[Discussion] Health Policies and ACA Reform/Repeal

The existing health thread is for discussion on how changes to current policy will/have personally affected you or those you know. This thread is for more general discussion of the subject.

OG_slinger wrote:

Rep. Dave Brat, R-7th, is feeling some political pressure as Republicans in Congress move to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

“Since Obamacare and these issues have come up, the women are in my grill no matter where I go,” Brat told an audience Saturday at a meeting of conservative groups at Hanover Tavern.

“They come up — ‘When is your next town hall?’ And believe me, it’s not to give positive input.”

Brat, R-7th, asked the GOP-friendly audience to get organized.

“Help us write newspaper articles. We’re getting hammered,” he said.

...

Brat said Saturday that he was concerned the Senate wouldn’t pass a free market alternative to the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 law that became a signature of the Obama administration.

“We need activists coming out on everything,” he said.

In a phone interview Monday, Brat said he thinks many of the people protesting the Trump administration are paid activists from outside their area of protest.

“I had one woman on my Facebook say she was going to get up in my grill,” he said. “There’s paid protesters ... paid activists on the far left, not my Democratic friends I go to church with.

“They’re being paid to go around and raise havoc.”

Brat’s comments on “paid activists” were met with surprise from some constituents on Monday.

Karen Conley of Henrico County said she recently called Brat’s office in support of the Affordable Care Act, which insures her family.

She said she’s encountered numerous other constituents of the 7th District concerned about representation, and groups of people are finding each other.

“Nobody is being paid or put up to this by an outside organization,” she said. “Everybody is putting in their time and effort because they’re dissatisfied with the representation. They feel dismissed, and that their concerns aren’t valid because they’re not being responded to.”

Brat is my representative, and he is a huge piece of sh*t.

Dezlen wrote:

Brat is my representative, and he is a huge piece of sh*t.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HUG...

Baron Of Hell wrote:

The 31st is the last day to sign up for Obamacare or ACA.

Still have a few hours to sign up. Only takes about 20 minutes.

Sanders and Cruz are going to debate next week on CNN over the ACA. I don't really get the point, but I'll be watching.

Sanders, Cruz to face off in debate over future of ObamaCare

The Freedom Caucus is not happy about Obamacare not being repealed yet.

One GOP source familiar with the vote told CNN: "There's no reason we shouldn't be able to pass this ASAP -- there's also no reason we should send anything less to President Trump's desk than we did Obama's. No need to reinvent the wheel."
But since President Donald Trump's inauguration, many congressional Republicans have asked party leaders to slow down the repeal efforts to ensure that a consensus is reached on an Obamacare alternative. Top Republicans are still weeks away from completing a repeal legislation, which now aims to include various replacement measures.

The "reluctant" Republicans keep talking about how they need to take their time to make sure they have a good replacement plan ready while the more aggressive among them want to know why they can't now follow through on all those dozens of "full repeal" bills they put up for a vote over the last few years. Funny how the eagerness to repeal goes away among some of them when they know the President isn't going to veto anything that might squeak through. Now that they're accountable for their rhetoric they're having to actually think about the consequences.

You break it, you bought it...

More like you break it, you still do everything you can to blame the guy who came before. It's the Dems' job to make sure that the GOP owns whatever they screw up.

If you look at the recent Republican town halls, that message has come through loud and clear.

Robear wrote:

If you look at the recent Republican town halls, that message has come through loud and clear.

To which they've reacted with no policy changes and instead are suggesting paid agitators and contrarian jerks are all coming, not real constituents.

Demosthenes wrote:
Robear wrote:

If you look at the recent Republican town halls, that message has come through loud and clear.

To which they've reacted with no policy changes and instead are suggesting paid agitators and contrarian jerks are all coming, not real constituents.

Some of them are simply not meeting with constituents to discuss healthcare citing nebulous "security threats."

OG_slinger wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
Robear wrote:

If you look at the recent Republican town halls, that message has come through loud and clear.

To which they've reacted with no policy changes and instead are suggesting paid agitators and contrarian jerks are all coming, not real constituents.

Some of them are simply not meeting with constituents to discuss healthcare citing nebulous "security threats."

Job security threats is more like it.

Robear wrote:

If you look at the recent Republican town halls, that message has come through loud and clear.

As an example, you have thisRepublican Congressman from Washington state.

