The GOP Congress keeps using the wrong end to blow with, and to think with.
The republicans will be working on tax breaks for the wolf next.
Well, the Republicans ARE mostly hot air, after all…
I wish those tax breaks could be tax breaks for the majority instead of for the 1%.
Dang! That O_Care won’t give me a free Pig!
I don’t think the wolf has given up just yet.
The democrats passed the ACA without republicans , so the republicans are trying the same thing. Until both parties work together, this will go on for ever.
Next the wolfy old GOP will try to come in through the chimney…
What a mooch! Oh wait, he’s been FIRED!
RETPOST, the Dems invited participation from the Repubs and added some of their suggestions. I.E. Grassley added the part about Congress using the ACA exchanges; of course that was because he thought the Dems would kill the ACA if they had to be on it. The mandate, which the Repubs whine about constantly NOW, was in the original design from the RW Heritage Foundation and continued in Romneycare.
.A group of white male Republicans drafted their garbage without even including any women or minorities from their own party, much less asking the Dems for anything. Then McConnell blames the Dems for not helping.
.You’re entitled to your own opinion, but you’re NOT entitled to your own “facts”.
The li’l pigs best be careful and not let down their guard. Evil can be relentless.
Seems like the wolf should be as fat as a pig already, after blowing down the houses of EPA, Energy, Education, State, etc., etc., etc.
@mikefive…you are constantly splitting hairs about the origins of the philosophy behind the PPACA. Using the insurance markets and an “individual mandate” to spread risk in financing healthcare is the essence of both the PPACA and the Heritage Foundation plan. It’s not that the details don’t matter. They do. But the core of the debate is whether we, as a society, have an obligation to assist our fellow citizens in accessing financing to pay for their healthcare goods and services.
At heart, your legalistic thinking avoids this critical overarching debate about the macro ethical and financial issues involved here. A market-based solution to these issues might work, if designed and supported properly. But extending the current national programs of Medicaid and Medicare to apply to all is a profoundly different ideological position, and represents one very real alternative to the market based approach.
To be sure, the narrow and legalistic details you always seem focused on ARE important. But you first need to have a vision. Then a coherent piece of legislation is crafted around the vision and becomes subject to massive political wrangling over the details. In the case of the PPACA, that vision mostly involves using insurance markets, which is the Heritage Foundation approach.
So. First a vision. Then write legislation. Then dicker over the legislation. Then dicker over the details. You, my friend, are focusing on the last element. The first element is straight out of the “private market are the best way to handle this” Heritage Foundation vision.
The prior republican vision was enacted into law under Saint Ronnie. He saw to it that nobody gets untreated for an emergency at the ER because of an inability to pay. as a wholly incomplete vision, this simply shifted expensive treatments to everyone else. Very dumb.
The devil may be in the details. But vision and intent set the stage. So, tell everyone, Mike, what’s your vision and intention?
If that was a real Obamacare building, it would be on fire and foreclosed upon!
August 01, 2017