Support NeoGAF

[aeolist]

Yeah, I'm not sure why people forget this. Huge efforts were made to turn this into something palatable to the GOP, but they were 100% behind fighting everything and anything Obama did.

Now they've convinced a lot of people that the ACA is the worst possible solution, to the point where people want it repealed without even knowing what's going to replace it.

That belief is 100% their own fault. The hilarious thing is, that the GOP criticized Obama care for it's premium costs. So now they've got to bring those down, without killing people. Which... good luck.

maybe it's just me but i tend to consider legislation that passed with only democrat votes and 0 republicans to be the responsibility of democrat legislators.

and it's not like the final vote came as a shock to them. they knew it was coming down to a party-line vote (minus some conservative house dems) and wrote the law accordingly. it was the most progressive thing that could have passed the democratic caucus and that's the most damning i can think of.

 

[CopperPuppy]

Absolute perfection.

 

[aeolist]

here they are on the record: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...s-there-will-be-no-obamacare-replacement.html

Representative Greg Walden, a key leader of the House Republican efforts on health care, tells Julie Rovner, “There's no single fix. There's no single plan.”

 

[LifEndz]

they've never been able to come up with a replacement because the ACA is a republican-created plan that already has the barest minimum concern for human life and health. anything further right would be obviously sociopathic and nobody would ever believe that it's better for anyone other than the wealthy.

Ryan's probably kicking himself for neutering it as much as he did.

 

[Tranqueris]

Early opposition has them spooked. Good.

But I heard that staying quiet and not protesting or making your voice heard was the best thing to do because blah blah blah.

People should be trying their best to keep adding more and more people to it while they struggle to figure out what to do with it.

 

[Galactic Barret]

I don't believe this at all.

They said this, this cleanly? In a secret meeting? And it's all confirmed by the GOP themselves or their staffers, this leaked recording of a meeting between members of the most guarded party in American politics?

You are destroying my America and I cannot be pacified or persuaded otherwise.

 

[Malvolio]

I don't believe this at all.

They said this, this cleanly? In a secret meeting? And it's all confirmed by the GOP themselves or their staffers, this leaked recording of a meeting between members of the most guarded party in American politics?

You are destroying my America and I cannot be pacified or persuaded otherwise.

Feels like more Putin string pulling to me.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

ACA was sabotaged by the GOP and insurance companies so I'm not sure that the program itself is bad or just rotted from the inside about by those entrusted to run it.

utter nonsense.

In 2008, Obama and Clinton ran on virtually the same plan, which Hillary Clinton and Newt Gingrich negotiated together. There was one significant distinction which was that the Clinton/Gingrich plan featured an individual mandate to buy health insurance. Barack Obama opposed the individual mandate.

I think the pharmaceutical industry has been quite constructive in this debate, And the savings that they've put on the table are real and significant and are appreciated.

In July 2009, President Obama began negotiating in private with the health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies. They had 3 main objections: no drug importation provision, no bulk drug negotiations, and no public option.

In October 2009, the houses passes a version of the ACA which features no mandate, and includes the public option. It received one Republican vote from Olympia Snowe. A later version of the house bill will re-introduce the mandate.

Concurrently, Democratic Senator Max Baucus becomes a major player on the Senate version of the bill. Baucus rejects 2 Democratic proposals to include a public option. Democrat-turned-Independent Joe Lieberman also played a role, saying that he would support a filibuster of any version of the bill containing a public option.

Baucus was not the only Democrat to oppose the public option:
[quote="NYtimes]Besides Mr. Baucus, two Democrats, Senators Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, voted against both public option proposals. Two other Democrats, Senators Thomas R. Carper of Delaware and Bill Nelson of Florida, voted against the first amendment, but supported the second.
[/quote]

By December, the public option was dead in the senate version.

The final bill contained no prescription drug importation, no public option, no bulk drug price negoiation and imposed the individual mandate as a tax penalty.

Over the course of Baucus' career, health-related lobbies would contribute $5.5M to his campaigns. But I'm sure that had nothing to do with anything.


28 of Baucus' top advisors, including Liz Fowler, who oversaw the implementation the of the ACA would become lobbyists.


