Patterico's Pontifications

Boom.

Patterico (86c8ed) — 12/3/2015 @ 7:17 pm

The Left will probably complain that you can’t use Reconciliation to repeal a law.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/3/2015 @ 8:00 pm

Vote in a Republican and this bill gets signed.

Vote in a Republican and some bill gets signed. They didn’t put a lot of effort into details because they know it will get vetoed. But the facts on the ground have changed and for a lot of people — particularly the self-employed who have bee ravaged by the changes — just going back to the status quo ante will kill people.

Like my wife, who had private insurance that was cancelled, then forced into Obamacare, then got cancer. Going back to a system where “prior conditions” mean you cannot get coverage would be terrible for her, and I’d be against that.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/3/2015 @ 8:04 pm

I don’t care if this is symbolic. It shows who the bad guys are. The senate is doing what the American people want them to do. It’s the democrats and president who oppose the will of the people. This should happen often so that republicans aren’t seen as democrat lite and the people can see who really is in the way.

Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 12/3/2015 @ 9:28 pm

Vote in a Republican and some bill gets signed. They didn’t put a lot of effort into details because they know it will get vetoed. But the facts on the ground have changed and for a lot of people — particularly the self-employed who have bee ravaged by the changes — just going back to the status quo ante will kill people.

Like my wife, who had private insurance that was cancelled, then forced into Obamacare, then got cancer. Going back to a system where “prior conditions” mean you cannot get coverage would be terrible for her, and I’d be against that.

As with Social Security or other government programs you may favor out of narrow and short-term self-interest, accommodations will have to be made to avoid near-term harm to those who can’t help but rely on the absurd Democrat system that has been set up. As long as such accommodations are made, folks like you are going to also have to confront the harms that are caused by the system that has been set up — and be prepared to deal with a less than ideal situation for some, to make the system better for all.

Patterico (86c8ed) — 12/3/2015 @ 10:03 pm

If there is a Republican President in the White House who will sign it, the Republicans in Congress will not pass it.

This is all theater and a lie and I’m sick of the jailhouse tactic “Be my girlfriend and I’ll protect you from those guys over there”. If the Republicans had wanted to do something — they could have done it last month in the two-year budget they gave Obama. Successfully — which is why they did not do it.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2015 @ 11:44 pm

Dead on, nk.

mg (31009b) — 12/3/2015 @ 11:58 pm

Hey, mg. How are you? Seriously, how are you and your family?

nk (dbc370) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:02 am

Devastated and sick. We will carry on through the love of friends, family and praying to Almighty God that she has met him in heaven. Thanks for caring, nk.

mg (31009b) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:17 am

As long as such accommodations are made, folks like you are going to also have to confront the harms that are caused by the system that has been set up — and be prepared to deal with a less than ideal situation for some, to make the system better for all.

The core of the GOP voter base is 50-70 years old. Screwing them over is not going to be a good strategy.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:19 am

It’s a win-win for Capitol pols.

The Dhimmicrats now can rightly squawk about the GOP voting to take away health benefits and going after a woman’s last resort, Planned Parenthood.

The GOP can rightly assert they followed through on promises to vote both entities out.

All the while, all involved parties know perfectly well there will be no actual effect on the status quo. BHO vetoes it? By God, he won’t get any votes!

Ed from SFV (3400a5) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:23 am

I say vote them all out, no matter who replaces them. How many lobbyists can K Street absorb? And there, they will have to deliver for the Arab oil interests, and the Chinese government, and the military contractors if they want to keep their jobs.

nk (dbc370) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:42 am

oh for the love of god who cares about obamacares WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE

Gov. Jerry Brown is delaying his trip to the international climate conference in Paris to visit San Bernardino, where 14 people were killed at a social service center.

Brown’s office says law enforcement officials will brief him Thursday afternoon on the investigation into the attack.

The Democratic governor was scheduled to attend at least 21 events over a six-day period at the U.N. conference on climate change. The delay means he’ll miss at least one of those, an appearance with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

happyfeet (831175) — 12/4/2015 @ 3:48 am

Just reported today; Jerry Brown cancels subsidies for private dwelling rooftop solar.

Now all the tax payer subsidies will go directly to big ~~business~~ democrat campaign contributors. As was intended all along.

You effed up. You trusted us.

papertiger (c2d6da) — 12/4/2015 @ 4:35 am

Vote in a Republican, and they won’t pass a bill exactly like that.

