Version 2 of Senate GOP Trumpcare Out: Pre-Existing Condition Discrimination Is Back

[mvaliz]

He tweeted last night in the middle of the night and has made a couple of tweets this morning about the Senate needing to go to 51-vote majority for everything. He seems unaware that he might regret it greatly if they did that. McConnell so far hasn't budged off the idea that essentially removing the filibuster entirely from the Senate is a bad idea. He's been around.

Ahhhh, gotcha. Didn't know that he did. Political strategy doesn't seem his strongpoint, but then again - he's not a politican, he's a "Businessman" (and I put that in quotes as I don't believe he is a buisnessman. I believe he's a spoild brat with an inheritance including a name that sells, and just rubber-stamps his last name on documents his ACTUAL businessmen and negotiators deal in, forge and create).

- - - Updated - - -

The post speach by Chuck Shumer could have been less diplomatic in my opinion. When senators from the other side of the aisle puts forth such a horrible legislation, knowingly that it would hurt millions of poeple, they should be called out on it very frankly. The continuous diplomatic approach where the Democrats try to say that they could be at fault as well, when they are not, gives the wrong perception.

The part you might be missing is the context that Chuck's speech was given immediately after McTurtle's speech, accusing the Democrats of obstruction.

It's one of those "Damned if you do, damned if yo dont" things. Dems aren't trying to sink to the levels that the Republicans have been. The goal here is to basically remind everybody that the current GOP highjackers are the assholes. So, let them be the assholes while we do everything the RIGHT (Democratic) way.

On the note of speeches - I damn near threw a glass at my monitor when McTurtle accused the Dems of not being willing to discuss the plan... WTF!? You deliberately HID the plan from them for well over a couple weeks! You deliberately EXCLUDED them from participating, and now you're chiding them because they DIDN'T participate!?!

But then again, this is the party that, when they seized power in 2010, made sure Obama got nothing passed or done, then (in 2016) accused Obama of getting nothing passed or done. Typical...

[karumayu]

Ahhhh, gotcha. Didn't know that he did. Political strategy doesn't seem his strongpoint, but then again - he's not a politican, he's a "Businessman" (and I put that in quotes as I don't believe he is a buisnessman. I believe he's a spoild brat with an inheritance including a name that sells, and just rubber-stamps his last name on documents his ACTUAL businessmen and negotiators deal in, forge and create).

- - - Updated - - -



The part you might be missing is the context that Chuck's speech was given immediately after McTurtle's speech, accusing the Democrats of obstruction.

It's one of those "Damned if you do, damned if yo dont" things. Dems aren't trying to sink to the levels that the Republicans have been. The goal here is to basically remind everybody that the current GOP highjackers are the assholes. So, let them be the assholes while we do everything the RIGHT (Democratic) way.

On the note of speeches - I damn near threw a glass at my monitor when McTurtle accused the Dems of not being willing to discuss the plan... WTF!? You deliberately HID the plan from them for well over a couple weeks! You deliberately EXCLUDED them from participating, and now you're chiding them because they DIDN'T participate!?!

But then again, this is the party that, when they seized power in 2010, made sure Obama got nothing passed or done, then (in 2016) accused Obama of getting nothing passed or done. Typical...

Which is why the speech from Shumer, as you and others have pointed out, is rational and meant to be the adult in the room, is a bit tame in my opinion. I don't think the democrats should steep down to the level the Republican's are playing at, but I still think that when they are acting like idiots or devious, there is no need to sugarcoat it.

[Glorious Leader]

Which is why the speech from Shumer, as you and others have pointed out, is rational and meant to be the adult in the room, is a bit tame in my opinion. I don't think the democrats should steep down to the level the Republican's are playing at, but I still think that when they are acting like idiots or devious, there is no need to sugarcoat it.

I suspect it comes down to the wishes and desires of their respective political bases. If you poled republicans i think youbwould find they want their politicians to offer no compromise and win. If you poled democrats youd probably get something like work together and compromise to get legislation past.


Im not particularly interested in negotiating with hostage takers and wing nuts. Im happy the democrats were in lock step against this bullshit and shumers speech may have been the correct optics but i hope they will continue to say no to the republican agenda.

