The fall of Trumpcare

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ElectricFetus, Mar 24, 2017.

  1. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Then why have Republicans promised for 7 years now promised to repeal Obamacare on day one? Republicans have had 7+ years to develop an alternative to Obamacare. Last I checked 7 years is certainly longer than just 3 months.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Oh, and when and where did you do that? You are deluding yourself once again.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...says-heritage-foundation-source-health-excha/

    The fact is Obamacare was the Republican healthcare plan developed by The Heritage Foundation in the early 90s in opposition to Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan. The plan was implemented Massachusetts by a Republican governor who became the Republican presidential nominee in 2012. That Heritage/Republican plan was touted by the former Republican Speaker of the House as recently as 2008 right up until Democrats supported it. Then suddenly Republicans were against it. Suddenly overnight it became evil incarnate replete with death panels.

    So you are now admitting for the first time that Trump sold his followers a bill of goods?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Republicans have had decades. Are they really that incompetent? Are they really that vacuous? Yeah, they really are.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    It's not just Joe, it's everybody. Everybody who is informed knows this, and always has. I handed you a link to a detailed Kaiser Foundation analysis from 2010, long before this recent Trump flailing.

    Many Republican Congressmen are aware of the fact that discarding the requirement of covering pre-existing conditions would cost them their seat in Congress, as would the impact of discontinuing subsidies, and so forth. They can't afford to be seen to have done that.

    The demographic circumstance involved is that the major beneficiaries of Obamacare are red State Republican voters, especially those whose State government signed on with the Medicaid expansion.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    And those seven years were spent promising repealing Obamacare, not repeal and replace. Only after Trump won did replace become a real priority. Until then most preferred free market solutions.
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-fall-of-trumpcare.159121/page-6#post-3447223
    In the parlance of today's ObamaCare discussions the "Mandate" refers to a legal obligation dictated by the federal government for all residents to purchase comprehensive health insurance covering routine, preventative, emergency, and mental health care and more.

    The 'mandates' laid out by the Heritage Foundation were of an entirely different nature, as they focused on two areas: 1) Employer Mandate, requiring all large companies to provide healthcare coverage and 2) A Catastrophic Insurance Mandate, intended to protect the public from absorbing the costs for uncovered emergency care.

    Routine health care was always regarded as an individual obligation.
    ...

    Dr. Butler in a USA Today article in February of 2012, summed up the position of the Heritage Foundation:

    "Is the individual mandate at the heart of "ObamaCare" a conservative idea? Is it
    Constitutional? And was it invented at The Heritage Foundation? In a word, no.

    The U.S. Supreme Court will put the middle issue to rest. The answers to the first and last can come from me. After all, I headed Heritage's health work for 30 years. And make no mistake: Heritage and I actively oppose the individual mandate, including in an amicus brief filed in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court."
    In its amicus brief to the Court, the Foundation stated:

    "the Heritage position quoted by the Department of Justice (should) have a red flag indicating it had been reversed. . . . Heritage has stopped supporting any insurance mandate."
    Heritage policy experts never supported an unqualified mandate like that in the PPACA
    [ObamaCare]. Their prior support for a qualified mandate was limited to catastrophic coverage(true insurance that is precisely what the PPACA forbids), coupled with tax relief for all familiesand other reforms that are conspicuously absent from the PPACA. Moreover, Heritage's legal scholars have been consistent in explaining that the type of mandate in the PPACA is unconstitutional.
    ...
    The next time you hear or read someone mention that the Heritage Foundation conceived of the "individual mandate," one should reflect a bit, not on what is being said, but on what is being left out. We need to recognize that the Heritage Foundation:

    1) Did not propose a mandate for routine health care.

    2) Later withdrew all support of any type of a mandate.

    3) Recognized that any such mandate is unconstitutional.