To summarize:
1. Obama never ran on a universal healthcare program, despite expressing support for single payer if we could design it from scratch.
2. Obama negotiated in private with health care companies before any bill came to a vote
3. Moderate Democrats were responsible for gutting all the key provisions of the ACA
4. The ACA is a piece of shit, and a corporate handout. Better than US healthcare circa 2007, but still a piece of shit.

 

[kirblar]

I consciously know how far right the democratic party really is on average but I often don't realize it on a day to day basis.(

Those house D votes against were almost certainly from Ds in R-leaning districts who were going to face difficult re-election campaigns. They were by design once it was clear the GOP support wasn't there. (Pelosi knows how to do her job.)

The issue with watering it down had to do with the mistake of not killing the fillibuster in the Senate. (Sugarhig's post does a good job explaining the issue they had when any one of 60 senators can issue a personal veto.)

 

[GARlockSpiral]

I've got it!

Missilecare - With one phone call, you can solve all your health problems! Just text the GOP your name, wire them some money and your GPS Coordinates, and BLAM! No more diseases!

 

[Lord Frieza]

I don't believe this at all.

They said this, this cleanly? In a secret meeting? And it's all confirmed by the GOP themselves or their staffers, this leaked recording of a meeting between members of the most guarded party in American politics?

You are destroying my America and I cannot be pacified or persuaded otherwise.

It's not all confirmed, but since this is apparently all recorded, some have confirmed it. I mean, when you have the enemies that Trump and his lackey's have made, you better believe there's those out to get you.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

I've got it!

Missilecare - With one phone call, you can solve all your health problems! Just text the GOP your name, wire them some money and your GPS Coordinates, and BLAM! No more diseases!

I got a better idea, let's get universal healthcare and make China pay for it! #MAGA

 

[sphagnum]

utter nonsense.

In 2008, Obama and Clinton ran on virtually the same plan, which Hillary Clinton and Newt Gingrich negotiated together. There was one significant distinction which was that the Clinton/Gingrich plan featured an individual mandate to buy health insurance. Barack Obama opposed the individual mandate.



In July 2009, President Obama began negotiating in private with the health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies. They had 3 main objections: no drug importation provision, no bulk drug negotiations, and no public option.

In October 2009, the houses passes a version of the ACA which features no mandate, and includes the public option. It received one Republican vote from Olympia Snowe. A later version of the house bill will re-introduce the mandate.

Concurrently, Democratic Senator Max Baucus becomes a major player on the Senate version of the bill. Baucus rejects 2 Democratic proposals to include a public option. Democrat-turned-Independent Joe Lieberman also played a role, saying that he would support a filibuster of any version of the bill containing a public option.

Baucus was not the only Democrat to oppose the public option:


By December, the public option was dead in the senate version.

The final bill contained no prescription drug importation, no public option, no bulk drug price negoiation and imposed the individual mandate as a tax penalty.

Over the course of Baucus' career, health-related lobbies would contribute $5.5M to his campaigns. But I'm sure that had nothing to do with anything.


28 of Baucus' top advisors, including Liz Fowler, who oversaw the implementation the of the ACA would become lobbyists.


To summarize:
1. Obama never ran on a universal healthcare program, despite expressing support for single payer if we could design it from scratch.
2. Obama negotiated in private with health care companies before any bill came to a vote
3. Moderate Democrats were responsible for gutting all the key provisions of the ACA
4. The ACA is a piece of shit, and a corporate handout. Better than US healthcare circa 2007, but still a piece of shit.

This is a good post. I think most people don't even remember Obama negotiating with the industry or Baucus' role.

 

[aeolist]

focusing on whether or not any of this will backfire is missing the point i think. the healthcare industry knows that these people are working on their behalf and will give cushy advisory or lobbying jobs to anyone that gets voted out of office. i doubt many of them are worried about getting the boot in 2018 or 2020 unless they have higher political ambitions.

 

[thepotatoman]

Because lots of people, especially people without means, fail to get their refunds/rebates due to the extra work and understanding required to do so. Also, those with less income and tax burden won't get anything back anyway. A refund for health insurance is essentially a regressive tax on the poor.

