It's never made sense to me either. Only thing I can guess is that they have such an unruly caucus they can't present one. They can't coalesce around a potential solution because they are beholden to their extremes and people defend it obviously.

(11-24-2015 02:53 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  So put something together in the House and let it die in the Senate. You should be able to get 5 Dems in the Senate if you work hard enough to a least get it to a veto pen. The right hasn't done anything. Besides voting to end it is there anything they have proposed as an alternative? If they have can you show it? I'm not aware of any alternative to the ACA.

Aren't you one of the many moaning about the Republicans wasting their time and energy working to 'repeal zerOcare 50 odd times", even though that is factually incorrect? Isn't it another (false) claim that the individual mandates and exchanges were Republican ideas? So, now for political expediency's sake they're not?

Republicans have put forth a whole host of competing ideas and that vicious partisan hack Reid has worked to shield the leader from behind on every.....single..... one of them.

So make up your mind.

(11-24-2015 05:57 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's never made sense to me either. Only thing I can guess is that they have such an unruly caucus they can't present one. They can't coalesce around a potential solution because they are beholden to their extremes and people defend it obviously.

This is a partisan response.

The more likely scenario is that just as in the Democratic Caucus where there were many who voted for the ACA, but really wanted single payer, there are many who would vote for something less than what they would really want, if their options were pass this, or pass nothing.

Owl, I think it obvious that the Dems would have fought passing those bills over the ACA and Obama would have simply argued that his solution was better and the law and vetoed it.... and that would have been a huge waste of time, and as I said, now you've got a whole bunch of people running on bills they really may not 100% support. Yes, there is a lot of truth to the idea that libertarians have splintered the Republican party, but I don't think you or I would argue that they are wrong to do so. I don't think a Libertarian would want to be 'stuck' running on a 'traditional' republican platform (or vice versa) and have to distance themselves from their vote... without being able to argue (as the far left dems have) that the ACA was a step in the right direction towards their goal... since they know it wouldn't ever become law. You're only doing it to make a point, and you don't necessarily agree with the point.

(11-24-2015 05:57 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's never made sense to me either. Only thing I can guess is that they have such an unruly caucus they can't present one. They can't coalesce around a potential solution because they are beholden to their extremes and people defend it obviously.

I'd say you just described the democrats as well as the republicans. Both parties are totally beholden to their extremes. The fact that a news commentator can, with a straight face, describe Obama or Hillary as a "moderate democrat" shows just how far the pendulum has swung.

The difference is that the extremes on the democrat side were able to beat the moderates into submission long enough to pass Obamacare.

(11-24-2015 09:05 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Owl, I think it obvious that the Dems would have fought passing those bills over the ACA and Obama would have simply argued that his solution was better and the law and vetoed it.

I think that's probably a very likely outcome. They would have passed the house and died in the democrat-controlled senate. But I think that puts the conversation exactly where republicans want it. That's a debate they can win.

You have had the House and Senate since 2014. You can't blame Reid anymore. Even with that you should be able to pull over 5 Dems to get something to Obama's desk if Obamacare is the albatross everyone in here thinks it is. The problem the GOP has is the Ted Cruz's of the world who stump speech on pulling Obamacare up by the root and destroying it. It's impossible for the right to come up with alternative or they would have done it. You have 75-100 House Members who won't support anything. That's the problem you have.

Put up a bill that covers pre existing conditions and caps. You don't even have to worry about universal. Probably 70% of voters would go for that. Give a hefty Funding increase to the county health clinics and pay for it with a national sales tax. Give a base level of care to everyone. The problem we have now is everybody has insurance but Dr.s are being squeezed. You have insurance but you won't be able to see a Dr. Republicans would really have an issue then and they would win.

(11-25-2015 08:29 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Put up a bill that covers pre existing conditions and caps.

Screw preexisting conditions. If you rolled the dice and didnt buy insurance, you lose when you get sick. Decouple insurance from employment, and simply say that someone cant lose insurance with a company if they do get sick.

Allow insurance to be sold across state lines. Allow the insurance companies the ability to offer insurance with or without lifetime caps so the consumer can choose which they want to pay for.

(11-25-2015 08:29 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Put up a bill that covers pre existing conditions and caps. You don't even have to worry about universal. Probably 70% of voters would go for that. Give a hefty Funding increase to the county health clinics and pay for it with a national sales tax. Give a base level of care to everyone. The problem we have now is everybody has insurance but Dr.s are being squeezed. You have insurance but you won't be able to see a Dr. Republicans would really have an issue then and they would win.

What I've been saying since 2010, at least. And if they'd added a real deficit reduction bill, they'd have taken the high ground on two issues that would have brought them home winners in 2012. Stupid party versus evil party.

The bolded part is why Obamacare won't work. And single-payer/single-provider will only make that worse.

I don't see any point in showing your cards until you have to. All that does is give your opponents something to take pot shots at, and it's been clearly proven that 80% of Americans don't understand the basic tenants of 'insurance', much less healthcare and will fall for whatever sounds good at the time.

Despite all the supposed failures of the Republicans to offer an alternative, frustration with the ACA has grown, not shrunk. I suspect that once a representative is chosen... whether it be an establishment candidate (in which case the libertarians will have to compromise) or an outsider (in which case the establishment will have to compromise)... they will put forth a plan to compete with Hillary's (or Bernie's) supposed solutions to the problem... because EVERYONE will be looking to solve the problems... and frankly, Bernie's supporters (and those of the 'single payer') will be asked to sacrifice their goals once again.

You guys are suggesting going for 2 early in the 3rd quarter.