    4) Argued to the Supreme Court (via briefs) that any such mandate was at odds with individual liberty.
    - http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2013/10/heritage_vs_obamacare.html
    You just keep telling yourself that. Just like Democrats seek to distance themselves from their history of racism with the myth of swapping sides, no doubt you'll try to distance yourself from the abject failure of Obamacare by calling it a conservative idea.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    This is not the first time I've freely admitted Trump is a liar.
    "Yes, I do think Trump and his administration are lying. If you ever bothered to quit stereotyping, maybe you'd have found that out before introducing foot to mouth." - http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-trump-presidency.158659/page-8#post-3431883
    Maybe you didn't read the reply to Bells, but it was in a post replying to you as well.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    And? It took Democrats 14 months into Obama's first term, even though they had been supposedly working on it for decades.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    So any incompetence and vacuousness applies doubly to them.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Yes, you just keep telling yourself that said what you imagine it did.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    That's a bare assertion...not a cited source.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    The bigot swap happened in 1968 and the years immediately following, and it was called the "Southern Strategy". The entire Confederacy was formerly Democratic, now it votes Republican. It's historical fact - look it up.
    The position of the Heritage Foundation on its own Plan when offered by Obama is famous. It's right up there with seeing Senators filibuster their own bills and other bizarre manifestations of the Black Presidency. But it doesn't go back in time and change the history of the Plan.
    Already explained for you: Republican and Blue Dog obstruction. Filibuster threats, etc. The Reps don't have that worry now- just no plan. They had a plan, years ago, but Obama took it and passed it - they never put anyone together.
    I quoted it. The comparative term was: "Similar". It was explained in great detail, for you.
    Everybody's the source, of stuff everybody knows.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2017
  8. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    The swap is a myth, otherwise name all the politicians who swapped sides.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    The South started migrating to the right long before '68, with that trend continuing into the 90's. It wasn't until Obama that white southern loyalty to Republicans neared that of blacks to Democrats.
    Note how you completely avoid refuting any specific points made in the cited source. Just more bare assertions in lieu of argument.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    They'd still likely have to use budget reconciliation to avoid filibuster, just like the Dems did for Obamacare...which took 14 months...and supposedly decades before that.
    And you conveniently forget that it only became repeal and replace after Trump won. Before all Trump's promises, most Republicans were happy with free market solutions, i.e. no government plan at all.
    Wow, they both used the word "mandate"....to refer to two different things.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Then it shouldn't be hard for you to cite a source.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    The bigot voters, the white racists and fundies, swapped Parties - starting with the national elections. That was the issue, remember?
    That's irrelevant.
    And the South didn't migrate to the "right", but to the Republicans. Right/left they didn't change much, relative to the rest of the country.
    Mocking the Heritage folks squirming would have been entertaining, but essentially trivial.
    Not at all. The Senate has a new precedent. And they haven't even got that far yet.
    That's ridiculous - turning medical care and medial insurance over to "free markets" only is a lunatic fringe position endorsed by very few people.
    I did. Everybody.
     
    douwd20 likes this.
  10. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Oh so much more nothing from iceaura...as usual.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    The truth is Republicans promised both. It was part of the Republican Party plank in 2012. Trump also promised repeal and replace.

    "MARCH 23, 2010: An immediate push to repeal.
    • Immediately after President Obama signed the Senate health care bill into law, 13 Republican state attorneys general file a federal lawsuit against the overhaul and Sens. Jim DeMint (R-SC), Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Rep. Steve King (R-IA) introduce legislation to repeal the law. King even offers a discharge petition. “If we can get to 218, we can force Nancy Pelosi to bring a repeal to the floor for a vote. If the Senate can do that…we have a chance to put a repeal on President Obama’s desk and make him veto that bill,” King explained. “Repeal and replace will be the slogan for the fall,” Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) predicts."
    Republicans never thought they would actually be able to replace Obamacare. The Republican anti-Obamacare movement was a political misinformation campaign intended to give Republicans a political advantage. Republicans never thought the truth would catch up with them. But it did, and that's why they've got their privates in a sticky wicket.