It's a credit, so you'll get money back even if you pay no taxes.

But i do now see how it would discourage poor people from taking part overall, which republicans might want in order to save money.

 

[Fenderputty]

utter nonsense.

In 2008, Obama and Clinton ran on virtually the same plan, which Hillary Clinton and Newt Gingrich negotiated together. There was one significant distinction which was that the Clinton/Gingrich plan featured an individual mandate to buy health insurance. Barack Obama opposed the individual mandate.



In July 2009, President Obama began negotiating in private with the health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies. They had 3 main objections: no drug importation provision, no bulk drug negotiations, and no public option.

In October 2009, the houses passes a version of the ACA which features no mandate, and includes the public option. It received one Republican vote from Olympia Snowe. A later version of the house bill will re-introduce the mandate.

Concurrently, Democratic Senator Max Baucus becomes a major player on the Senate version of the bill. Baucus rejects 2 Democratic proposals to include a public option. Democrat-turned-Independent Joe Lieberman also played a role, saying that he would support a filibuster of any version of the bill containing a public option.

Baucus was not the only Democrat to oppose the public option:


By December, the public option was dead in the senate version.

The final bill contained no prescription drug importation, no public option, no bulk drug price negoiation and imposed the individual mandate as a tax penalty.

Over the course of Baucus' career, health-related lobbies would contribute $5.5M to his campaigns. But I'm sure that had nothing to do with anything.


28 of Baucus' top advisors, including Liz Fowler, who oversaw the implementation the of the ACA would become lobbyists.


To summarize:
1. Obama never ran on a universal healthcare program, despite expressing support for single payer if we could design it from scratch.
2. Obama negotiated in private with health care companies before any bill came to a vote
3. Moderate Democrats were responsible for gutting all the key provisions of the ACA
4. The ACA is a piece of shit, and a corporate handout. Better than US healthcare circa 2007, but still a piece of shit.

1 and 2 are accurate enough I suppose. 3 is a giant half truth as max baucus formed a gang of six to create a bipartisan bill but that was bogged down as republican leaders instructed the GOP members to not make a deal. In fact Baucus was only brought on board because Ted Kennedy had cancer. It was thought the blue dog could get moderate GOP votes. A public option was actually put back in the table at another point too. Blue dog Dems did play a huge roll in the destruction of the public option though. I fucking hate blue dog Dems. The death of Ted kennedy was also a large role as republican Scott brown vowed to be the 41st vote to stop reform. The first bill that passed that had a public option but no mandate was garbage. The two are linked. A good public option needs a mandate to bring down risk polls just like a mandate really needed the public option to bring down costs of private insurance. Insurance companies wanted the mandate but not the public option. In the end we got a watered down mandate and no public option. Obamas role in the pharma sell out is depressing. Long story short there's egg on just about everyones face in how the ACA ended up. Fuck blue dog Dems though.

 

[LegendofJoe]

1 and 2 are accurate enough I suppose. 3 is a giant half truth as max baucus formed a gang of six to create a bipartisan bill but that was bogged down as republican leaders instructed the GOP members to not make a deal. In fact Baucus was only brought on board because Ted Kennedy had cancer. It was thought the blue dog could get moderate GOP votes. A public option was actually put back in the table at another point too. Blue dog Dems did play a huge roll in the destruction of the public option though. I fucking hate blue dog Dems. The death of Ted kennedy was also a large role as republican Scott brown vowed to be the 41st vote to stop reform. The first bill that passed that had a public option but no mandate was garbage. The two are linked. A good public option needs a mandate to bring down risk polls just like a mandate really needed the public option to bring down costs of private insurance. Insurance companies wanted the mandate but not the public option. In the end we got a watered down mandate and no public option. Obamas role in the pharma sell out is depressing. Long story short there's egg on just about everyones face in how the ACA ended up. Fuck blue dog Dems though.

