country approves of the ACA but disapproves of "Obamacare" I have to wonder just how much hand holding of stupid people the media is supposed to do, or how much difference it would make. Ultimately I'm all for one person, one vote, but if you don't even know that the two are the same and you're still making decisions that impact my family's healthcare... just... damn.
I mean, just throw in a discussion every now and again where you say "Republicans say that they want to repeal the ACA. If they are elected, they will probably try to do that. Democrats say that it should be kept. Nonpartisan analyses say repealing could cost tens of millions of people their insurance. Which outcome is better?" You can go straight back to debating e-mail security afterwards!

User avatar
Remus West
Posts: 32675
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Not in Westland

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Remus West » Fri Jun 08, 2018 11:54 am

The trouble for me comes from the media adopting Republican naming conventions. If they insisted on refering to the ACA as the ACA rather than adopting the name Obamacare for it they could have spared us confusion. They could then have run stories regarding "The ACA, which Republicans refer to as Obamacare....." Refuse to use the Republican term without the tie in to the other.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken

User avatar
ImLawBoy
Forum Admin
Posts: 11116
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by ImLawBoy » Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:22 pm

Remus West wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 11:54 am
The trouble for me comes from the media adopting Republican naming conventions. If they insisted on refering to the ACA as the ACA rather than adopting the name Obamacare for it they could have spared us confusion. They could then have run stories regarding "The ACA, which Republicans refer to as Obamacare....." Refuse to use the Republican term without the tie in to the other.
IIRC, the Democrats actually embraced the term Obamacare for a while, because it was so similar to "Obama Cares". They also probably felt that this would be popular in the long term (and rightly so), so keeping a Democrat's name attached to it was a good thing.
We had subs. It was crazy

User avatar
Remus West
Posts: 32675
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Not in Westland

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Remus West » Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:14 pm

ImLawBoy wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:22 pm
Remus West wrote:
Fri Jun 08, 2018 11:54 am
The trouble for me comes from the media adopting Republican naming conventions. If they insisted on refering to the ACA as the ACA rather than adopting the name Obamacare for it they could have spared us confusion. They could then have run stories regarding "The ACA, which Republicans refer to as Obamacare....." Refuse to use the Republican term without the tie in to the other.
IIRC, the Democrats actually embraced the term Obamacare for a while, because it was so similar to "Obama Cares". They also probably felt that this would be popular in the long term (and rightly so), so keeping a Democrat's name attached to it was a good thing.
The issue was allowing the seperation of the two names. If the media hammers "the ACA, known as Obamacare" rather than speaking of the ACA and Obamacare as though they were two different things - which the Republicans did a lot of - more people would have made the connection. Would it have mattered in the election? Probably not enough but at least they'd be more on their way to owning the blame.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 57950
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Isgrimnur » Sun Jul 08, 2018 3:39 pm

WaPo
The Trump administration took another major swipe at the Affordable Care Act, halting billions of dollars in annual payments required under the law to even out the cost to insurers whose customers need expensive medical services.

In a rare Saturday afternoon announcement, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said it will stop collecting and paying out money under the ACA’s “risk adjustment” program, drawing swift protest from the health insurance industry.

Risk adjustment is one of three methods built into the 2010 health-care law to help insulate insurance companies from the ACA requirement that they accept all customers for the first time — healthy and sick — without charging more to those who need substantial care.

The other two methods were temporary, but risk adjustment is permanent. Federal health officials are required each year to calculate which insurers with relatively low-cost consumers must chip in to a fund, and which ones with more expensive customers are owed money. This idea of pooling risk has had significant practical effects: encouraging insurers to participate in the insurance marketplaces the ACA created for Americans who cannot get affordable health benefits through a job.

In its announcement, CMS said that it is not going to make $10.4 billion in payments that are due to insurers in the fall for expenses incurred by insurers last year.
...
The five-paragraph statement plus a timeline issued on Saturday justified the latest maneuver by tying it to a legal dispute over the fairness of the risk-adjustment formula. The dispute goes back about three years to a new type of nonprofit insurer, known as Consumer Oriented and Operated Plans (co-ops), created by the ACA as alternatives to traditional insurance companies. Most of the co-ops found themselves in such fragile financial condition that they closed, and a few that have survived sued the government, alleging they were unfairly making contributions into the risk-adjustment fund while larger, better-established insurers were receiving payments.

In two cases, federal district judges in Massachusetts and New Mexico reached opposite conclusions. The Massachusetts judge found the HHS formula fair, but the one in New Mexico ruled that it was “arbitrary and capricious.” Federal health officials are asking that the New Mexico ruling be reconsidered.