The constituents of Washington's District 8 have a lot to say to their U.S. Representative, Dave Reichert (R-Auburn), but when he returns from Washington for recess the week of February 20th, he isn't giving them a public forum in which to say it. No town hall. No mini-town hall (we'll get to that in a second). No speech from a balcony or from a fir tree or from Mt. Si's hallowed haystack.

Instead, and only after serious pressure, he's agreed to host a Facebook live event on February 23rd at 1:00 p.m.

...

But according to Straka, during their meeting she asked Foy if Reichert would host a town hall meeting during Congressional recess. She and her group wanted him to answer questions about his views on civil rights, healthcare, and the environment. Foy responded then, and later reiterated the point in an e-mail to Straka, saying that town halls "were not successful because they turned into screaming matches amongst some of the participants."

(Straka pushes back on the idea that there's going to be a lot of screaming and yelling at their town hall. "If there’s a hundred us in a room and we’re all asking for the same thing, there’s probably not going to be a lot of shouting going on," she said.)

In that same meeting, according to Straka, Foy also mentioned Reichert's response to the rise of the Tea Party back in 2009-10. When local Tea Partiers asked him to hold town halls, he offered them "mini town halls" as a compromise. When Straka and her crew asked for a mini town hall, Foy countered with the idea of a Facebook live meeting, which she said would be moderated by the Public Broadcasting Service.

The piece goes on to have the Congressman talking about backlash from the muslim ban but I'll quote that elsewhere.

Kehama wrote:
Robear wrote:

If you look at the recent Republican town halls, that message has come through loud and clear.

As an example, you have this Republican Congressman from Washington state.

This part of that article is what got me.

The Stranger wrote:

And don't physically show up to his office, either. You might scare him.

According to Politico, on Tuesday, House GOP Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers tapped former sheriff Reichert to lead a closed-door meeting concerning proper safety measures representatives should take to "protect themselves and their staffs from protesters storming town halls and offices in opposition to repealing Obamacare."

Reichert urges lawmakers to build a backdoor just in case they need to skedaddle. He instructs them to install video cameras, and to replace glass doors with "hard doors."

Reichert's last bit of advice is one of prevention, and it reveals a major motivation for all of his dodgy ways: “You’ve got to build a relationship so you don’t get to the level where they feel they need to threaten or antagonize you or try to get you upset and get a YouTube moment,” he said.

A YouTube moment. That's what all this is about.

A YouTube moment like this one where four constituents of Senator Tom Cotton tried to meet with him and were greeted with a locked door, several signs telling them to bugger off, and a fancy security intercom that Cotton's staff members used to tell people to go away.

I'm quickly learning that my representatives don't represent me because I didn't vote for them. Apparently I had misread that part in civics class where elected officials were supposed to take into account the needs of all of their people, not just their most ardent supporters. The line "We won, get over it." is apparently being taken to heart. When you can't even be bothered to speak with your detractors and defend your position it just makes me think you either don't know why you're doing something or you're too ashamed to admit why you're doing it. If you can't answer primary questions about a position you're taking, maybe you shouldn't be so proud that you've taken it and talk about how it's best for everyone.

Kehama wrote:

I'm quickly learning that my representatives don't represent me because I didn't vote for them. Apparently I had misread that part in civics class where elected officials were supposed to take into account the needs of all of their people, not just their most ardent supporters. The line "We won, get over it." is apparently being taken to heart. When you can't even be bothered to speak with your detractors and defend your position it just makes me think you either don't know why you're doing something or you're too ashamed to admit why you're doing it. If you can't answer primary questions about a position you're taking, maybe you shouldn't be so proud that you've taken it and talk about how it's best for everyone.

That's actually a semi-reasonable stance for them to take, if you just look at the real-politics of their re-election. Effort spent placating someone who will undoubtedly vote for their Democratic opponent even if they listen to you on many of those issues... that's hard to force yourself to do. And when listening to you on those issues is mutually exclusive to listening to people that did vote Republican last time, and probably well next time... It's a difficult sell even before you consider primary challengers.

That's why I have been flexing the truth a bit by omission in my calls. When I talk to the offices of the Republicans I tell them, completely honestly, that I was a registered Republican until 2016. What I don't tell them is that I had been trending more liberal for long before that without actually changing my registration, and while it is possible, I simply can't imagine the Republican party possibly pulling itself up from this sh*thole they've dug for themselves to the point where I'll support the party for decades (I'd love to be pleasantly surprised). I just let the implication that they could get me back just as quickly hang there.