[cubby]

I disagree. He didn't have to walk to the Center of the chamber within 5 minutes of Pence failing to convince him in the cloak room, stand next to Mitch McConnell, dramatically pause and say "no" and gesture with a thumb down.

That was John McCain making a point about this bill and humiliating Donald Trump.

Agreed. That was some Grandpa Next-Gen "fuck you" voting. McConnell looked like his dog just died.

[Crissi]

Agreed. That was some Grandpa Next-Gen "fuck you" voting. McConnell looked like his dog just died.

A stone cold stunner, you could say?

Still my favorite youtube video on the internet.

[cubby]

No. The Senate passed ACA by 60 votes. The House passed their bill, which had changes to it. That would have required a Conference, and then both houses re-passing the compromise bill. Between those two points, Ted Kennedy died and was replaced with Scott Brown, giving Democrats 59 votes. This necessitated the Senate passing the House bill via reconciliation.

But regardless, something as big as Obamacare should have been a 85 to 90 vote bill, not a 59 vote bill done through reconciliation. Obama justified it with his "Fierce Urgency of Now" bullshit. It was nonsense.

Basically if the ACA couldn't get 85 votes, it shouldn't have been voted on. As a matter of principle legislating and governing by just-barely-enough-votes-to-pass is a way of doing business that... well... invites exactly what has happened to happen.

I sincerely hope liberals, if they ever get another President who tries to push them to do things via the "Fierce Urgency of Now" line of thinking, promptly tell him to take a long walk off a short bridge. No matter the policy, it's not worth the long term consequences, and equally, by a more competent President/politician than Trump, could be used to justify truly anything against liberals interests, the next time power changes hands.

Without a broad consensus, in my view, don't even bother putting it to a vote.

I have to disagree here. The issue with voting had nothing to do with policy likes and dislikes and everything to do with flat out obstruction by McConnell - who was widely quoted as saying their first priority was to make sure Obama was a one-term President. That, combined with the Tea Party's transformation into the No Compromise Party, made it so no major legislation introduced by Obama would get GOP votes.

The ACA was generally a GOP plan, or at least the outline of one, when initially crafted. The voting maneuvers that came about from this hostile working environment made it impossible to get anything done with the consent of both parties. The GOP had great ideas for universal healthcare as well, but they couldn't get them in because McConnell insisted on a party-wide no-vote of whatever the ACA turned into.

And that's how the voting came about. Obama knew he had one chance to bring the vote up and then get it approved. And he did it. If McConnell hadn't be an almost worse obstructionist than Reid, we'd have a large democracy's version of universal healthcare by now. But he was a total party prick, and now we're stuck with the ACA.

[Masark]

Currently, he whined this morning about wanting to go to a 51 vote for everything (wouldn't have helped here)

Obviously they need to go to requiring a 49-vote majority so they can overcome Democratic Obstructionism.

[PACOX]

Not sure if mentioned but anyone think McCain's vote was more strategic than just him taking a stance against the bill?

I'm think other Senators were against the bill. All of them could've cast no votes but why do that when you can have your cake and eat it to. They just needed one person to flip to kil the bill. So what do they do? Pick the guy with the less to lose, most to gain (hero narrative) to kill the bill while everyone looks like they were still in favor of it. That way they can go home and say the bill didn't pass and then tell their base/colleagues that wanted the repeal that they did all they all could to push it through.

TLDR: They made it look like McCain cast the siding vote but his vote actually represent the views of at least a few more GOP Senators.

[MoanaLisa]

Agreed. That was some Grandpa Next-Gen "fuck you" voting. McConnell looked like his dog just died.

In a way it did. Passing legislation by reconciliation comes with some rules, one especially known as the Byrd Rule. One of those rules is that you get one bill per topic per fiscal year to vote on. Topics are spending, federal debt limit and revenue. If a bill dies in committee, then it doesn't count. This bill made it to the floor and lost. So, McConnell can't bring out any more legislation on that topic for the rest of the fiscal year and try to pass it with 51 votes. It's now all 60 votes or nothing at all until September 30th. McCain knew all of this of course. So the Republican Party threw the dice on health care but will now be restricted for a while on what they can try to pass through reconciliation.

