The two senators who will likely decide fate of ObamaCare repeal

[Bigun]

That's the selling point to me. There seems to be no political will to repeal Obamacare and the current Federal leviathan. I don't expect it to happen. Any solution that has come about simply shuffles the chairs but keeps the FedGov bureaucracy in place.

While this bill keeps many of the rules, it shifts the administration to the states. States for the most part seem to have more efficient bureaucracies than the Feds, and are closer to the customers that they serve.

But most importantly is that politically it now puts the Governors and State legislatures into the game, and at odds with their respective state's congressional officials, as they have to make this work for their consitutuents. State officials are far closer to the public, and by extension that allows for greater ability for citizens to apply pressure to have a set of rules that function.

So if I'm going to be stuck with something at the Federal or State level, I'll take the state and try to make it better over time.

I agree with every word.   

It isn't what was promised but it is a hell of a lot better than the status quo.

[XenaLee]

I respect your opinions but I don't see that passing this bill would hurt us.  Why do people think Obamacare will collapse of its own weight.  It has been an utter failure but it hasn't collapsed yet.

You aren't aware that certain parts of ObamaCare were delayed until later years?  Like this...

Another Obamacare delay has taken effect, although you may not have heard. The administration has quietly announced that it was delaying through October 2016 the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate for millions of Americans who have lost their healthcare coverage.

Offhand, I would say that the collapse is evident re: the millions of struggling Americans having to contend with skyrocketing premiums and unaffordable deductions... forcing them to go without healthcare ... probably for the first time in their lives, for most (thanks, Barry).  The collapse is the unaffordable aspect that we are seeing all around us.....as well as the fact that many insurers have dropped out of those exchanges and no longer even offer health insurance.  A typical end result when leftist government inflicts leftist policies upon businesses in America. 

I think we should take what is offered in this bill and continue our efforts to get through to the Congress critters.

I prefer to hold out for what was promised and for the ONLY thing that will save our economy from implosion (specifically... non-government interference and control over healthcare).  It may be a pipe dream at this point, but it still is the only thing that will work.  Anything else is merely delaying the inevitable collapse.

[Emjay]

This isn't about any kind of revenge...it's about doing what's right for the people.  ANY form of government controlled health care...even at the state level IMO is not in the best interest of the people.

And if the politicians have stopped caring about what their voters want...it's time the voters sent them home.

Well, yes, but I get the feeling from you that you don't want to do anything because the pols might take credit for it.  That is pointless.

I've seen enough comments and reasons to think this bill would be beneficial.

As for sending them home, we have our chances in 2018 and 2020.

[XenaLee]

@XenaLee

Full Text:  https://www.cassidy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/LYN17709.pdf

You're a treasure.  Thank you!

[Sanguine]

If our elected representatives are not going to repeal it, I think it would be better to let it collapse.  I don't want a half measure to save it and kick that can down the road even further.

[aligncare]

If our elected representatives are not going to repeal it, I think it would be better to let it collapse.  I don't want a half measure to save it and kick that can down the road even further.

And in the meantime people continue suffering under Obamacare.

[Smokin Joe]

I respect your opinions but I don't see that passing this bill would hurt us.  Why do people think Obamacare will collapse of its own weight.  It has been an utter failure but it hasn't collapsed yet.

I think we should take what is offered in this bill and continue our efforts to get through to the Congress critters.

Here is how it hurts. At present the issue is to "DO SOMETHING! about Obamacare". The action we were (repeatedly) promised is repeal. This is far less. This leaves the Federal Government in control of the money, the states with mandates that the Feds will supposedly fund, and with an amendment or rider in any other bill, this 'damage' to obama care can be undone. Perhaps in another continuing resolution for the budget, now that the Dems know they can stuff those, or some disaster relief bill.
The bottom line is that as long as the Feds control funding, whether in the form of block grants or more directly, they retain ultimate control of something for which there is no Constitutional Authority.

Whatever the Congress passes, which will be short of the promised repeal, they will be able to say they "DID SOMETHING" and that will be the end of that. Then they will come to their home districts and crow and strut to the people who are content to take scraps from the hands of their servants.

[Sanguine]

And in the meantime people continue suffering under Obamacare.

And, will continue to under this bill also.  What's your point?

[Smokin Joe]

And in the meantime people continue suffering under Obamacare.

How will this bill restore the insurance options I had before Obamacare?

It won't. I am still in the same boat, regardless.

[Cyber Liberty]

If our elected representatives are not going to repeal it, I think it would be better to let it collapse.  I don't want a half measure to save it and kick that can down the road even further.

The problem I have with letting it collapse is it could wipe out a lot of private insurers, which will lead to the rubes screaming even louder for single-payer.  Many folks (like me) think that was the original intent for Obastardcare in the first place.

[Emjay]

Here is how it hurts. At present the issue is to "DO SOMETHING! about Obamacare". The action we were (repeatedly) promised is repeal. This is far less. This leaves the Federal Government in control of the money, the states with mandates that the Feds will supposedly fund, and with an amendment or rider in any other bill, this 'damage' to obama care can be undone. Perhaps in another continuing resolution for the budget, now that the Dems know they can stuff those, or some disaster relief bill.
The bottom line is that as long as the Feds control funding, whether in the form of block grants or more directly, they retain ultimate control of something for which there is no Constitutional Authority.

Whatever the Congress passes, which will be short of the promised repeal, they will be able to say they "DID SOMETHING" and that will be the end of that. Then they will come to their home districts and crow and strut to the people who are content to take scraps from the hands of their servants.

Who cares about that?  They will say that anyway. 

My gosh, people, if there's something that will help AT ALL, let's take it and not sit around whining.

We couldn't even pass a good repeal bill by Ted Cruz and we probably can't pass this either, but I hope we can.

