115th Congress defunds ACA: Senate: 51-48 House:227-198; Executive Order signed 1/20

[David_TheMan]

Does anyone think if this is successfully implemented, it will backfire and lead to the Democrats winning back majority in the senate during the next senate elections?

Nope because even the Dems are sour on it and now talking about a even worse single pay solution.
So getting rid of it I don't believe will caue any backfire, prone to cause more support IMHO.

 

[David_TheMan]

Rand paul said he will not vote for it. they need two more republicans.

maybe snow from maine might be next. then they will need one more

Rand just doesn't want repeal and delay., he will support it if they can get some replacement language up, so that is a positive.

 

[FAH1223]

Does anyone think if this is successfully implemented, it will backfire and lead to the Democrats winning back majority in the senate during the next senate elections?

Obamacare? No

Big cuts to social security and medicare? Maybe.

The House is Gerry mandered though so Dems would need historic turnout in 2018 in various districts that are impossible to win in

 

[Mr swag]

Nope because even the Dems are sour on it and now talking about a even worse single pay solution.
So getting rid of it I don't believe will caue any backfire, prone to cause more support IMHO.

so you believe the 20 million people will be happy to lose their insurance?

 

[Worthless Loser]

Obamacare? No

Big cuts to social security and medicare? Maybe.

The House is Gerry mandered though so Dems would need historic turnout in 2018 in various districts that are impossible to win in

Nope because even the Dems are sour on it and now talking about a even worse single pay solution.
So getting rid of it I don't believe will caue any backfire, prone to cause more support IMHO.

I do think it will cause a shift in Trump supporters who has Obama Care and are worried about losing it. If this falls flat I can see more votes for Democrats during US Senate elections. Like FAH said, social security and medicare can definitely do damage.

 

[David_TheMan]

so you believe the 20 million people will be happy to lose their insurance?

entitlement recievers will always be mad when entitlements are cut, those of use who either lost our plans or had plans prices go up significantly will be more than happy it was repealed.

 

[David_TheMan]

I do think it will cause a shift in Trump supporters who has Obama Care and are worried about losing it. If this falls flat I can see more votes for Democrats during US Senate elections. Like FAH said, social security and medicare can definitely do damage.

I think you overrate how universally poor reception and support for obamacare is.
I don't see any danger for the GOP next election cycle coming off of this, especially in the Senate.

SS is a easy fix, medicare is the hardest due to the senior voting block

 

[GoddamnyamanProf]

Does anyone think if this is successfully implemented, it will backfire and lead to the Democrats winning back majority in the senate during the next senate elections?

No because as you can see in this very thread, they've already convinced stupid people that the basic right of healthcare is "entitlements", which is of course GOP codespeak for poor people and minorities, upon which they're more than happy to place the blame for all of society's ills, including their recently repealed healthcare. Sadly, the irony is lost on the dummies.

 

[How Sway?]

waits for The Donald to propose a similar bill under a different name, only for his supporters to commend him on his political genius

 

[David_TheMan]

No because as you can see in this very thread, they've already convinced stupid people that the basic right of healthcare is "entitlements", which is of course GOP codespeak for poor people and minorities, upon which they're more than happy to place the blame for all of society's ills, including their recently repealed healthcare. Sadly, the irony is lost on the dummies.

If that is what you view entitlement just say it, but to try to act as if it is a codeword for GOP, when GOP are just as big of supporters of government entitlements as the DNC is funny.

If you think I am looking to single out minorities you would be wrong, i know the biggest beneficiaries of government entitlements aren't poor people or minorities, but politically connected busineeses or extremely rich individuals who are typically white americans.

Also repealing obamacare isn't repealing, healthcare, its repealing government health insurance subsidy.

That said, its clear where your level of discourse is, where you don't even take the time to read and study people who disagree with you and their actual stance, but make up a victimization story in your own mind, and name call instead of having a true discussion to see where people stand and why they sstand and if it is logically consistant with what they believe and etc.