Hillary Clinton, by the way, for now, wants to semi-replace Obamacare in all but name. She proposes a $5,000 refundable tax credit (that means granting every U.S. citizen or permanent resident $5,000) to pay for co-payments and deductibles.

I think there’s a plan endorsed by some Republicans to let that $5,000 be used also for the whole policy. Hillary apparently wants, if the word “wants” can be said to apply to anything shesays she is for, to keep Obamacare as it is, but just make it affordable for the policyholder.

Sammy Finkelman (4d9cfa) — 12/4/2015 @ 6:54 am

The various Congressional replacement plans support guaranteed issue and eliminating the pre-existing conditions exclusion, but the Republican plans only do this for people who have maintained continuous coverage. They also eliminate employer mandates and open up plans across State lines. There are more issues addressed at the link.

DRJ (15874d) — 12/4/2015 @ 7:40 am

The core of the GOP voter base is 50-70 years old. Screwing them over is not going to be a good strategy.

As long as government intervention is viewed as “help” and removing it is viewed as “screwing” people then you’re right. I don’t accept the premise.

Patterico (86c8ed) — 12/4/2015 @ 7:47 am

The plans also promote establishing high-risk pools for people who are uninsured and have pre-existing conditions.

I think those are common-sense reforms. We shouldn’t punish people with pre-existing conditions who have insurance, but people who made the choice not to get insurance may end up with fewer choices.

DRJ (15874d) — 12/4/2015 @ 7:49 am

The latest poll shows Trump with 36%, Cruz with 16%, and Carson with 14%. That’s 66% supporting clear outsiders. The establishment GOP must be beyond panic. I honestly believe that’s why they are voting like this and bringing bills like this to a vote.

DRJ (15874d) — 12/4/2015 @ 9:49 am

We’re not worried solely about ObamaCare any more. We’re way beyond that, and DC still doesn’t have clue.

DRJ (15874d) — 12/4/2015 @ 9:50 am

Presumably they will attempt to override the veto. Not that they will succeed, but by doing this the battle lines will be drawn more clearly for the 2016 Congressional and Senate elections.

If they don’t attempt to override, then this is just another example of street theatre. And one more nail in the GOP’s coffin.

They could also pass legislation in the mean time that would address the concerns of those who have been screwed by the current system. Make it simple and understandable, and have it preempt any existing laws, thus covering the likely veto. This too would elicit a veto. Again, the purpose is to illustrate the distinction between market-based and Democrat policies.

BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 12/4/2015 @ 10:33 am

I disagree that this is “symbolic”. “Symbolic” would be a resolution, like “National Breast Cancer Awareness Month” or some such.

This is a real bill. It will get a real veto. This is what is supposed to be the normal process. People will be on the record and not just posturing.

Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 12/4/2015 @ 11:15 am

Gabriel, agreed, but knowing a priori that the bill will be vetoed it will only be the vote to override that will be significant. If they know that the override will fail, then you could also say that the override was a “free” yes vote. But failing to override will make the few who support the president that much more visible, and accountable. Which may give a number of these slimy beasts pause, and if a few switch their previous “no” vote to a “yes” vote, the logs might roll.

BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:10 pm

Another consideration for the override vote, the president’s delusions are becoming increasingly evident even to the “low information” voter. I have a suspicion that the number of Democrats who will base their reelection campaign on a theme related to their unwavering support of the failed administration will be miniscule. One advantage of having Trump thrashing around in the jungle is that he has broken through the PC barrier to honest political discussion, and we might be able to address some real problems in 2016. No more “hope and change” and stopping the (vastly overstated if not to say imaginary) rise of the oceans. And the number of people helped by Obamacare is a tiny fraction of their anticipated enrollment, and worse yet, of those ensnared in the system who actually have jobs and pay taxes, their increased costs have been boarding on the astronomical.

BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:20 pm

We will be fooled again
Meet the old bunch
Same as the old bunch

You slop the hog with as much as the trough can hold, then you come back and say “Please Mr. Hog, don’t eat all that”. Yeah, right, you’re showing principle.

nk (dbc370) — 12/4/2015 @ 12:57 pm

As long as government intervention is viewed as “help” and removing it is viewed as “screwing” people then you’re right. I don’t accept the premise.

The government has taken at LEAST $500K from my retirement, on the promise that I’d get a dribble back. I fought against this my entire life while a lot of now-40-somethingsw were still voting Dem. Now they see the bill and want to change everything.