When the Democrats take back control you can bet your ass that a public option and drug negotiations will be on the table. I will make life a living hell for as many democratic reps as I can if it isn't.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

1 and 2 are accurate enough I suppose. 3 is a giant half truth as max baucus formed a gang of six to create a bipartisan bill but that was bogged down as republican leaders instructed the GOP members to not make a deal. In fact Baucus was only brought on board because Ted Kennedy had cancer. It was thought the blue dog could get moderate GOP votes. A public option was actually put back in the table at another point too. Blue dog Dems did play a huge roll in the destruction of the public option though. I fucking hate blue dog Dems. The death of Ted kennedy was also a large role as republican Scott brown vowed to be the 41st vote to stop reform. The first bill that passed that had a public option but no mandate was garbage. The two are linked. A good public option needs a mandate to bring down risk polls just like a mandate really needed the public option to bring down costs of private insurance. Insurance companies wanted the mandate but not the public option. Obamas role in the pharma sell out is depressing. Long story short there's egg on just about everyones face in how the ACA ended up. Fuck blue dog Dems though.

I don't see how you can think this is true. The US pays triple per capita as the UK, which has a universal "socialized" system:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...hecking-bernie-sanders-claim-us-spends-three/

The health insurance industry is making insane profits under the ACA:
http://www.salon.com/2016/10/28/mak...urance-companies-are-reaping-massive-profits/

The CBO has concluded that medicare is more effective at controlling costs than private insurance. Medicare spending rose 4.3% from 1997 - 2009. Private insurance rose 6.5% over the same period.

Then there's this:

The ACA could've included provisions capping executive salaries and marketing spending, neither of which were ever debated.

The idea that we have to force people to buy insurance to make affordable care viable is pure ideology. And it's also discredited by the experience of virtually every other developed nation.

 

[Fenderputty]

I don't see how you can think this is true. The US pays triple per capita as the UK, which has a universal "socialized" system:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...hecking-bernie-sanders-claim-us-spends-three/

The health insurance industry is making insane profits under the ACA:
http://www.salon.com/2016/10/28/mak...urance-companies-are-reaping-massive-profits/

The CBO has concluded that medicare is more effective at controlling costs than private insurance. Medicare spending rose 4.3% from 1997 - 2009. Private insurance rose 6.5% over the same period.

Then there's this:

The ACA could've included provisions capping executive salaries and marketing spending, neither of which were ever debated.

The idea that we have to force people to buy insurance to make affordable care viable is pure ideology. And it's also discredited by the experience of virtually every other developed nation.

What the fuck do you think Universal healthcare is?

Hint: a fuckung mandate. Everyone is on it bringing down overall costs and risk and everyone pays in via taxation

 

[CrispyBoar]

I'll take your word for it, Increasingly Nervous Man.

Hardy har har.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

The idea that we have to force people to buy insurance to make affordable care viable is pure ideology. And it's also discredited by the experience of virtually every other developed nation.

Dude what are you even talking about? Other developed nations with universal healthcare DO force people to "buy insurance", they just do so by automatically making you "buy" insurance through higher taxation. That's what universal healthcare is. Everyone having insurance by default

 

[Kettch]

Maybe next time we can elect a party that's interested in having a functional government.

 

[LordofAllThatIsEvil]

The dog caught the bus.

 

[Stinkles]

Dude what are you even talking about? Other developed nations with universal healthcare DO force people to "buy insurance", they just do so by automatically making you "buy" insurance through higher taxation. That's what universal healthcare is. Everyone having insurance by default

You're neatly ignoring the giant bloated middleman industry that siphons off most of those contributions in the US, while driving up the costs of every other component. You're making a false and asymmetrical equivalency.

The mere existence of the insurance industry at its present scale and power is driving most of the issues and decisions around healthcare.

PS that's what Theresa May has planned for the UK. A brand new (scale of) parasitic industry that does nothing except help solve a problem it created and amplified, itself.

 

[sangreal]

The ACA could've included provisions capping executive salaries and marketing spending, neither of which were ever debated.

The ACA does limit how much money raised from premiums can be spent on anything other than member healthcare

 

[adamsappel]

This is a good post. I think most people don't even remember Obama negotiating with the industry or Baucus' role.

But even less people remember Harry and Louise. These industry-sponsored ads were instrumental in turning public opinion against Hillary Clinton's health care initiative. Obama's negotiations staved off advertising like this.