Obviously most people don't have that convenient history, but what everyone can do is keep specific calls/messages/letters to a single focus. Don't call with a laundry list of complaints that shows how far you are from your representative. Pick a single message, and talk about it alone (also a good general idea for a short conversation like what we are talking about). It's also a good idea to open during your introduction with something you like or agree with your representative on, there has to be something. It's not only your representative's job to close the gap with you, it's your job to close the gap with them as well.

So if you're a Republican who has constituents beating down the doors and clogging comm lines demanding you keep their healthcare features intact, and you can't even hold a town hall without being attacked for going after OCare without a replacement, what will you do?

A - Go back to DC and tell McConnell and Ryan that you're fully on board with burning down OCare without a replacement, and damn the constituents likely to throw you out on your ass in the next election?
or
B - Go back to DC and light McConnell and Ryan's hair on fire, telling them that *they* can get their asses out to Podunk City to explain to your constitutents why their beloved benefits are going away without redress and can they please fix this RIGHT G-D-DAMMED NOW!!!!

The thing is Ro, they are so entrenched from gerrymandering or just in an area that votes for anyone with an R next to their name, the only way they have to fear losing an election is if the Republicans decide to primary someone else against them.

Or

C) Pretend those concerned constituents are professional agitators paid by the Democratic Illuminati or Big Socialism and ignore them because your district is so gerrymandered that no one left of Nixon could be elected.

So, we can argue that people voted for Trump because they thought he'd protect their rights and privileges in society, but not that they will vote out their rep because their *health care* entitlement is threatened? Gerrymandering is bad, but people *will* vote their interests as they see them, and right now we've seen a huge surge in support for the features of OCare.

Robear wrote:

So, we can argue that people voted for Trump because they thought he'd protect their rights and privileges in society, but not that they will vote out their rep because their *health care* entitlement is threatened? Gerrymandering is bad, but people *will* vote their interests as they see them, and right now we've seen a huge surge in support for the features of OCare.

How many of those Republican voters do you think understand after eight years of being continually lied to by conservative politicians and media alike that Obamacare is different from the ACA they've been benefiting from?

After nearly a decade of a relentlessly negative conservative marketing campaign those people f*cking *hate* Obamacare.

Republican politicians are now trying to figure out how they can fulfill their promise to repeal Obamacare without getting slammed for cutting the benefits millions of their constituents have come to love and depend on.

Which is why Republicans are trying to drag their feet now. They sold their conservative constituents on sticking it to Obama by overturning the law. But now they they're afraid of telling voters that they lied to them for years and years and that getting rid of Obamacare is going to f*ck them and their loved ones over.

Republicans aren't really worried about a YouTube moment. They're worried about a campaign ad about a child or mother who died because they voted to repeal Obamacare.

Robear wrote:

So, we can argue that people voted for Trump because they thought he'd protect their rights and privileges in society, but not that they will vote out their rep because their *health care* entitlement is threatened? Gerrymandering is bad, but people *will* vote their interests as they see them, and right now we've seen a huge surge in support for the features of OCare.

The Republicans are EXCELLENT at getting people to vote against their own interests. It is actually kind of amazing.

Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of repealing the ACA, I don't think many people that voted for them are now saying they need to keep it.

After nearly a decade of a relentlessly negative conservative marketing campaign those people f*cking *hate* Obamacare.

While generally overwhelmingly supportive of the actual ACTIONS Obamacare takes other than...
1. The primary measures necessary to PAY FOR the other stuff.
2. I've seen this one go back and forth but who knows how much of that is bias... Birth control coverage requirement issues which do cause some employers, for whatever reason, to feel like they're paying for things which... I forget the part where you are required by law to be a business owner and that causes the conflict with religious beliefs.

If taxdollars are funding abortions through payments to PP, then our healthcare dollars are paying for the wall through abolishing the ACA.
Can that connection be sold to idi... uninformed voters? Or do I need to work Jesus into it too. /rage

Edit: There was a h*cking protest at our local PP with no opposition. I found out about it the next day. /super-impotent rage

Robear wrote:

So, we can argue that people voted for Trump because they thought he'd protect their rights and privileges in society, but not that they will vote out their rep because their *health care* entitlement is threatened? Gerrymandering is bad, but people *will* vote their interests as they see them, and right now we've seen a huge surge in support for the features of OCare.