 

[GoddamnyamanProf]

If that is what you view entitlement just say it, but to try to act as if it is a codeword for GOP, when GOP are just as big of supporters of government entitlements as the DNC is funny.

If you think I am looking to single out minorities you would be wrong, i know the biggest beneficiaries of government entitlements aren't poor people or minorities, but politically connected busineeses or extremely rich individuals who are typically white americans.

Also repealing obamacare isn't repealing, healthcare, its repealing government health insurance subsidy.

That said, its clear where your level of discourse is, where you don't even take the time to read and study people who disagree with you and their actual stance, but make up a victimization story in your own mind, and name call instead of having a true discussion to see where people stand and why they sstand and if it is logically consistant with what they believe and etc.

When that subsidy is the difference between being able to afford insurance and going without, that is indeed repealing healthcare for millions of people, to say nothing of the other invaluable benefits of the ACA that your kind would also love to repeal, like eliminating disqualification due to pre-existing conditions.

I didn't bother quoting you for a reason. You're an example to make an unfortunate point about, not someone worth debating.

 

[David_TheMan]

When that subsidy is the difference between being able to afford insurance and going without, that is indeed repealing healthcare for millions of people, to say nothing of the other invaluable benefits of the ACA that your kind would also love to repeal, like eliminating disqualification due to pre-existing conditions.

I didn't bother quoting you for a reason. You're an example to make an unfortunate point about, not someone worth debating.

No it isn't repealing healtcare for millions, no matter what type of emotional argument you wan to use. Its a subsidy.
As for pre-existing conditions, they had plans for those people, but logically their plans should be expensive because they are a greater risk.
The bullshyt is trying to make healthy and young people eat the cost of those who are high risk, instead of letting the high risk health insurance seeker pay the higher premium and eat the cost like they should.

You didn't bother quoting because you are a petty and shallow thinking individual. You don't want to have a logical debate with a person who will logically tell you why they are against government subsidy and entitlements, and no rely on emotional arguments, but on stone cold logic.

You want insurance pay for it, if you are at high risk, you are going to either have a extremely high deductible and face heavy premium as a result. No one complains why a person with pleny of accidents and moving violations has to pay higher auto insurance, its no different healthwise.

The emotionalism of but __________ should have insurance because he has _________ and ______ happened doesn't change anything and trying to claim others should have to subsidize the insurance cost of others through government coercion instead of voluntarily. I can not support that.

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/articl...ialflow&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Good deal

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Here's who's at risk from an Obamacare repeal

The first scenario examined partial repeal without a replacement plan. Although Congress could easily repeal funding for key Obamacare programs, it is not clear that Republicans will be able to obtain what likely will be needed Democratic support for a replacement plan for the ACA — even if the repeal is suspended for several years.

Under that scenario — one with no replacement — the number of uninsured children in 2019 would be 4.4 million greater than it would be under the ACA, the Urban Institute report said.

The number of uninsured parents would be 7.6 million greater, the report found. That would raise the uninsured rate for adults from a projected 10.7 percent under the ACA to 22.8 percent.

The second scenario examined was one involving partial repeal, combined with a previous Republican proposal that could lead states to lower the eligibility limits for children to be covered under Medicaid, the government-run program for the poor.

Under that scenario, nearly 9 million kids would be at risk of losing coverage, the report found.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and other congressional Republicans have said they intend for a transition period between votes to repeal Obamacare and implementation of a replacement plan, a period that would maintain current levels of coverage for people who have benefited from the ACA.

But the American Academy of Actuaries, whose members help set the prices for Obamacare health plans, warned earlier this month that if the creation and adoption of the plan is delayed, it could wreak havoc on the individual health insurance plan market, where more than 12 million people have coverage.

The academy, in a letter to Ryan, said that insurers could flee the individual market because of uncertainty over its long-term prospects, and that premium rates could soar to unaffordable levels for many customers.

Here's who's at risk from an Obamacare repeal

 

[tru_m.a.c]