(10-25-2025 04:48 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-24-2025 08:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  They are holding out for renewal of the ACA tax credits that are set to expire. If they expire, health insurance costs will be way too high for many Americans that can afford them now due to the ACA. And illegals are not eligible for the ACA

https://redstate.com/beccalower/2025/10/...e-n2195463

Quote:Over the past three-plus weeks since the start of the Schumer Shutdown the Democrats continue to spread the rhetorical equivalent of cow manure about millions in taxpayer dollars not going to pay for illegals' healthcare in the U.S. Their audacious kabuki theater continues apace.

Earlier in Oct., House Speaker Mike Johnson explained to former Bill Clinton campaign operative, ABC News' George Stephanopoulos, exactly how - and why - Dems have demanded the federal government keep the gravy train going for illegals across the country to pay for their healthcare; it's the primary purpose for the shutdown.

All the while, even with much of the federal government in sleep mode, the Trump administration continues to work on lowering the cost of medicines for every day Americans with a second deal with a major pharmaceutical company.

RedState wrote that there's already ample documentation on how much fraud, waste, and abuse is endemic in the Medicaid program, with Oregon set to dole out a massive amount--about $1.5 billion--in healthcare benefits from 2025-2027, 25 percent of it covered by federally-funded tax dollars.

Most recently, in May, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Director, Dr. Mehmet Oz shared that the overall Medicaid fraud was astronomical, according to what had been ferreted out by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), as my colleague Bob Hoge wrote.

Now, we see yet another submitting of receipts over Medicaid and illegal immigrants, in a new interview with Fox News' Fox & Friends this week. Hold on to your seats, readers.

The Trump administration has "identified more than $1 billion" in taxpayer dollars that were spent on Illegals' healthcare--and they have only investigated "half a dozen states," Dr. Oz said in the segment this week:


A major positive in what he said is that the Trump administration is in the process of "clawing back" that money from misuse. As Dr. Oz also stated in the clip, the receipts don't lie--and they continue to pile up on the leftists who control the Democrat Party in this mess.

I'd say the facts are clear as a mill pond after a summer thunderstorm: Democrats cannot hide that they are fine with leaving actual Americans in need out to dry - while they fight like heck to protect illegals with Senator Chuck Schumer's Shutdown. Shameful.

https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/10/0...s-n2194624

Quote:On Wednesday, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson had a brief conversation with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos on the matter of how illegal aliens in the United States were, in fact, receiving Medicaid - along with what was done about it, and precisely how Democrats want to undo that, so illegals can start receiving these taxpayer-funded benefits again.

Mr. Stephanopoulos, who we should all remember is a Clinton creature, made this point:

Here are the facts. The proposal does not provide healthcare for illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants cannot buy healthcare under the Affordable Air... uh, Care Act. They cannot receive healthcare subsidies. Illegal immigrants are ineligible for Medicare, Medicaid, and the children's health program. The Democratic bill does not make them eligible.

The Speaker responded with a Reagan-esque "There you go again" retort:

It does, actually. Because what it does, it unwinds the changes that Republicans put into the Big, Beautiful Bill, that signature legislation that we passed and signed into law last July 4th, that has been very successful in shoring up Medicaid for the people who are actually eligible to receive it. What we did in the bill, and the CBO just verified this three weeks ago, the Congressional Budget Office, the non-partisan arbiters of everything up here, they said that those provisions have helped to reduce premiums. Why? Because we got ineligible recipients off of Medicaid.

Illegal aliens and able-bodied young men who were riding the wagon, who were not eligible to be there. Medicaid is intended for specific populations of U.S. citizens. That is young, pregnant women, who are down on their luck, the disabled and the elderly, those resources were being drained from those folks, and so we fixed that. We reduced fraud, waste, and abuse in the program. Chuck Schumer's counter-proposal on the CR would reverse that. That is a simple fact.

At this point, George Stephanopoulos just issued an unsupported denial of what the Speaker had just explained, and snapped, "You made your point."

Indeed, Mr. Stephanopoulos, the Speaker did make his point; it's just too bad that it sailed over your head.

CBO estimates that enacting the Medicaid provisions in title IV would increase the number of people without health insurance by 7.8 million in 2034 relative to baseline projections under current law.

1 Of that number:
About 4.8 million would be able-bodied adults between the ages of 19 and 64 who have no dependents and who do not meet the community engagement requirement in section 44141 for participating in work-related activities at least 80 hours a month.

About 1.4 million would be people who do not meet citizenship and immigration status requirements for Medicaid enrollment but who would be covered under current law in programs funded by the states.