    Well, here is the problem with that; I wasn't a part of that conversation...oops. Two, your post doesn't prove the things you claim it does. You dumped a lot of shit, but you didn't prove your case. Dance about it all you will, the fact is Obamacare was the Republican alternative to Hillarycare.

    You can quibble about this and that, but fact remains Obamacare was the Republican alternative to Hillarycare and it remained so for more than a decade. It became Romneycare in the State of Massachusetts. It put Romney in bit of a fix when he became the Republican presidential nominee in 2012. He had to campaign against his healthcare plan while touting it as a success.

    I don't get how you think this is even remotely relevant, and what does Bells have to do with this?

    Okay, you think Trump and his administration are lying, but you support them anyway, because, you know, he is a Republican. How is that relevant here? And how is a link related to your confusion about Social Security relevant? It isn't. You are obfuscating again.

    Well, they hadn't been continually working on it for decades. Republicans took over Congress and then the presidency killing any possibility of healthcare reform for more than a decade. When Democrats took control of both houses of congress and the presidency, it was one of the first things they did.

    And here is the thing, Democrats never promised repeal and replace as Republicans have done for the last 7 years. Democrats never promised day one action as Republicans did. If you are going to replace something you should have some idea as to what you will replace it with.

    Are they?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    We will see. Republicans have said many things that are not true. At this point, it's very difficult to see how this works out well for Republicans. The Freedom Caucus is backed by the Kochs and they are in solid Republican districts. As long as they stick with the caucus they don't have to fear reelection. It's very difficult to see how or why they would materially change their positions. I don't think the Kochs are going to change their colors any time soon. The Freedom Caucus are the Koch's personal congressmen. They fund them and they control them. The Kochs want Obamacare killed in order to fund Trump's 13 trillion dollar tax cut which will mostly benefit folks like the Kochs.

    And it doesn't appear likely the so called "moderate" Republicans will change course either. If they fuck-up Obamacare they know it will be their derrieres next year. The so called "moderates" represent people who are heavily dependent upon Obamacare. Their constituents bought into Trump's promises of better and cheaper healthcare. What the Kochs/Freedom Caucus is pushing isn't better or cheaper healthcare. They want the money. Republicans are in a tough spot. They have two factions who are diametrically opposed to each other. The best they can hope for is people will forget about healthcare.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2017
  12. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Just had to point out that this is the most literal use of the ad populum fallacy I've EVER seen. LOL

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,659
    From The Blaze, Feb 24:
    ===============
    Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute . . . cited House Speaker Paul Ryan’s plan, which he called “Obamacare lite.” But, as Cannon noted, he isn’t the only one calling it that.

    “I would say that the Republican establishment position is that they’re going to keep parts of Obamacare. I don’t think Obamacare lite is what we should do,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said during a Feb. 15 interview with Fox News host Neil Cavuto.

    Idaho Republican Rep. Raul Labrador used the same phrase while referring to top Republicans’ reported plan to replace the health care overhaul.

    “I’m hearing a lot of members say that they want Obamacare lite,” Labrador said Jan. 31 during a Bloomberg interview.

    “That’s not what we promised the American people. I’m very concerned about the things I’m hearing in the conference because they’re different than the things I’ve heard over the last six years,” Labrador added.

    Cannon said that Republican leadership is discussing keeping in place “core provisions” of Obamacare, such as requiring everyone in a particular insurance pool to pay the same premium regardless of the individual risk they pose, taxpayer subsidies for health care insurers and perhaps even the individual mandate that requires all Americans to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.
    ==============
    The Hill, Feb 1:
    ==============
    “I'm trying to be accurate on this that there are some of these provisions in the law that probably will stay, or we may modify them, but we're going to fix things, we're going to repair things,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.), a key player on healthcare, told reporters Tuesday.

    “There are things we can build on and repair, there are things we can completely repeal,” he said.