Under Senate interpretations of the Congressional Budget Act, the Senate can consider the three basic subjects of reconciliation — spending, revenues, and debt limit — in a single bill or multiple bills, but it can consider each of these three in only one bill per year (unless Congress passes a second budget resolution). Consequently, in the Senate there can be a maximum of three reconciliation bills in a year, one for each of the basic subjects of reconciliation.

This rule is most significant if the first reconciliation bill that the Senate takes up affects both spending and revenues. Even if that bill is overwhelmingly devoted to only one of those subjects, no subsequent reconciliation bill can affect either revenues or spending because the first bill already addressed them.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/federa...reconciliation

[Celista]

Not sure if mentioned but anyone think McCain's vote was more strategic than just him taking a stance against the bill?

I'm think other Senators were against the bill. All of them could've cast no votes but why do that when you can have your cake and eat it to. They just needed one person to flip to kil the bill. So what do they do? Pick the guy with the less to lose, most to gain (hero narrative) to kill the bill while everyone looks like they were still in favor of it. That way they can go home and say the bill didn't pass and then tell their base/colleagues that wanted the repeal that they did all they all could to push it through.

TLDR: They made it look like McCain cast the siding vote but his vote actually represent the views of at least a few more GOP Senators.

This crossed my mind, too. This all seemed like showmanship, probably due to the backlash regarding ACA repeal. Which honestly would not have happened if they had something substantial to replace the ACA with, instead of going all Disney villain-esque and simply trying to strip health care away from people.

[Belize]

McConnel threw in the towel.
Says he wants to move on from healthcare.

GG Conservatives. The Liberal Agendatm wins again.

[Skroe]

Saw this on Twitter. Jesus christ, McCain fucked the Republicans hard. Turns out being in the Senate for 30 years earns you a black belt in parliamentary tactics, and those of us on the outside don't know shit.

McCain basically set everyone up by voting to proceed. And nobody doubted him until the last hours.

[Blur4stuff]

Fucking amazing week altogether. How can this be our politics now and how the hell can it possibly last another 3.5 years?

Obviously republicans won't support public option/single payer. They also want to remove the mandate, lower taxes, and reduce regulations. I can't figure out a way for them to stick to those without the law resulting in millions losing care every year and costs jumping higher.

I honestly can't imagine a plan more conservative than the ACA that doesn't make healthcare worse. How would it be possible?

After all these years I also still don't understand their opposition to the mandate. Republicans are supposedly all about personal responsibility. If someone doesn't buy insurance they eventually end up getting hurt/sick, can't pay the enormous medical bills and the cost gets shoved onto everyone else. Honestly, republicans should be the biggest supporters of a mandate.

[DarkTZeratul]

After all these years I also still don't understand their opposition to the mandate. Republicans are supposedly all about personal responsibility. If someone doesn't buy insurance they eventually end up getting hurt/sick, can't pay the enormous medical bills and the cost gets shoved onto everyone else. Honestly, republicans should be the biggest supporters of a mandate.

It might help your understanding to realize that in at least one version of the repeal bill the requirement for the ER to treat people who can't pay (thus forcing taxpayers to eat the cost) would have been removed.

[Glorious Leader]

It might help your understanding to realize that in at least one version of the repeal bill the requirement for the ER to treat people who can't pay (thus forcing taxpayers to eat the cost) would have been removed.

Thats nuts. That would literally mean people dying. That would also probably increase wait times because instead of being able to properly triage youd have to figure out their insurance status first. Thats fucking crazy.

[Cthulhu 2020]

And in 20 minutes everybody will forget what he said and no impact will have been made and Republicans will continue to do whatever they want ignoring the Democrats.

Imagine if, instead, Schumer came out and contradicted every single lie McConnell spat out, talking about how Republicans obstructed for 8 years, and even during Obama's inauguration plotted to do so in a basement so nothing could get done. Talked about how incredibly long Obamacare was discussed in committee and how long the debates were about it. Talk about how this piece of trash bill was out for a mere 2 hours before the vote, and how Republicans shot down even a simple request to take a few days to just look at it and understand what it does.