 

[Seth Enosh]

You're neatly ignoring the giant bloated middleman industry that siphons off most of those contributions in the US, while driving up the costs of every other component. You're making a false and asymmetrical equivalency.

The mere existence of the insurance industry at its present scale and power is driving most of the issues and decisions around healthcare.

PS that's what Theresa May has planned for the UK. A brand new (scale of) parasitic industry that does nothing except help solve a problem it created and amplified, itself.

Under the ACA, 80 to 85% minimum of insurance premiums are passed through to healthcare providers or other healthcare costs. https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-review/

The insurance industry is not "siphon[ing] off most of those contributions" in the USA. The money is going to the ballooning costs of healthcare. Pointing to a 8 million or even 66 million dollar CEO salary doesn't mean much, these salaries are a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of money these companies take in and pay out (e.g. UnitedHealthcare takes in 46 billion dollars in a single quarter of revenue).

 

[sugarhigh4242]

But even less people remember Harry and Louise. These industry-sponsored ads were instrumental in turning public opinion against Hillary Clinton's health care initiative. Obama's negotiations staved off advertising like this.

If youre willing to make this sort of defense, it makes me wonder what corruption you wouldn't defend on similar grounds.

Also:
https://youtu.be/pbnjUGNK1ig

 

[Fuchsdh]

My thoughts exactly. If they put forth a reasonable plan and cut ACA simultaneously, I'll be happy that a crisis was averted regardless of their motivations.

Not that I think they're actually capable of coming up with a reasonable replacement, mind you.

The problem here is the ACA was the reasonable Republican proposal until they themselves turned it radioactive with the Obamacare label.

 

[BowieZ]

Kind of insane, they can either fix the damage they've done to it and prove Obama right, or burn it all down and watch the ensuing chaos and prove Obama even more right. They're fucked either way and they have to own either outcome.

Insane, or delicious?

The Obamacare misnomer is a Frankenstein of the Republicans' own creation.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Insurers aren't having it unless they come up with a really good replacement that ensures the same enrollment numbers AKA the mandata

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/27/new...re-replacement0702PMStoryLink&linkId=33857584

One of the biggest issues is the individual mandate, which requires nearly all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. If Republican lawmakers repeal the mandate without a replacement plan, insurers said they'd "seriously consider" withdrawing from the market next year, the Urban Institute report said. They see "significant" risks in remaining while the details of a replacement bill are in doubt.

 

[Xe4]

If youre willing to make this sort of defense, it makes me wonder what corruption you wouldn't defend on similar grounds.

Also:
https://youtu.be/pbnjUGNK1ig

This isn't corruption. Obama negotiating with the health care industry was the only way the ACA got passed. As it is, shit barely made it past the legislative branch, with health care lobbying against it, there is about a 100% chance it would have been an equal failure as Hillarycare.

Small steps are needed, which is exactly what the ACA was. There's tons of stuff to fix, but it is sure as hell better than nothing at all. People who thought there was any chance of getting universal single payer were delusional.

I don't see how Obama making a promise on the campaign trail changes any of that.

 

[Betty]

Obama said if they'd come up with a better alternative he would go out and champion it as a superior replacement.

I think he knows there's no better replacement and the Republicans too are starting to realise this.

 

[Harlock]

Just for an outsider curiosity, there is not demand for a better public health system? Or this is so bad that people dont even think about?

 

[sugarhigh4242]

This isn't corruption. Obama negotiating with the health care industry was the only way the ACA got passed. As it is, shit barely made it past the legislative branch, with health care lobbying against it, there is about a 100% chance it would have been an equal failure as Hillarycare.

Small steps are needed, which is exactly what the ACA was. There's tons of stuff to fix, but it is sure as hell better than nothing at all. People who thought there was any chance of getting universal single payer were delusional.

I don't see how Obama making a promise on the campaign trail changes any of that.

Obama received more money from the pharmaceutical industry than any other candidate in 2008:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/04/news/companies/pharma_votes/

Then he invites them in to "contribute" to the bill.