[Smokin Joe]

Who cares about that?  They will say that anyway. 

My gosh, people, if there's something that will help AT ALL, let's take it and not sit around whining.

We couldn't even pass a good repeal bill by Ted Cruz and we probably can't pass this either, but I hope we can.

It's simple enough. Drop the mandates, drop the coverage requirements, drop the penalties. Pull the teeth out of the dragon. Let the market decide.

[aligncare]

How will this bill restore the insurance options I had before Obamacare?

It won't. I am still in the same boat, regardless.

In-state competition. Get rid of government mandates and you open up the market to innovation and competition in insurance marketing. New companies will spring up under this freer regulatory environment. There will be plans to suit all budgets and all health conditions, unlike Ocare’s one size fits all mandates. It’s called the free market.

Additional money saving will come from the lower cost of state administration and innovations found in many state capitals.

[Sanguine]

In-state competition. Get rid of government mandates and you open up the market to innovation and competition in insurance marketing. New companies will spring up under this freer regulatory environment. There will be plans to suit all budgets and all health conditions, unlike Ocare’s one size fits all mandates. It’s called the free market.

Additional money saving will come from the lower cost of state administration and innovations found in many state capitals.

Sure it will....

[Sanguine]

Ooops, @aligncare, here's your answer:  http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,282155.0/topicseen.html

[XenaLee]

The problem I have with letting it collapse is it could wipe out a lot of private insurers, which will lead to the rubes screaming even louder for single-payer.  Many folks (like me) think that was the original intent for Obastardcare in the first place.

It was indeed the ultimate goal and aim and original intent of the leftist Democrats.  Still is, in fact.  Problem is... there's a bunch of RINOs that want single-payer too.

 As for a lot of private insurers being wiped out or dropping out.... that has already happened under ObamaCare.  Which is what always happens if/when greedy government gets involved in anything other than what they should be involved in.... businesses suffer and Americans have less choice and less options.  Always.

[truth_seeker]

It's simple enough. Drop the mandates, drop the coverage requirements, drop the penalties. Pull the teeth out of the dragon. Let the market decide.

My understanding is this bill, DOES drop employee and personal mandates, DOES eliminate "essential health benefits," etc.

[aligncare]

My understanding is this bill, DOES drop employee and personal mandates, DOES eliminate "essential health benefits," etc.

Yep. The states and the industry are freed up to innovate. And with 50 different states experimenting, you can bet successful ones will be copied.

[Smokin Joe]

Yep. The states and the industry are freed up to innovate. And with 50 different states experimenting, you can bet successful ones will be copied.

Actually, what I had worked just fine for me. It's time for the government to quit using us all as it's bleep lab rats and get the hell out.

[XenaLee]

Oh look.  Big Government picking winners and losers.... as usual.... via their version of The Bribing Games.  Seems that 'some' states are more equal than others.

Cassidy-Graham bill provision would exempt Alaska, Montana from a cap on Medicaid spending

By Juliet Eilperin

As GOP leaders continue to drum up support for the health-care proposal authored by Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy, La., and Lindsey Graham, S.C., a provision buried deep in the 140-page bill benefiting Alaska has begun to draw greater scrutiny. Beginning on Page 95, the bill has a provision that...   

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/

[RoosGirl]

My understanding is this bill, DOES drop employee and personal mandates, DOES eliminate "essential health benefits," etc.

I read that it does NOT eliminate the essential health mandates except that a State can petition Fed Gov to get rid of them.  Is Fed Gov going to allow that on a State by State basis?  How can it eliminate one in one State and not another?

[Jazzhead]

That's the selling point to me. There seems to be no political will to repeal Obamacare and the current Federal leviathan. I don't expect it to happen. Any solution that has come about simply shuffles the chairs but keeps the FedGov bureaucracy in place.

While this bill keeps many of the rules, it shifts the administration to the states. States for the most part seem to have more efficient bureaucracies than the Feds, and are closer to the customers that they serve.

But most importantly is that politically it now puts the Governors and State legislatures into the game, and at odds with their respective state's congressional officials, as they have to make this work for their consitutuents. State officials are far closer to the public, and by extension that allows for greater ability for citizens to apply pressure to have a set of rules that function.

So if I'm going to be stuck with something at the Federal or State level, I'll take the state and try to make it better over time.

Sound reasoning, FV.  I agree.

[Jazzhead]

I read that it does NOT eliminate the essential health mandates except that a State can petition Fed Gov to get rid of them.  Is Fed Gov going to allow that on a State by State basis?  How can it eliminate one in one State and not another?

The EHB requirement - which O-Care doesn't impose on group plans - may be the single biggest reason why the individual marketplace can't provide affordable policies for so many people.   Understand that this is all trying to be accomplished under the auspices of budget reconciliation, so that only 50 votes are needed.   That requires some compromises - such as using a waiver approach rather than getting rid of EHBs altogether.  Hopefully under a Trump administration such waivers will be, er, liberally granted.   

[Smokin Joe]

Oh look.  Big Government picking winners and losers.... as usual.... via their version of The Bribing Games.  Seems that 'some' states are more equal than others.

Montana and Alaska have two of the highest "Native American" population percentages in the country.

[truth_seeker]

Actually, what I had worked just fine for me. It's time for the government to quit using us all as it's bleep lab rats and get the hell out.

The truth is today, 435+100+1=536 persons hold the next solution in their hands.

It is messy. It will not totally satisfy you. The clock will not be turned back in time, no matter how much anyone might wish it to be so.

You and I each have influence on just 4 of those people, namely the President, your two senators, and one House Rep.

I am grateful for progress, to remedy matters, to the extent it is feasible.

Unlike some, I do not run about jousting at windmills. Or waiting for perfect solutions in the future.