    Senate Health Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) is sounding a similar note. He notes that Republicans plan to use special budget rules known as reconciliation to prevent Democrats from filibustering a vote to repeal ObamaCare. The use of those rules won’t allow all of ObamaCare to be repealed.

    “I think it is more accurate to say repair ObamaCare because, for example, in the reconciliation procedure that we have in the Senate, we can't repeal all of ObamaCare,” Alexander said. “ObamaCare wasn't passed by reconciliation, it can't be repealed by reconciliation. So we can repair the individual market, which is a good place to start."
    ================
     
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Yeah, it's kind of funny. After all these years, after nearly a decade of screaming repeal and replace, after all the claims of death panels and other assorted lies, after denying Obamacare was the Republican healthcare plan, the first thing Republicans do is attempt to replace Obamacare with Obamacare lite.
     
  15. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    That only applies to argument - your error similar to your use of ad hominem et al. There's no such thing as an ad populum observation. That's an illiteracy you could fix in thirty minutes, probably, with a little study.


    Meanwhile, the great bigot swap - a hugely significant change in the American political landscape, and quite obvious as well as famous, is relevant here: racial bigotry is probably the single biggest obstacle to socialized medical insurance in the US, or any other beneficial reform in its startlingly under-performing and cripplingly expensive medical care system.

    Myth? Here's four election maps of Presidential votes. See if you see a difference, before and after Nixon/Reagan - hint: Alabama is a famous center of white bigotry, with Mississippi and Georgia comprising the heartland of the Confederacy, Jim Crow, and US bigotry in general. Indiana plays that role in the North.
    1) 1956 - a famous and highly honored WWII General, from Kansas, is running on the Republican ticket; a Princeton and Harvard educated Yankee career bureaucrat and politician from an upper class Illinois family of no military honor, a snob of sorts whose favorite ancestor was a close aid and advisor to Abraham Lincoln, is running on the Democratic ticket. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PresidentialCounty1956.png
    2) 1960 - a Republican running as a populist of sorts, from California with a good military service record, vigorous and masculine; running against another Harvard Yankee Dem, from a wealthy and centrally connected Eastern Seaboard elite family, with health problems. As a wild card there is a southerner running as a white racist Independent defending segregation and Jim Crow - the Jim Crow laws are becoming controversial. He gets a lot of votes from the centers of bigotry - see if you can spot them: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/1960_Electoral_Map.png
    3) 1996 - The Republicans run another WWII war hero from Kansas, as in 1956. The Dems have a big advantage in the south running an incumbent southerner in a good economy, popular and famous for his common touch - but he's a bit iffy on the race issue (people describe him as the first black President, and it kind of makes sense). See if you can spot the difference in the voting patterns from 1956: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YKysaaPsZkA/TVoPbWydVsI/AAAAAAAAAIg/aheXW8bDLz0/s1600/dole.JPG
    4) 2000 - the Republicans run a third generation scion of an elite Eastern Seaboard family, Yale and Harvard educated on a legacy admission but not known for smarts, with a checkered business career involving Arab and corruption money and a failed military career involving draft avoidance mediated by his father along with alcohol and drugs; the Democrats run a southerner from the Confederacy and well-respected war veteran, a successful politician of undeniable accomplishment and close association with a good economy - but, again, shaky on the race issue (he's associated with that "first black President"). http://www.270towin.com/2000_Election/
    Note: the southern Dem even lost his home State, won by even snob Yankee Dems in the past. That's rare.