Eff off. I want my dribble.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/4/2015 @ 1:05 pm

As long as government intervention is viewed as “help” and removing it is viewed as “screwing” people then you’re right. I don’t accept the premise.

When you “help” people in a way that screws them, then after they are well and truly screwed, you undo that in a way that FURTHER screws them, no one is going to thank you.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/4/2015 @ 1:08 pm

How about a law that states “if you like your coverage, you can keep it,” and make the policy an individual policy with no employer control. Allow individuals to deduct the cost of the policy as long as employers are allowed to do the same. Keeping your policy was wildly popular 5 years ago, and the economic incentive for employer-coverage is simply the result of an employer’s ability to classify the employee’s premiums as a cost of doing business. The idea that one could keep their current policy would require forcing the insurance companies to honor their existing obligations. But make it possible for a market to develop that features policies that cross state lines, etc., with the expectation that in a few years, healthcare insurance would become analogous to automobile insurance. It wouldn’t cover oil changes, but major stuff would be covered. And those with pre-existing conditions would decline as a percentage of the total population … hopefully as a result of their being cured of their disease. They could then join the ranks of those free to choose.

For a number of years this might involve the government covering losses to the insurance companies who provide policies that are locked into Obamacare, but eventually the free, consumer driven, market should grow and provide coverage that would attract the vast majority of people who desire health care insurance. Get rid of the 70,000 item codes that Doctors now wrestle with every time they perform a physical exam, get rid of everything that requires some bureaucrat to judge the work of a physician.

Right now, the cost of Social Security benefits, both retirement and disability, etc., are running $994 billion annually. This works out to about $6,400 from each part- and fulltime worker. The cost of Medicaid is running about $450 Billion annually. Or another $3,000 per worker. It is no wonder that the government is running up a $700 billion deficit each year. This will only get worse.

BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 12/4/2015 @ 3:21 pm

bob–

This was the plan that McCain presented in 2008. Everyone gets their own insurance in a national market. Whatever they think is best for them. It’s tax deductible. Employers may offer [taxable] subsidies, effectively reducing the deduction. THe state or federal government might offer subsidies to the poor to buy on the same market. Lose your job, change jobs, become self-employed and you still have the insurance.

Dealing with “preexisting conditions”, and the willing uninsured was unclear. Perhaps there would be a tax for people who choose to go without, or perhaps a waiting period for the uninsured who suddenly obtain insurance. The cost of needy newly insureds would be averaged over all insurance, unlike now where it is dumped on a few percent of the population.

And of course, Medicare would be rolled into this, as is the real plan even with Obamacare.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/4/2015 @ 6:27 pm

And those with pre-existing conditions would decline as a percentage of the total population … hopefully as a result of their being cured of their disease.

Bob–

You do realize that HAVING HAD a disease, even if it was cured, was a no-go for getting new insurance, even if one had been insured continuously until then. Also, potential conditions (man with enlarged prostate) would generally disqualify one. And some diseases (diabetes, asthma, or even high blood pressure) are not cured, but treated. In a perverse form or the Prisoner’s Dilemma, no company wanted to accept anyone who had problems. Which, by the time the are 50 or so, everyone has some of.

Kevin M (25bbee) — 12/4/2015 @ 7:06 pm

The government has taken at LEAST $500K from my retirement, on the promise that I’d get a dribble back. I fought against this my entire life while a lot of now-40-somethingsw were still voting Dem. Now they see the bill and want to change everything.

Eff off. I want my dribble.

Like I said, accommodations have to be made. But as the guy says in Full Metal Jacket: it’s a giant shit sandwich, and we’re all gonna have to take a bite.

Patterico (86c8ed) — 12/4/2015 @ 7:17 pm

The nice thing about the ACA is that since no legislative body voted the federal exchange into existence the next president can just shutter it without having to sign any new legislation from Congress.

The only 5 people to vote on a federal exchange sit on the Supreme Court and if they make a fuss they can run it themselves. It’s not like they can point to the text of any law that requires such an exchange be run. And it would be a violation of the oath of office for a president to pretend legislation exists when it doesn’t.

Roberts and his merry band of traitors have really made a helluva mess.

Thatch (2fb96a) — 12/5/2015 @ 11:59 am

12/3/2015

Senate Votes to Repeal ObamaCare

32 Responses to “Senate Votes to Repeal ObamaCare”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out