John McCain, A Return to Order and NDAA 84-9 Vote

mark kennedy · Sep 23, 2017

hedrick said:
I think the people of the US are paying attention. It's too early to predict elections. My estimate is that voters won't care that much about the process, but they will care if they lose the protections of Obamacare.

Unfortunately the latest bill is complex enough that it's going to come down to who you believe. 2018 is too close to see actual results. You can argue that the bill doesn't remove anything good, because the states will miraculously do things more efficiently, not use the block grants for other things, and supplement the money during recessions when more people are out of work and need help.

(The thing about entitlements is that appropriations expand as need expands. Unfortunately taxes don't. But a Federal entitlement program is more likely to find a way to handle it than states.)

It's very unlikely that this will all happen. Indeed the welfare "reform" that turned entitlements into block grants gives a good model for what will happen. But because the text of the legislation doesn't actually remove protections, it will come down to whose analysis of impact you believe. Unfortunately people believe in people that they like rather than people whose analyses are accurate.

By the time results are visible, it will be a few years after the legislation. So voters will have to believe analysis that traces results to that cause. Again, I'm not convinced that people will necessarily believe in accurate analysis.

The GOP leadership didn't nominate Trump. Their members did. It's very hard to predict what's going to happen either to the GOP or the Democrats. If the voters recoil in horror from what the GOP is doing, things will change. But in my opinion the same forces that elected Trump are still present, and will be for a while.

Will key Republicans reject an ideological tax cut? I'm not so sure. I think they may manage to get a budget through. It may actually be easier for Democrats to hang them on that, as it will be easier to document impacts.

"I cannot in good conscience vote for the Graham-Cassidy proposal," the Arizona Republican said in a statement. "I believe we could do better working together, Republicans and Democrats, and have not yet really tried. Nor could I support it without knowing how much it will cost, how it will (affect) insurance premiums, and how many people will be helped or hurt by it. Without a full CBO score, which won't be available by the end of the month, we won't have reliable answers to any of those questions." (CNN)

They will get the budget done but Graham-Cassidy was largely intended to take away the expansion of Medicaid. I almost hope it passes because some states that supported Trump will suffer big loses in funding:

Texas, which rejected Medicaid expansion under Obamacare, would see an increase of $35 billion in federal dollars headed its way. California and New York, two massive states whose governors accepted the Medicaid expansion, would see dips in funding of $78 billion and $45 billion, respectively.

Those are the extremes. It's the other 47 states -- or at least the 34 that would receive less federal dollars under Graham-Cassidy -- that should worry Republican politicians. Among the states that would lose billions in federal funding: Pennsylvania ($6 billion), Ohio ($9 billion), Colorado ($6 billion) and Michigan ($8 billion). The states that carried Trump to victory in the Rust Belt are hit hard. (CNN)

jgarden · Sep 24, 2017

John McCain, A Return to Order and NDAA 84-9 Vote

When the Republicans in the House and Senate are attempting to pass legislation that only has 17% support in the national polls, waiting for CBO scores, following normal congressional procedures, public hearings and knowledge of the bill's content all suddenly become counterproductive!

When every group of healthcare "stakeholders" in the nation (doctors, lawyers, hospitals, insurers, etc.) are opposed to Republican repeal and replace legislation, the GOP game plan is to suppress, not solicit, any informed but dissenting opinions.

The original repeal and replace legislation in the Senate was written in secret by 13 ultra-conservative, older, "white," wealthy males in expensive suits, all handpicked by Mitch McConnell - no female GOP senators, no "black" GOP senators, no public hearings, no attempt to encourage bipartisan support!

FOOTNOTE: Senators Bill Cassidy (a physician with relevant healthcare experience) and Lindsay Graham, co-authors of the current "Cassidy-Graham Bill," were both considered "too liberal" and independent, by Senate standards, to earn a place on the original committee.

Search

Search

John McCain, A Return to Order and NDAA 84-9 Vote

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum

More options

jgarden

Senior Veteran

More options

Similar threads