General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPelosi sends letter to Ryan and McConnell saying House Dems could support some elements of BCRA
Link to tweet
GOP would be smart to take this. If they actually don't want single payer, they should pass something with the dems and let the markets work.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)If there are any left. They could save their seat (not that I'd want them to) working on this.
Casprings
(347 posts)We can save people's lives now. Just make it work.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)I'm all for working with them until they can be defeated.
msongs
(67,436 posts)the dems plan to fix things she wants fixed
Casprings
(347 posts)RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)They'll just say "ok, agree to everything we want or else" and that will end it.
Casprings
(347 posts)The Senate tried everything to do it GOP only. Trump clearly doesn't give two shits what he signs. He just wants to sign a bill. It could be single payer.
With all of that, Trump could tell his crowds that he "forced" the dems to give in. His base would buy it. Conservatives would be pissed.. but it could happen.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Good.
If McCain is willing to continue to fuck over the GOP, then I, a staunch leftist, am willing to make concessions in the interest of good governance.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)stopbush
(24,396 posts)that they stripped from the ACA so they could say the ACA was failing.
By putting it out there immediately, she is giving them the chance to expose their duplicity of the last seven years. At the end of the day, the amount of $ needed to stabilize the markets is relatively small. Once that $ is restored, the question will be why there was so much gnashing and wailing over the ACA when simply throwing a little $ at the program was all that was needed all along
Casprings
(347 posts)better
(884 posts)Especially, the Short Term Stability Fund, which would allocate $50 billion over 4 years to address coverage and access disruption and respond to urgent health care needs within States.
I don't know about anyone else, but that looks to me like a massive conspiracy by Republicans (and possibly some insurance providers).
Let's do the math.
In 2015, after Republicans gutted funding for the "risk corridor" payments in the ACA, intended to make insurers whole in the event that they suffered losses as the law was rolled out, Marco Rubio bragged that his legislative sabotage had "saved taxpayers $2.5 billion". Fast forward one year, and rates are rising by 11-30%, and insurers have dropped out of the market altogether in a number of (mostly red) states, contributing to further rise in premiums as competition eroded. Conveniently spiking with hundreds of articles about these issues in just October 2016, a month before the election.
Then fast forward just another 9 months, and we're debating a Republican initiative that would allocate twenty times the amount that Rubio and his Republican co-conspirators effectively stole from the insurance companies by gutting the risk corridor, specifically to address coverage and access disruption" that they intentionally created.
I mean all one has to do is connect the dots. They surreptitiously force the government to renege on $2.5 billion in payments promised to insurance providers to stabilize the market, decrying them as "a taxpayer-funded bailout for insurance companies." Then once they get into power, they allocate nearly five times as much to bailing out insurance companies.
Smells fishy to me.
Casprings
(347 posts)Just do it.
oasis
(49,401 posts)Casprings
(347 posts)As long as people have access to needed medical coverage. And in fact, the reason we are where we are today is the system is based on employment provided coverage, which creates all sorts of weird stuff. That is the original sin.