GOP Leaders are Trying to Bribe An Alaska Senator—By Letting Her State Keep Obamacare

http://reason.com/blog/2017/09/21/gop-leaders-are-trying-to-bribe-an-alask

It is, of course, a very common practice to try and effectively bribe legislators by adding provisions and carve outs to legislation. But this attempt sets a new bar. It is a bribe to force a senator into voting to repeal the healthcare law for the entire nation...by exempting her own State from that repeal.

TrumpCare is being passed before a CBO score, and without a hearing, the fact that it no longer guarantees against pre-existing conditions and, in fact, permits insurance companies to instantly raise your rates after you get sick...and now we see the depth of depravity necessary to get 50 votes - WHEN THEY HAVE 52 SENATORS.

What. The. ****.

 

TrumpCare threatens to force 50 states into individual healthcare discussions and, more importantly, it is the largest intergovernmental transfer of financial risk in US history.

The federal government can not go bankrupt, but individual states can. TrumpCare threatens to cause that to happen.

 

Direct me to your outraged posts at the Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase, Gator Aid that were used to get Obamacare passed.

 

Well Nelson did allow them to remove the Cornhusker kickback after it became public. Not like he could vote no after that either.

 

From what little I've heard about it, it isn't that much different than the first bill. Still seems like Obamacare lite.

 

This bill should be dead on arrival, it shouldn't even BE a bill. For all of the ACA's flaws, doing worse than the ACA isn't exactly smart.

 

You could lead by example and demonstrate your outrage over this potential example of bribery.

 

GOP Leaders are Trying to Bribe An Alaska Senator—By Letting Her State Keep Obamacare

I'm hoping Murkowski has the personal integrity not to sell out the rest of America for a bribe favoring Alaska. Since the current GOP health bill would destroy Medicaid over the next decade, and Medicaid services over 50% of our nation's pediatric and gerontological needs, I certainly don't feel this bill is acceptable, and strongly support killing it during the vote Wednesday. It goes far beyond simply killing Obamacare. I ask myself, how can anyone claiming to be Pro-Life support a bill that destroys Medicaid, the largest, most successful medical coverage for children in the nation today, and still feel good about themselves?

 

The GOP is effectively admitting that Obamacare works and is desirable with this bribe.

On a side note, CNN will be hosting a debate with Graham, Cassidy, Sanders, and Klobuchar monday night. Really hope to watch that event.

 

I agree that it is risky

The blue states will go for socialized medicine and overspend their budgets

and then come to the feds for a bailout

 

You say the silliest things!

 

It does work. Not as well as we'd like it to.

If you nationalized insurance regulation and rate review, strenghthened provisions for cost managment and standardization and portability of records, allowed for bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals, and took measures to end the new practice of coding inflation and monopolization of heatlh care services in individual markets, you could make some progress.

Of course, the public option would drive all of these things forward., The marketplace would demand them in order to compete!

 

It worked getting the ACA passed, remember Senator Ben Nelson and the cornhusker kickback and Senator May Landrieu with the Louisiana Purchase.

Stuff like this shouldn't be part of passing any legislation, but as you stated it is. I always thought a bill or legislation should stand on its merits and if its merits isn't enough, it should fail. Buying votes is a time honored tradition in congress, totally wrong and probably immoral and unethical, but a tradition nonetheless.

 

I have absolutely no idea what Graham is thinking. I'm so disappointed in him right now.

This is exactly what the Republicans successfully ran against in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016. This is the kind of behavior the Democrats exhibited when passing the ACA. This is just terrible optics.

But even putting politics aside, this bill is awful.

First off, most of it is the exact same as the ACA. Secondly, it puts the decision for the pre-existing clauses back in the hands of the states. For the love of God, that is NOT protecting the pre-existing conditions, so there is no way that President Trump will sign it anyway (I assume) since he promised to not sign any law that exposes pre-existing conditions again.

Secondly, what specific problems with the ACA does this thing even solve? None that I can see. None that anyone else has identified.

Third, and most important - this isn't solving the healthcare crisis or making it better for all Americans or trying not to bankrupt the country. This is a way to get Barack Obama's name off a major piece of legislation - nothing more and nothing less. That right there is dangerous, ignorant, hateful, and a disgrace.

Get back to the drawing board and come up with a bipartisan plan that lowers costs for ALL Americans, makes quality healthcare accessible for everyone, and saves the country money.