The announcement says that “ruling prevents CMS from making further collections or payments under the risk adjustment program.” CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a statement: “As a result of this litigation, billions of dollars in risk adjustment payments and collections are now on hold.
Queue the lawsuits.
Silver - 3k

People who are wrong often get mad at people who are right. (I have surprisingly never been shot.) (h/t Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar)

User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 18426
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California
Contact:

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Pyperkub » Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:36 pm

And, of course, the data says that in the absence of the fucking with, rates would be down 4.3%. Instead, profits will be up 10%...
In a stable policy environment, average premiums for ACA-compliant plans would likely fall in 2019:...

...Insurers will earn large profits in the ACA-compliant individual market in 2018: Fiedler projects that insurers’ revenues in the ACA-compliant individual market will far exceed their costs in 2018, generating a positive underwriting margin of 10.5 percent of premium revenue,
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by El Guapo » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:00 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:
Sun Jul 08, 2018 3:39 pm
WaPo
The Trump administration took another major swipe at the Affordable Care Act, halting billions of dollars in annual payments required under the law to even out the cost to insurers whose customers need expensive medical services.

In a rare Saturday afternoon announcement, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said it will stop collecting and paying out money under the ACA’s “risk adjustment” program, drawing swift protest from the health insurance industry.

Risk adjustment is one of three methods built into the 2010 health-care law to help insulate insurance companies from the ACA requirement that they accept all customers for the first time — healthy and sick — without charging more to those who need substantial care.

The other two methods were temporary, but risk adjustment is permanent. Federal health officials are required each year to calculate which insurers with relatively low-cost consumers must chip in to a fund, and which ones with more expensive customers are owed money. This idea of pooling risk has had significant practical effects: encouraging insurers to participate in the insurance marketplaces the ACA created for Americans who cannot get affordable health benefits through a job.

In its announcement, CMS said that it is not going to make $10.4 billion in payments that are due to insurers in the fall for expenses incurred by insurers last year.
...
The five-paragraph statement plus a timeline issued on Saturday justified the latest maneuver by tying it to a legal dispute over the fairness of the risk-adjustment formula. The dispute goes back about three years to a new type of nonprofit insurer, known as Consumer Oriented and Operated Plans (co-ops), created by the ACA as alternatives to traditional insurance companies. Most of the co-ops found themselves in such fragile financial condition that they closed, and a few that have survived sued the government, alleging they were unfairly making contributions into the risk-adjustment fund while larger, better-established insurers were receiving payments.

In two cases, federal district judges in Massachusetts and New Mexico reached opposite conclusions. The Massachusetts judge found the HHS formula fair, but the one in New Mexico ruled that it was “arbitrary and capricious.” Federal health officials are asking that the New Mexico ruling be reconsidered.

The announcement says that “ruling prevents CMS from making further collections or payments under the risk adjustment program.” CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a statement: “As a result of this litigation, billions of dollars in risk adjustment payments and collections are now on hold.
Queue the lawsuits.
They announced a couple weeks ago that they are resuming the risk adjustment payments.

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 33140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Kraken » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:11 pm

El Guapo wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:00 pm
They announced a couple weeks ago that they are resuming the risk adjustment payments.
Surprise! The assault on healthcare is on hold until after the election.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45201
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:44 am

You know how most places call signing up for benefits "Open Enrollment?" Well Humana Military (they run Tricare in the east region) calls it "Open Season" for their military enrolees. Like who thought that was a good name?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 57950
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Trump's Full Court Press on healthcare

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Nov 29, 2018 1:34 pm

WaPo
The Trump administration is urging states to tear down pillars of the Affordable Care Act, demolishing a basic rule that federal insurance subsidies can be used only for people buying health plans in marketplaces created under the law.

According to advice issued Thursday by federal health officials, states would be free to redefine the use of those subsidies, which have since 2014 provided the first help the government ever has offered consumers to afford monthly insurance premiums.

States could allow the subsidies to be used for health plans the administration has been promoting outside the ACA marketplaces that are less expensive because they provide skimpier benefits and fewer consumer protections. Even more dramatic, states could let residents with employer-based coverage set up accounts in which they mingle the federal subsidies with health-care funds from their job or personal tax-deferred savings funds to use for premiums or other medical expenses.

If some states take up the administration’s offer, it would undermine the ACA’s central changes to the nation’s insurance system, including the establishment of nationwide standards for many kinds of health coverage sold in the United States.
...
The day before they were released by Seema Verma, administrator of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, an analysis by the Brookings Institution questioned the legality of the content and method of these concepts. The analysis by Christen Linke Young, a Brookings fellow and HHS alumni from the Obama administration, contends that “there are serious questions” about whether the changes are allowable under the law and that “at the very least, it is likely invalid” for CMS to issue the advice to states without going through the formal steps to change federal regulations.
Silver - 3k

People who are wrong often get mad at people who are right. (I have surprisingly never been shot.) (h/t Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar)

Post Reply