    And that is why we don't have First World levels of medical care delivery in the US, and why Trump cannot fix Obamacare or replace it with something "better", but only damage or discard it. Go back to Eisenhower, Kennedy; carry through to Clinton, and you can see the socialized insurance plans hit the iceberg of racial bigotry in the Confederacy and sink without a bubble.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2017
  16. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Maybe you should look it up before you go telling easily refutable lies about the 2012 Republican platform:
    Repealing Obamacare
    The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—Obamacare—was never really about healthcare, though its impact upon the nation's health is disastrous. From its start, it was about power, the expansion of government control over one sixth of our economy, and resulted in an attack on our Constitution, by requiring that U.S. citizens purchase health insurance. We agree with the four dissenting justices of the Supreme Court: "In our view the entire Act before us is invalid in its entirety." It was the high-water mark of an outdated liberalism, the latest attempt to impose upon Americans a euro-style bureaucracy to manage all aspects of their lives. Obamacare has been struck down in the court of public opinion and is falling by the weight of its own confusing, unworkable, budget-busting, and conflicting provisions. It would tremendously expand Medicaid without significant reform, leaving the States to assume unsustainable financial burdens. If fully implemented, it could not function; and Republican victories in the November elections will guarantee that it is never implemented. Congressional Republicans are committed to its repeal; and a Republican President, on the first day in office, will use his legitimate waiver authority under that law to halt its progress and then will sign its repeal. Then the American people, through the free market, can advance affordable and responsible healthcare reform that meets the needs and concerns of patients and providers. Through Obamacare, the current Administration has promoted the notion of abortion as healthcare. We, however, affirm the dignity of women by protecting the sanctity of human life. Numerous studies have shown that abortion endangers the health and wellbeing of women, and we stand firmly against it.
    - http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=101961
    LOL
    Where does it say replace? You know, aside from the free market....like I've been saying.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    And you do know that McConnell was hated among Republicans only second to Boehner (who was ousted), right?
    And yet again, we don't know what they will or will not do, until at least given the 14 months the Dems took in the first Obama term to get anything done. But no doubt you'll continue asserting your blatant double standard.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Hey, if you can't be bothered to look, you really shouldn't be saying things like, "Oh, and when and where did you do that? You are deluding yourself once again." So take your time and pry your foot out of your mouth. Or just keep blaming me for not personally spoon feeding you every single argument I make.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    If you think your mother posts here, I'm not wiping your ass either.
    Yeah, just keep ignoring facts by calling them "quibbles"....you know, instead of actually managing to refute anything.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Wow, what bigoted stereotypes you have. I don't support parties or individuals unquestionably. I support principles.
    Short memory? You asked, "So you are now admitting for the first time that Trump sold his followers a bill of goods?" So I proved that I have already (not the "first time") said Trump was a liar. If you don't like having your pointless stereotypes completely refuted, quit making them.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Congress has usually been controlled by the same party (post WWII) with the “odd man out” being, literally, the President. Only 16 times (32 years) since 1945 have both branches of Congress and the Presidency been controlled by the same party; the Democrats have held this advantage more often than Republicans (11 to 4). However, it has happened four times (8 years) since 2003, making this seem more common that it has been, historically (Republicans, three times). Prior to WWII, having House, Senate and White House controlled by the same party was the norm.
    - http://wiredpen.com/resources/polit...l-guide-balance-of-power-congress-presidency/
    So what's your next excuse?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    In '33 (pre WWII) FDR wanted publicly funded healthcare. So Dems have had decades.
    And from the 2016 Republican platform:
    We agree with the four dissenting judges of the
    Supreme Court: “In our view, the entire Act before
    us is invalid in its entirety.” It must be removed
    and replaced with an approach based on genuine
    competition, patient choice, excellent care, wellness,
    and timely access to treatment. To that end, a
    Republican president, on the first day in office,
    will use legitimate waiver authority under the law
    to halt its advance and then, with the unanimous
    support of Congressional Republicans, will sign its
    repeal.​
    - https://prod-cdn-static.gop.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf
    In case you don't understand, "genuine competition" only exists in a free market solution.
    And you're naive if you think no politician ever lies or exaggerates campaign promises.
    Your conspiracy theories aside, wait and see is exactly what I've been saying. So we agree.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Nice try dodging your own assertion. When you make a claim without support, are challenged to support said claim, and then say "everyone knows", that is literally an argument ad populum ("a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it").
    Maybe you just don't understand what constitutes a fallacious argument. That would explain a lot of your confusion.
    In truth, the white South began breaking away from the Democrats in the 1920s, as population centers began to develop in what was being called the “New South” (remember, at the beginning of the 20th century, New Orleans was the only thing approximating what we currently think of as a city in the South).