Ugh.

 

Quite a bit, if not the majority, of the ACA actually does work. Then a lot of it doesn't work either. It's ridiculous for any side to claim it's a complete disaster or a complete success. So what they should be doing is identifying what isn't working and make changes to the law, as it exists today, and keep the majority of it in place since most of it seems to work.

But they can't do that. That would require them giving Barack Obama credit for being the President when that law was passed. Because people call it "Obamacare", and they can't stand that. That's what this is all about - politics and optics. There is no upside for the American people in their actions and in this bill.

 

If the only reason for this legislation to to get back at President Obama and get his name off a major piece of legislation, I would leave it alone. Over time the ACA is imploding on its own and the best way to get back at him is just to let time take it course. Now, I totally agree with this, "Get back to the drawing board and come up with a bipartisan plan that lowers costs for ALL Americans, makes quality healthcare accessible for everyone, and saves the country money."

No one party can solve healthcare on its own. Both parties must have a stake in it to make it work or the other party will work as hard as they can to destroy it.

 

Great Post !


Trump would sign this Trash Bill in a heartbeat then have the Biggest Ever Photo Op to celebrate his doing his " mandate "

So So Sad !!!

 

Yes, which is why I said it has to be a bipartisan plan. If it isn't, it won't work.

I can't believe everyone doesn't realize that now. I don't just mean the lawmakers - I mean why doesn't every American realize that and fight for it? They have no choice. Ether work together, or realize they destroyed 1/6th of this country's economy for nothing, absolutely nothing but partisan politics.

 

No, actually, the Democrats did not behave like this.

The hearings, meeting, discussion and debate about the ACA went on for a year and a half before the legislation was passed.

McConnell is sitting in a room with a few guys (we don't know who) writing a bill in secret, for which there will be no hearing, no CBO score, and no debate.

That is NOT how the Democrats got the ACA passed.

 

McConnell is an embarrassment

But he represents the true face of the corrupt washington establishment

 

It was introduced in July 2009. It was passed march 2010. Less than one year. Not a year and a half.

Obama didn't even take office until Jan '09, so even if you want to say that's the start, it's still not a year and a half.

If you are trying to include the meetings etc between the presenters of the bill before it was presented, then heck, this has been in the works for 5+ years.

That being said, this bill sucks, and so did the ACA bill.

 

There is a reason this thread was moved to Opinions.... Now I will reply

 

I wasn't a fan of how the Democrats passed the ACA. Although in retrospect, and years later, I'll give them credit for two things:

1. They wanted single payer, and many of their constituents wanted single payer, yet they resisted the temptation of ramming through single payer - that is to their credit
2. They gave the Republicans a chance to have input into the process, and the Republicans, for the most part, simply resisted

Now that said, they still made a lot of mistakes. Having to pass something in order to know what's in it isn't a lawmaking policy I agree with.

The ACA, generally speaking, works. It's a good bill. I'm not a fan of entitlement programs but I'm also not a heartless monster, and I see where they are needed, and there is no doubt we need healthcare entitlement for many people. I can clearly see the good things that came out of the ACA. There are some bad things too, but luckily they haven't impacted me at all, and except for the curious question of how precisely we're going to continue funding that thing, most of it still nets to a positive for most Americans.

My biggest issue with the ACA, and now this bill, is that neither one actually made or make healthcare affordable. "Affordable Care Act" was a misnomer. If you're going to make healthcare affordable for everyone, the ACA wasn't the way to do it, and this new Graham-Cassidy plan isn't either.

 

....was that the extent of your reply?

 

I was stunned to hear this on the news about Monday's debate this morning. I really do believe Sanders is making a huge mistake here, I completely understand his thinking on single payer but the timing of this debate couldn't be worse. This will no doubt elevate public support for a truly bad bill (that virtually all stakeholders and the vast majority of the public oppose), the GCHJ Act and play into the hands of Graham / Cassidy. I can see it now - socialism = communism and so on........

It would have been better to let the bill fail, resulting in no choice but to repair the ACA, and have the debate on single payer later. Eventually the nation will be ready for single payer, once it finally sinks in that it is not socialism = communism and virtually all western industrialized nations practice a form of this - but the US isn't there yet.........I'm guessing something as politically explosive as single payer healthcare needs public polling at 65% approval or better.......