About 2.2 million would become uninsured because of other provisions in H.R. 1, including provisions increasing the frequency of verification of eligibility to enroll in Medicaid or those that would lead states to change their Medicaid enrollment requirements in response to federal policy changes.

CBO estimates that the interactions among the policies would, on net, reduce the number of people without health insurance by 600,000 in 2034 relative to the sum of the estimated effects of the individual policies because some people would become uninsured under more than one policy.


In other words, the CBO estimates that the Big, Beautiful Bill - now law - would eliminate from the Medicaid rolls 4.8 million who are ineligible due to being young, able-bodied, with no dependents. It also estimates that the BBB would eliminate 1.4 million from the Medicaid rolls who do not meet citizenship and immigration status requirements. As in, illegal aliens - 1.4 million of them.These people may have been on the Medicaid program illegally, but on it they were. Now Democrats want to roll back the very BBB provisions that took them off.

Speaker Johnson is correct in his claim. This supposed newsman, George Stephanopoulos, the Clinton creature, is once again, sadly and catastrophically wrong.

Mr. Speaker, you're doing great. Stick to your guns, and stick to the facts. The American taxpayers are counting on you.

If everybody in here read all of the above post, and understood it, nobody in here would ever vote for a Democrat again.

(10-25-2025 04:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-25-2025 04:48 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-24-2025 08:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  They are holding out for renewal of the ACA tax credits that are set to expire. If they expire, health insurance costs will be way too high for many Americans that can afford them now due to the ACA. And illegals are not eligible for the ACA

https://redstate.com/beccalower/2025/10/...e-n2195463

Quote:Over the past three-plus weeks since the start of the Schumer Shutdown the Democrats continue to spread the rhetorical equivalent of cow manure about millions in taxpayer dollars not going to pay for illegals' healthcare in the U.S. Their audacious kabuki theater continues apace.

Earlier in Oct., House Speaker Mike Johnson explained to former Bill Clinton campaign operative, ABC News' George Stephanopoulos, exactly how - and why - Dems have demanded the federal government keep the gravy train going for illegals across the country to pay for their healthcare; it's the primary purpose for the shutdown.

All the while, even with much of the federal government in sleep mode, the Trump administration continues to work on lowering the cost of medicines for every day Americans with a second deal with a major pharmaceutical company.

RedState wrote that there's already ample documentation on how much fraud, waste, and abuse is endemic in the Medicaid program, with Oregon set to dole out a massive amount--about $1.5 billion--in healthcare benefits from 2025-2027, 25 percent of it covered by federally-funded tax dollars.

Most recently, in May, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Director, Dr. Mehmet Oz shared that the overall Medicaid fraud was astronomical, according to what had been ferreted out by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), as my colleague Bob Hoge wrote.

Now, we see yet another submitting of receipts over Medicaid and illegal immigrants, in a new interview with Fox News' Fox & Friends this week. Hold on to your seats, readers.

The Trump administration has "identified more than $1 billion" in taxpayer dollars that were spent on Illegals' healthcare--and they have only investigated "half a dozen states," Dr. Oz said in the segment this week:


A major positive in what he said is that the Trump administration is in the process of "clawing back" that money from misuse. As Dr. Oz also stated in the clip, the receipts don't lie--and they continue to pile up on the leftists who control the Democrat Party in this mess.

I'd say the facts are clear as a mill pond after a summer thunderstorm: Democrats cannot hide that they are fine with leaving actual Americans in need out to dry - while they fight like heck to protect illegals with Senator Chuck Schumer's Shutdown. Shameful.

https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/10/0...s-n2194624

Quote:On Wednesday, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson had a brief conversation with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos on the matter of how illegal aliens in the United States were, in fact, receiving Medicaid - along with what was done about it, and precisely how Democrats want to undo that, so illegals can start receiving these taxpayer-funded benefits again.

Mr. Stephanopoulos, who we should all remember is a Clinton creature, made this point:

Here are the facts. The proposal does not provide healthcare for illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants cannot buy healthcare under the Affordable Air... uh, Care Act. They cannot receive healthcare subsidies. Illegal immigrants are ineligible for Medicare, Medicaid, and the children's health program. The Democratic bill does not make them eligible.

The Speaker responded with a Reagan-esque "There you go again" retort:

It does, actually. Because what it does, it unwinds the changes that Republicans put into the Big, Beautiful Bill, that signature legislation that we passed and signed into law last July 4th, that has been very successful in shoring up Medicaid for the people who are actually eligible to receive it. What we did in the bill, and the CBO just verified this three weeks ago, the Congressional Budget Office, the non-partisan arbiters of everything up here, they said that those provisions have helped to reduce premiums. Why? Because we got ineligible recipients off of Medicaid.