    In the 1930s and 1940s, FDR performed worse in the South in every election following his 1932 election. By the mid-1940s, the GOP was winning about a quarter of the Southern vote in presidential elections.

    But the big breakthrough, to the extent that there was one, came in 1952. Dwight Eisenhower won 48 percent of the vote there, compared to Adlai Stevenson’s 52 percent. He carried most of the “peripheral South” -- Virginia, Tennessee, Texas and Florida -- and made inroads in the “Deep South,” almost carrying South Carolina and losing North Carolina and Louisiana by single digits.

    Even in what we might call the “Deepest South” -- Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi -- Eisenhower kept Stevenson under 70 percent, which might not seem like much until you realize that Tom Dewey got 18 percent in Georgia against FDR in 1944, and that this had been an improvement over Herbert Hoover’s 8 percent in 1932.

    In 1956, Eisenhower became the first Republican since Reconstruction to win a plurality of the vote in the South, 49.8 percent to 48.9 percent. He once again carried the peripheral South, but also took Louisiana with 53 percent of the vote. He won nearly 40 percent of the vote in Alabama. This is all the more jarring when you realize that the Brown v. Board decision was handed down in the interim, that the administration had appointed the chief justice who wrote the decision, and that the administration had opposed the school board.

    Nor can we simply write this off to Eisenhower’s celebrity. The GOP was slowly improving its showings at the congressional level as well. It won a special election to a House seat in west Texas in 1950, and began winning urban congressional districts in Texas, North Carolina, Florida and Virginia with regularity beginning in 1952.
    - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...shift_to_the_gop_predates_the_60s_118172.html
    IOW, as the south started to develop like the north, the people started voting like northerners. The Dems changed their strategy with FDR's infamous "I'll have those niggers voting Democrat for 200 years".
     
  18. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Which was invisible in the recorded Presidential electoral vote until after Lyndon Johnson's Presidency. The bigot swap happened between 1960 and 2000.
    You seem to have forgotten your original contention - you claimed that the bigot swap never happened, that it was a myth, remember?

    As far as "breakthrough", look at the circumstances - look at who the Confederacy was voting for to keep voting Democratic: snooty Yankee elites, over very competent and southern values friendly war heroes. Northerners over neighbors. That was striking. Obviously there was a powerful motive involved.
    They didn't. The Confederacy, and the part of the country settled from it, continued to vote differently from the Union, and has - visibly in close elections - to this day. Look at the maps.
    "Everybody knows" was in the original observation, repeated later. It would have been part of what I would have had to argue for, had I decided to post argument.

    I hadn't. What I posted wasn't an argument (of the kind referred to by such terms) at all. Claims are - literally - not the same things as arguments. You have the same problem with insults, falsehoods, and so forth: they aren't arguments either. This is illiterate, on your part. You can probably fix the gap in your education with a half hour of study on line.

    Meanwhile, the influence of what we now encounter as the Republican core voter on the US medical care and insurance system continues - stretching back to their incarnations in the KKK and John Birch society, the White Citizens Council and the Jim Crow laws, the Byrd and Wallace and Nixon and Reagan and W and now Trump enthusiastic crowds of people who hate - and that's not really too strong a word - "liberals".

    Because First World medical care for all citizens, no matter how it's set up, is a liberal proposal. In the US.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2017
  19. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910

    LOL....Now read the part you left out:

    Our Prescription for American Healthcare: Improve Quality and Lower Costs
    We believe that taking care of one's health is an individual responsibility. Chronic diseases, many of them related to lifestyle, drive healthcare costs, accounting for more than 75 percent of the nation's medical spending. To reduce demand, and thereby lower costs, we must foster personal responsibility while increasing preventive services to promote healthy lifestyles. We believe that all Americans should have improved access to affordable, coordinated, quality healthcare, including individuals struggling with mental illness.