Around where I live the only real local elections are Republican primaries. Democratic candidates are usually doing good to get up into the low 30s when it comes to election time and the only Democratic politicians we have in office in this state are in small, predominately black, rural areas or the major cities. For instance, while Alabama is the 2nd most conservative state in the country, Birmingham is one of the top 25 most liberal cities in the nation. So while the cities may put forward liberal policies such as raising the minimum wage, welcoming immigrants, etc., the state always comes down on them and blocks them from implementing anything.

Because of this, the larger state positions are what affects my day to day life. And here in Alabama, well, just take a look at our current partisan composition. 72 out of 105 state reps are R, 26 out of 35 state senators R, 6 out of 7 US representatives R, and both of the senators are R. Oh, and every state executive is R. Around here, the common line is that the Democrats want to destroy the country. If they see that the current Republicans are screwing them over, all they're going to do is look for another Republican to save them. At this stage, I'm afraid the entire Republican party has gone so far over into conservative extremism I'm not sure they will ever get back to a place where I agree with them. When equal rights for all is something they can't even agree on and healthcare for all is seen as a privilege of the wealthy rather than a right, I'm not sure where we're going to go from there.

Kehama wrote:

When equal rights for all is something they can't even agree on and healthcare for all is seen as a privilege of the wealthy rather than a right, I'm not sure where we're going to go from there.

California and the Pacific NW secede and institute a refugee program for progressives from other parts of the US.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the future of the US is a somewhat peaceful dissolution, similar to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia into Czech Republic and Slovakia, but I don't know how to formulate that for the prediction thread.

LeapingGnome wrote:

Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of repealing the ACA, I don't think many people that voted for them are now saying they need to keep it.

But that's the whole point of the dozens, or more, town halls disrupted by *Republicans* lately... I understand that this idea that they voted against their interests has been around a while, but I guarantee you most of them did not vote to get rid of pre-existing condition coverage, or to drop children from coverage at 18 or 21 or whatever it was. Obamacare has finally crossed over 50% of people saying the law is mostly working well, which is the first time in its history that this has happened.

My take is that people don't really care what you call the wrapper; what they worry about is that the meat that they are interested in is about to be thrown out, and they don't see anyone coming forward with an improved deal.

I know doom and gloom is very popular right now, but it's heartening to see that people who just accepted the rhetorical position when they got their benefits are actually capable of changing their behaviors when those benefits are threatened. The R bloc is not as monolithic or as opposed to basic services as we might have feared. And this is one of the areas where many Republicans will whine and whimper, but in the end they will go for the health care features they need, even if its from a Democratic program, perhaps "fixed" or rebranded by their team.

And all the while they will pull that R lever in the voting booth.

Looks like they have some sort of replacement plan:

House G.O.P. Leaders Outline Plan to Replace Obama Health Care Act

NathanialG wrote:

Looks like they have some sort of replacement plan:

House G.O.P. Leaders Outline Plan to Replace Obama Health Care Act

House Republican leaders on Thursday presented their rank-and-file members with the outlines of their plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, leaning heavily on tax credits to finance individual insurance purchases and sharply reducing federal payments to the 31 states that have expanded Medicaid eligibility.
It also included no estimates of the number of people who would gain or lose insurance under the plan, nor did it include comparisons with the Affordable Care Act, which has extended coverage to some 20 million people.

With the House proposal’s rollback of Medicaid payments to the states, it appears probably that the number covered would be smaller.

It would fundamentally remake Medicaid, a Great Society program that provides health care to more than 70 million Americans, not just the poor, but also middle-class people who have run out of money and need nursing home care. Under the plan, Medicaid, an open-ended entitlement program designed to cover all health care needs, would be put on a budget.

The Affordable Care Act’s subsidies, which expand as incomes decline, giving the poorer people more help, would be replaced by fixed tax credits to help people purchase insurance policies. The tax credits would increase with a person’s age, but would not vary with a person’s income.

By contrast, Mr. Ryan said, with the Republican version of tax credits, people can “buy the health insurance plan of their choosing,” which could cost less and have less generous coverage than the plans now available.

“You get the freedom to do what you want and buy what you need,” Mr. Ryan said.

How are poor people supposed to pay for the insurance while they are waiting a year for their tax refund to come in?