Illegal aliens and able-bodied young men who were riding the wagon, who were not eligible to be there. Medicaid is intended for specific populations of U.S. citizens. That is young, pregnant women, who are down on their luck, the disabled and the elderly, those resources were being drained from those folks, and so we fixed that. We reduced fraud, waste, and abuse in the program. Chuck Schumer's counter-proposal on the CR would reverse that. That is a simple fact.

At this point, George Stephanopoulos just issued an unsupported denial of what the Speaker had just explained, and snapped, "You made your point."

Indeed, Mr. Stephanopoulos, the Speaker did make his point; it's just too bad that it sailed over your head.

CBO estimates that enacting the Medicaid provisions in title IV would increase the number of people without health insurance by 7.8 million in 2034 relative to baseline projections under current law.

1 Of that number:
About 4.8 million would be able-bodied adults between the ages of 19 and 64 who have no dependents and who do not meet the community engagement requirement in section 44141 for participating in work-related activities at least 80 hours a month.

About 1.4 million would be people who do not meet citizenship and immigration status requirements for Medicaid enrollment but who would be covered under current law in programs funded by the states.

About 2.2 million would become uninsured because of other provisions in H.R. 1, including provisions increasing the frequency of verification of eligibility to enroll in Medicaid or those that would lead states to change their Medicaid enrollment requirements in response to federal policy changes.

CBO estimates that the interactions among the policies would, on net, reduce the number of people without health insurance by 600,000 in 2034 relative to the sum of the estimated effects of the individual policies because some people would become uninsured under more than one policy.


In other words, the CBO estimates that the Big, Beautiful Bill - now law - would eliminate from the Medicaid rolls 4.8 million who are ineligible due to being young, able-bodied, with no dependents. It also estimates that the BBB would eliminate 1.4 million from the Medicaid rolls who do not meet citizenship and immigration status requirements. As in, illegal aliens - 1.4 million of them.These people may have been on the Medicaid program illegally, but on it they were. Now Democrats want to roll back the very BBB provisions that took them off.

Speaker Johnson is correct in his claim. This supposed newsman, George Stephanopoulos, the Clinton creature, is once again, sadly and catastrophically wrong.

Mr. Speaker, you're doing great. Stick to your guns, and stick to the facts. The American taxpayers are counting on you.

yet, cummy tummy repeatedly states he doesn't lie ...

If everybody in here read all of the above post, and understood it, nobody in here would ever vote for a Democrat again.

They may read a little of it, they may read everything in it but they still won't believe it. My SIL will not believe anything that comes out of Fox News, only from her lying sources. That's how they roll.

(10-25-2025 09:44 AM)olliebaba Wrote:  They may read a little of it, they may read everything in it but they still won't believe it. My SIL will not believe anything that comes out of Fox News, only from her lying sources. That's how they roll.

All news sources are biased, unfortunately. I watch Fox and CNN to get both biased sides.

I tried to watch MSNBC, but they openly slant things so wildly that they are unwatchable to anybody trying to find legit news.

I tried to watch Newsmax, but they are freaking boring.

Before Trump, I was essentially neutral (didn't vote for him the first time), disliking all sources, but watching the two I mentioned. I think since then, the left has been taken over by the Socialists, and has driven over the cliff.

Fox is biased, but at least they have the ability to criticize the right on occasion, and allow libs on some shows. Scott Jennings is the only conservative I see on CNN. MSNBC is a joke.

(10-25-2025 09:44 AM)olliebaba Wrote:  They may read a little of it, they may read everything in it but they still won't believe it. My SIL will not believe anything that comes out of Fox News, only from her lying sources. That's how they roll.

the whole point is how subversive tactics are applied … your SiL probably thinks that’s some special technique at the nail salon …

Quote:BREAKING: It was just revealed that young air traffic controllers are BAILING on the academy because Democrats shut the government down.

Holy smokes. Chuck Schumer's actions are now having devastating ripple effects - worse than initially thought.

SEC. DUFFY: "Some of our young controllers in the academy and some who have been given spots in the next class of the academy are BAILING! They're walking away!"

"They're asking themselves, why do I want to go into a profession where I could work hard and have the potential of not being paid for my services?"

"And so we're seeing that real consequence right now. That affects my ability to continue the surge and get more people, more young, well-trained controllers into our system."

Trump came in and had Duffy begin to clean up the air traffic shortage - and Chuck is bent on causing another one. Disgusting.