If you don't accept this definition of corruption, then corruption doesnt exist. I don't know what to do with this point of view. I seriously doubt you'd hold this stance regarding Trump or any other Republican.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Or how about you do something good for once in your miserable lives and improve the system instead of using lives as gambling chips?

 

[Stinkles]

Under the ACA, 80 to 85% minimum of insurance premiums are passed through to healthcare providers or other healthcare costs. https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-review/

The insurance industry is not "siphon[ing] off most of those contributions" in the USA. The money is going to the ballooning costs of healthcare. Pointing to a 8 million or even 66 million dollar CEO salary doesn't mean much, these salaries are a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of money these companies take in and pay out (e.g. UnitedHealthcare takes in 46 billion dollars in a single quarter of revenue).

The 80/20 Rule generally requires insurance companies to spend at least 80% of the money they take in from premiums on health care costs and quality improvement activities. The other 20% can go to administrative, overhead, and marketing costs

Lol. Accounting and offsetting, how do they work? If you believe that 80% of your premiums are going to the ACTUAL costs then I don't know what to tell you. I'm certainly not arguing that the rest of the industry isn't colluding, in fact the entire thing is a closed loop syndicate. The better comparison is the simplest: What does it cost for a Swedish hospital to administer a Tylenol vs what it costs a US hospital.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

Lol. Accounting and offsetting, how do they work? If you believe that 80% of your premiums are going to the ACTUAL costs then I don't know what to tell you. I'm certainly not arguing that the rest of the industry isn't colluding, in fact the entire thing is a closed loop syndicate. The better comparison is the simplest: What does it cost for a Swedish hospital to administer a Tylenol vs what it costs a US hospital.

You've been tearing this pseduo-argument apart nicely. I thought it was too absurd to address rationally, but you've done it.

 

[Curufinwe]

The amount of stuff leaking out of Washington lately is insane.

Republicans know Trump is going to cost a lot of them their seats if he isn't at least slowed down.

 

[Veezy]

Just for an outsider curiosity, there is not demand for a better public health system? Or this is so bad that people dont even think about?

The United States instills in many a young person that "if you work hard, you can achieve anything." Thus, government assistance, of any type, is seen as weakness and as "stealing" from the better off. The phrasing of the White poor in America not seeing themselves as lower class but as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" is reflective of this. Remember, you can be anything you want to be in the USA. Grand 'ole flag, liberty and justice for all, whatever. So, only the lazy are poor. There is no such thing as a hard working poor person. Quite literally, they don't exist. If you work fast food, it's because you want to.

So, while people do what a better public health system, what people are fed is "socialized medicine doesn't work, other countries that have it are miserable, it's super expensive, and we've already got the best health care in the world. You really want something different that's going to help lazy, poor, people? How much money is that going to cost you?" Thus, shit like the ACA, which is a necessary step towards a true public option or single payer, is completely demonized despite the fact that the problems it has is due to how health insurance functions in the country and not so much reflective of the law alone.

 

[Sulik2]

Just for an outsider curiosity, there is not demand for a better public health system? Or this is so bad that people dont even think about?

People view it as unjust to take their taxes and pay for unhealthy people who should just work harder, get a better job and get their own insurance. Propaganda shapes the thinking of people in the USA to an obscene degree when it comes to any sort of welfare or socialism in this country.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

People view it as unjust to take their taxes and pay for unhealthy people who should just work harder, get a better job and get their own insurance. Propaganda shapes the thinking of people in the USA to an obscene degree when it comes to any sort of welfare or socialism in this country.

Notably, a minority of people view it that way.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/191504/majority-support-idea-fed-funded-healthcare-system.aspx

 

[Za-Neen-Jya]

This Republican congress is like that guy that acts like he wants to fight you as long as someone is there to hold him back.

When they know it had no chance to pass the repubs tried to repeal it over 70 times. Now that they can actually pass a repeal they are getting cold feet. Nothing but bullshit and bluster from these fucking clowns.

 

[JaggedSac]

The ACA does limit how much money raised from premiums can be spent on anything other than member healthcare

Yep. Wife got a letter in the mail saying the insurance company's profit was over the allowed percentage and were reimbursing the amount back to the insured. This went back to her employer, not her though.