You know what that does? It fires up the base. The base that wins off-year elections.

Being nice doesn't. win. elections. anymore. Especially when there's so much raw anger at Trump that still has no direction since Democrats are just pussies who won't ever get fired up about anything. Even when they had the perfect candidate to do so against, instead of picking the guy who could do that, they instead pick the boring lady who has been demonized for 30 years by the largest political tv station in the country. What a shocker, the boring lady lost to the bombastic retard telling people what they want to hear.

Democrats don't know how to politically fight. They wring their hands and go, "Oh geez" and sometimes that works, but more often than not it doesn't in this day and age.

I mean, I wholeheartedly agree that Democrat campaigning tactics don't work quite as well as Republican fear mongering. But I'm not sure I could get behind a Democrat party that stoops to baseless fear mongering. They'd either swing right and fear monger about the same stuff Republicans do, or they'd swing left and go full antifa SJW fear mongering.

And before anyone says "BUH BUH THEY ALREADY DO DIS", they really should realize that a bunch of fear mongering far-left SJW VOTERS and the Democratic political party are almost entirely separate entities, and probably further apart in political ideology than Republicans and Democrats even are.

[Glorious Leader]

I mean, I wholeheartedly agree that Democrat campaigning tactics don't work quite as well as Republican fear mongering. But I'm not sure I could get behind a Democrat party that stoops to baseless fear mongering. They'd either swing right and fear monger about the same stuff Republicans do, or they'd swing left and go full antifa SJW fear mongering.

And before anyone says "BUH BUH THEY ALREADY DO DIS", they really should realize that a bunch of fear mongering far-left SJW VOTERS and the Democratic political party are almost entirely separate entities, and probably further apart in political ideology than Republicans and Democrats even are.

You dont have to be "far-left sjw voters" to recognize that the republican agenda should be feared. On climate change alone...

[kail]

Saw this on Twitter. Jesus christ, McCain fucked the Republicans hard. Turns out being in the Senate for 30 years earns you a black belt in parliamentary tactics, and those of us on the outside don't know shit.

McCain basically set everyone up by voting to proceed. And nobody doubted him until the last hours.

Now that...is a work of art.

[Celista]

Saw this on Twitter. Jesus christ, McCain fucked the Republicans hard. Turns out being in the Senate for 30 years earns you a black belt in parliamentary tactics, and those of us on the outside don't know shit.

McCain basically set everyone up by voting to proceed. And nobody doubted him until the last hours.

I saw that, too. If true I have mad respect for McCain. He deserves props for standing up for healthcare.

Murkowski is right, we can do better.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Saw this on Twitter. Jesus christ, McCain fucked the Republicans hard. Turns out being in the Senate for 30 years earns you a black belt in parliamentary tactics, and those of us on the outside don't know shit.

McCain basically set everyone up by voting to proceed. And nobody doubted him until the last hours.

If anyone was so delusional that they insisted there was no in-fighting among Republicans, this just destroyed their fantasy glass bubble into billions of tiny pieces.

- - - Updated - - -

You dont have to be "far-left sjw voters" to recognize that the republican agenda should be feared. On climate change alone...

I know, I think you missed the point of my post. The person I was responding to said that Democrats won't win with their mild mannered campaigning. I agreed that fear mongering about imaginary threats (instead of real ones) gets people fired up to vote, and the Democrat base, while it vastly outnumbers Republicans, has major voter apathy problems.

If you want people fired up to vote for you, you have to convince them that something YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY PROTECT THEM FROM, is an existential threat to the life they know.

Climate Change is a threat, a long-term threat, but something we can and should be doing stuff about right now. Russia and North Korea are also REAL existential threats, so is a trade-war with Europe. Muslims and Mexicans aren't existential threats to our way of life... but Republicans, in a modern world where America faces very few real existential threats to our way of life, have conjured up threats to get people to vote for them... since they really have almost zero solid policy positions about real threats to our way of life.