Why can't air traffic control be privatized anyway?

Sent from my Pixel 7 using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-25-2025 01:53 PM)b2b Wrote:  Why can't air traffic control be privatized anyway?

Sent from my Pixel 7 using CSNbbs mobile app

Almost every state and federal function can and should be privatized. The great majority, for sure.

Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

(10-27-2025 06:25 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

The ACA is pretty much unaffordable to anyone sans subsidies, imo

(10-27-2025 07:32 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 06:25 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

The ACA is pretty much unaffordable to anyone sans subsidies, imo

If you recall it was a failure from the start. Website was junk. I don't know anyone who's had good experience with it. It severely destroyed private insurance.

BTW, if the stuff is so "affordable" as the name suggests, why do they need subsidiaries.

Obamacare encourages the cycle of poverty

If you get a better job either
1. Your premiums go up signficantly as you lose your subsidy rapidly the more you make. Make $30K a year you get a $40/month policy with a reasonable deductible. Make $40K a year and you get unafforadable garbage insurance
2. You lose your subsidy completely making the insurance entirely unaffordable, even if the employer's insurance is junk

(10-27-2025 05:53 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

tampon timmy agrees with tanq in the authoritarian dept ... what a duo ...

(10-27-2025 07:32 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 06:25 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

The ACA is pretty much unaffordable to anyone sans subsidies, imo

Especially in Texas. If you are below the poverty line in Texas---you get no subsidy at all (sounds odd, but thats how it works). Those that are below the poverty line in Texas pay full price for Obamcare---just the same as someone who makes too much money to qualify for a subsidy. The sweet spot for Obamacare in Texas is just above the poverty line---where you would get a huge subsidy bringing the insurance price down to almost nothing. The farther above the poverty line you get---the smaller the subsidy becomes until it completely phases out (which makes sense---its the below the poverty line part that seems really odd to me).

(10-27-2025 07:32 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 06:25 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

The ACA is pretty much unaffordable to anyone sans subsidies, imo

In reality, what health insurance is? Look at your W-2, Box 12. The amount with Code DD is what your employer paid on your behalf for health insurance. Add that to your portion you pay each year, and tell me you can afford that all on your own. Doubtful most could afford that.

So yeah, the cheap insurance sucks. But if you have a catastrophic situation, at least it won't bankrupt you in the end. That's about all health insurance is really good for.

(10-28-2025 10:11 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 07:32 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 06:25 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

The ACA is pretty much unaffordable to anyone sans subsidies, imo

In reality, what health insurance is? Look at your W-2, Box 12. The amount with Code DD is what your employer paid on your behalf for health insurance. Add that to your portion you pay each year, and tell me you can afford that all on your own. Doubtful most could afford that.

Prior to the ACA being passed, I had insurance that didn't cost a fortune. My co pay was low and my deductible was non existent. After the ACA, more money was taken out of my check with higher co pays and deductibles. The services rendered was better before the ACA and after half of the services were no longer valid.

The ACA destroyed health insurance for millions of working people and for what?

(10-28-2025 10:15 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 10:11 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 07:32 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-27-2025 06:25 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Let me tell you my experience with the ACA.

I got laid off in 2021, and had an new job in 2 weeks. The previous company gave me insurance until X Date, which is the date I started with the new company. New company unfortunately didn't start insurance for a month, so I hit the marketplace.

I paid half of what my current employer and I pay together, the insurance sucked. Barely anything covered, high deductible, it was basically like paying high dollar for liability insurance.

The ACA is neither helpful to those of us paying into the system nor to anyone who uses it.

The ACA is pretty much unaffordable to anyone sans subsidies, imo

In reality, what health insurance is? Look at your W-2, Box 12. The amount with Code DD is what your employer paid on your behalf for health insurance. Add that to your portion you pay each year, and tell me you can afford that all on your own. Doubtful most could afford that.

Prior to the ACA being passed, I had insurance that didn't cost a fortune. My co pay was low and my deductible was non existent. After the ACA, more money was taken out of my check with higher co pays and deductibles. The services rendered was better before the ACA and after half of the services were no longer valid.

The ACA destroyed health insurance for millions of working people and for what?

Mine...as with everyone else I know...didn't really change a lick. Except that you could cover your kids all the way past college until they got settled in jobs and on their own plans...and that you could pretty much never get kicked off your plan, or denied due to a pre-existing condition.

But yes, the cost goes up each year, just as pretty much everything does and always has. And I remember, before the ACA, costs were going up a lot each year too. If you don't remember that, you're lying.

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep it." - Barack Hussein Obama.