    Our goal is to encourage the development of a healthcare system that provides higher quality care at a lower cost to all Americans while protecting the patientphysician relationship based on mutual trust, informed consent, and privileged patient confidentiality. We seek to increase healthcare choice and options, contain costs and reduce mandates, simplify the system for patients and providers, restore cuts made to Medicare, and equalize the tax treatment of group and individual health insurance plans. For most Americans, those who are insured now or who seek insurance in the future, our practical, non-intrusive reforms will promote flexibility in State leadership in healthcare reform, promote a free-market based system, and empower consumer choice. All of which will return direction of the nation's healthcare to the people and away from the federal government.

    To return the States to their proper role of regulating local insurance markets and caring for the needy, we propose to block grant Medicaid and other payments to the States; limit federal requirements on both private insurance and Medicaid; assist all patients, including those with pre-existing conditions, through reinsurance and risk adjustment; and promote non-litigation alternatives for dispute resolution. We call on State officials to carefully consider the increased costs of medical mandates, imposed under their laws, which may price many low-income families out of the insurance market. We call on the government to permanently ban all federal funding and subsidies for abortion and healthcare plans that include abortion coverage.

    To achieve a free market in healthcare and ensure competition, we will promote price transparency so that consumers will know the actual cost of treatments before they undergo them. When patients are aware of costs, they are less likely to over-utilize services. We support legislation to cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits, thereby relieving conscientious providers of burdens that are not rightly theirs and addressing a serious cause of escalating medical bills. We will empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools in order to expand coverage to the uninsured. Individuals with preexisting conditions who maintain continuous insurance coverage should be protected from discrimination. We support technology enhancements for medical health records and data systems while affirming patient privacy and ownership of health information.

    Ensuring Consumer Choice in Healthcare
    Consumer choice is the most powerful factor in healthcare reform. Today's highly mobile work force requires portability of insurance coverage that can go with them from job to job. The need to maintain coverage should not dictate where families have to live and work. Putting the patient at the center of policy decisions will increase choice and reduce costs while ensuring that services provide what Americans actually want. We must end tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance and allow consumers to purchase insurance across State lines. While promoting "co-insurance" products and alternatives to "fee for service," government must promote Health Savings Accounts and Health Reimbursement Accounts to be used for insurance premiums and should encourage the private sector to rate competing insurance plans. We will ensure that America's aging population has access to safe and affordable care. Because seniors overwhelmingly desire to age at home, we will make home care a priority in public policy. We will champion the right of individual choice in senior care. We will aggressively implement programs to protect against elder abuse, and we will work to ensure that quality care is provided across the care continuum from home to nursing home to hospice. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=101961

    You never disappoint me comrade.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You should, you know, like read your references before you reference them.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The Republican Party plank of 2012 clearly calls for the repeal and replacement of Obamacare and it describes what they would replace it with, e.g. selling of insurance across state lines, tort reform, healthcare savings accounts, tax law changes, etc. That has been the Republican Obamacare replacement plan for the last 4 years. But now when it matters, Republicans cannot pass their plan because they know it is bullshit.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2017
    ElectricFetus likes this.
  20. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Then why is McConnell still the majority leader if he is so hated? Boehner resigned. He wasn't ousted.

    Except, that isn't true. Obama had passed his fiscal stimulus within weeks of taking office. Obama accomplished much in his first few weeks in office. Obama inherited an economy and financial system in crisis. Healthcare wasn't Obama's number one priority as it has been with Republicans. Facts matter comrade. Just because you do a lot of cherry picking, it doesn't follow that I have a double standard. I don't.

    LOL...bothered to look? The fact is you lied. Just because you are clearly delusional, it doesn't follow anyone else is.

