Tom Cotton: I think we’re moving ‘a little bit too quickly’ on health care

[TomSea]

Tom Cotton: I think we’re moving ‘a little bit too quickly’ on health care
    AP

By David Sherfinski - The Washington Times - Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Sen. Tom Cotton, Arkansas Republican, said Wednesday it might be a good idea to pump the brakes a bit on the push to overhaul Obamacare and that the Senate isn’t just going to rubber-stamp whatever the House passes.

“I think we’re moving a little bit too quickly on health care reform,” Mr. Cotton said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

“This is a big issue. This is not like the latest spending bill that gets released on a Monday night, [passed] on Wednesday and everybody goes home for Christmas, and we live with it for nine months,” he said.

Continued: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/8/tom-cotton-i-think-were-moving-little-bit-too-quic/

War Hero, Vet, the Jimmy Stewart of Washington DC, I hope Cotton's words are heeded.

[Just_Victor]

No, not too quickly, too liberally.

Here's a thought: pass the repeal bill with an effective date.  Then work on what to do to minimize public anger.

[TomSea]

[Maj. Bill Martin]

No, not too quickly, too liberally.

Here's a thought: pass the repeal bill with an effective date.  Then work on what to do to minimize public anger.

They can't pass a full repeal bill.  There are not enough votes in the Senate.

[corbe]

   McConnell told his Senators yesterday to 'keep up' with the Bill in the House because as soon as it gets to him, He's ramming it through.  We all know from experience this is very uncharacteristic of the turtle so someone is putting a lot of pressure on him and Ryan to get this done regardless of the consequences.

    We are wasting a golden opportunity to get it RIGHT in exchange for expediency.

[Just_Victor]

They can't pass a full repeal bill.  There are not enough votes in the Senate.

Repeal is a tax/funding issue just likethe ACA.  50 plus the VP is all that is necessary.

[Frank Cannon]

Don't give me that shit....



Cotton is an elected official i.e.; a politician now.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Repeal is a tax/funding issue just likethe ACA.  50 plus the VP is all that is necessary.

@Just_Victor

Republicans don't have even 50 votes in the Senate for a full repeal.  That's the political reality with which Ryan and McConnell have to deal.  And even with this "ObamaCare light" version, 4 GOP Senators are balking on the Medicaid rollback.   Ryan and McConnell are attempting to use public pressure to "do something" with Obamacare, to pressure a couple more GOP Senators to support this bill.  They -- the RINOs in the Senate -- are the target of McConnell's comments.

We have to deal in reality.  We cannot pass anything if we lose more than two Senators, or if the Freedom Caucus doesn't support the bill.  And the reality is that those two Senators and the Freedom Caucus are pressuring the bill from opposite sides of the spectrum.  If you give the Freedom Caucus their way, you'll get it through the House and it will die in the Senate.  And the GOP will get the blame for doing nothing with ObamaCare as it implodes.

Getting rid of the federal-funded Medicaid expansion is huge -- it's the vast majority of the cost, and the part that is the most difficult politically because of guys like Kasich.  So, they're basically making that the focus of this first phase, when political leverage is likely as high as it is going to get.  Ram that though first, then come back and to the more complicated stuff.  As a matter of political reality, that's the only way anything is going to get done.

[jmyrlefuller]

Republicans don't have even 50 votes in the Senate for a full repeal.

So who are the turncoats?

They voted against it, it's time for them to be true to their word the last time they voted.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

So who are the turncoats?

They voted against it, it's time for them to be true to their word the last time they voted.

Portman, Capito, Murkowski, and Gardner sent a public letter to McConnell saying (essentially) that they wanted to see the federal Medicaid subsidies kept intact.  That means 52 votes against the bill (and a full repeal would do the same thing, except more so) in the Senate.  Saying that "they need to be true to their word" is simply rhetoric -- it doesn't actually change the vote count.

That's the reality with which the GOP congressional leadership is dealing, so they are trying to do the most controversial things one at a time so as to maximize their chances at getting the bill passed.  We can stamp our feet and call the bill "Obamacare light", but that doesn't solve the problem.

Now, if this is the only issue that causes them heartache, then maybe you can bring enough pressure on them, or maybe you massage it to extent the phase-out period.  But we have to get something passed that is better than the status quo, and this bill does qualify for that.

[LateForLunch]

Portman, Capito, Murkowski, and Gardner sent a public letter to McConnell saying (essentially) that they wanted to see the federal Medicaid subsidies kept intact.  That means 52 votes against the bill (and a full repeal would do the same thing, except more so) in the Senate.  Saying that "they need to be true to their word" is simply rhetoric -- it doesn't actually change the vote count.

That's the reality with which the GOP congressional leadership is dealing, so they are trying to do the most controversial things one at a time so as to maximize their chances at getting the bill passed.  We can stamp our feet and call the bill "Obamacare light", but that doesn't solve the problem.

Now, if this is the only issue that causes them heartache, then maybe you can bring enough pressure on them, or maybe you massage it to extent the phase-out period.  But we have to get something passed that is better than the status quo, and this bill does qualify for that.

Some good points of fact there.

In addition, the horizon for using Budget Reconcillation is not infinite. Unless a bill is passed within a certain time frame, the limit will expire and we will be stuck with the ACA as it is indefinitely. The threshold for passing a full bill will then be much higher than that for budget reconciliation.

Sometimes it's not ideology so much as nuts and bolts of what is possible within the procedural parameters of DC/Congressional rules and regs.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Sometimes it's not ideology so much as nuts and bolts of what is possible within the procedural parameters of DC/Congressional rules and regs.

There are some people that just don't want to hear that.  They want their cake, and they want it now.

I posted that article in its own thread to make folks aware of the roadblocks to "just repeal it".  Don't know if folks even care, though.

[Hondo69]

There are some people that just don't want to hear that.  They want their cake, and they want it now.

I posted that article in its own thread to make folks aware of the roadblocks to "just repeal it".  Don't know if folks even care, though.

Include me in that bucket of people that don't want to hear it.  But hearing things I don't like is a full time job and a guy learns sooner or later that reality will bite you whether you like it or not.

So give me a minute to throw my own private fit, then I'll re-read your post which contains a big dose of reality.

 

[Fishrrman]

Maj. Bill wrote:
"They can't pass a full repeal bill.  There are not enough votes in the Senate."

They could if they'd use the nuclear option.

Sooner or later, it's going to come down to the Pubbies' willingness to go nuclear, if not on this issue, on another.

This cannot be avoided.

[LateForLunch]

Maj. Bill wrote:
"They can't pass a full repeal bill.  There are not enough votes in the Senate."

They could if they'd use the nuclear option.

Sooner or later, it's going to come down to the Pubbies' willingness to go nuclear, if not on this issue, on another.

This cannot be avoided.

That is true to some extent, but the crux of the issue  now as I understand it is amendments - which cannot be added in the Reconciliation phase. If they try to do that, it would require 60 yea votes which would be utterly and absolutely impossible to achieve.