    And what facts have I ignored? Please be specific. The fact is Obamacare was the Republican healthcare solution right up until Democrats began to support it in 2009. You keep ignoring that fact. You keep ignoring the fact Romney, the Republican presidential nominee in 2012 had implemented Obamacare in his state.

    The unfortunate fact for you is Obamacare was for decades the Republican alternative to Hillarycare.

    Bigoted stereotypes....? Please do explain. Don't look now comrade but your delusional thinking is showing. Just because you want to represent your self as a rational thinker it doesn't mean you are a rational thinker. Your writings clearly show you are not. You know Trump is a liar but you support him anyway because of your "principals" i.e. party affiliation.

    Your delusions are showing again. That was completely off topic and totally irrelevant. The unfortunate fact for you is that the Clinton's tried to reform healthcare in the early 90s. It failed as Democrats lost control of Congress and eventually the presidency. When Democrats once again controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency again in 2009 - 2011 they passed healthcare reform.

    We agree? You just flip flopped. You said the Freedom Caucus would pass a healthcare law in a few weeks. I doubt it for the reasons previously given. There's no conspiracy there comrade. The Republican Party is deeply fractured. The Tea Party Caucus is funded by the Kochs and they are in safe districts. As long as they maintain the support of the Kochs, they don't need to change. And there is no indication the Kochs will change their tune anytime soon. The Caucus wants to use the money from Obamacare to fund tax cuts for the wealthy.
     
    ElectricFetus likes this.
  21. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Again, crony, where does any of that say replace?
    Apparently you need some big words explained to you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    "personal responsibility" and "health savings accounts" mean less reliance on government, "encourage the development of a healthcare system" and "end tax discrimination" mean removing the regulatory road blocks to a free market solution and "return the States to their proper role of regulating local insurance markets", and "promote non-litigation alternatives for dispute resolution" does not mean tort reform (because promoting alternatives does not limit the victims options).

    It took a visit from the pope, a brewing conservative rebellion, and a good night’s sleep for John Boehner — the son of a bartender and a devout Catholic from Cincinnati — to decide that Friday morning was the right moment for him to end his tumultuous five-year speakership and bring his 25-year career in Congress to a close.
    ...
    “It had become clear to me that this prolonged leadership turmoil would do irreparable harm to the institution,” Boehner told reporters Friday. “I don’t want my members to have to go through this. And I certainly don’t want the institution to have to go through this.”
    ...
    Ohio Rep. Steve Chabot said Boehner “fell on his sword for the rest of the conference so we didn’t have to go through a bitter, divisive battle about his speakership.”
    - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/09/25/john-boehner-resigns-house-speaker/72793398/
    Yeah, everything sounded peachy.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Can you say non sequitur?
    I've already shown you exactly where I said it, so it is demonstrable you are lying or delusional.
    All the fact you obviously can't be bothered to read...or comprehend. No use repeating myself to the willfully ignorant.
    Just more of your bigotry on display. I freely admit Trump is a liar because I don't support the man nor the party that does. I support specific actions that align with my principles, but I can see how "principles" may be too big a word for you. After all, you certainly seem to reflect a high degree of group-think.
    What flip flop?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    House Republicans pass bill to replace and repeal Obamacare
    You were saying?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    He says...continuing to spout his conspiracy theories.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    If it involves the free market, it's not a solution, it's theft. Even Obamacare was a horrible way to provide health care. We need single payer, government insurance with zero profit motive. We already know it works, and President Pumpkin said so about Australia.
    It's just history. They decided to support the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and they lost all the racists.
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,659
    I take that back. They are now 0 and 3. The Senate announced that they would abandon the House bill altogether and "start from scratch." Sen. Susan Collins: "First of all, the House bill is not going to come before us. The Senate is starting from scratch. We're going to draft our own bill."

    We haven't seen this much incompetence since "Mission Accomplished."
     

Share This Page