Here we go: Trump now ready to work with Democrats on health-care fix

[DiogenesLamp]

I don't think God has taken a position on the AHCA.  You have.  Hence, my initial reference to the crucifix.

Like it or not, we live in a democratic republic in which the votes of citizens determine the direction of the country.

And if the votes of the citizens demand that certain of us must have our property seized from us,  and perhaps we be placed into camps,   then we must simply salute the tyranny of the majority? 



I thought one of the characteristics of a Republic is that the foundational laws do not bow to the whim of the people?   


Certain foundational premises establish the rights of the individuals to be free from public tampering.   

"Among these are life, liberty,  and the pursuit of happiness." 

[skeeter]

Bingo!  Do you smoke cigars?  Because you just earned one!   

Great. There go our insurance premiums, up another 50%.

[DiogenesLamp]

It seems like sudden changes are only good if the lurch is to the left.   

Thank you for stating my point more eloquently.   

[geronl]

Oh,  I have and I will.   Political idiocy needs to be called out, time and again if need be.   The Freedom Caucus has damaged the cause of conservatism,  and left us with ObamaCare as its dubious legacy.   Simply idiots, as Rep. Poe has pointed out, in gentler language than mine.     

The morons in charge made no attempt to repeal ObamaCare. That's the fact.

[INVAR]

I thought one of the characteristics of a Republic is that the foundational laws do not bow to the whim of the people?   

Certain foundational premises establish the rights of the individuals to be free from public tampering.   

"Among these are life, liberty,  and the pursuit of happiness."

The "Political reality" that we are being told that we must accept is that 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' has been fundamentally changed into 'choice, welfare and the pursuit of other people's money'.

We are unreasonable to refuse surrender and compromise with tyranny that we are told the vast majority want and demand.  We are told that if we will not compromise with Communism and Statism, that seats will be lost in the next election of those who refused to compromise.

I say "nuts".

[DiogenesLamp]

I do apply it to both sides.  Obamacare was a disaster for millions of people who first lost their existing plans, and then saw the new, "better" plans cost a whole lot more.  But that doesn't change the fact that "repeal" will apparently result in the loss of coverage for people who are now covered, and political realism says you've got to avoid that, whatever one's principles are.

You mean we can't take back the freebies from the moochers?   Because the New York Liberal Democrat propaganda system will make us look bad for doing it?   


Math says we can't keep this freebies to moochers program going much longer.   When are we going to stop it,  or is the plan to just let it collapse?   

Well, the world ain't fair, where matters of left vs. right are concerned.  But it's the world we live in.

Well it's certainly been unfair to our side.   How about we let the liberal side get their turn at "unfairness"?   

A fair assessment, but you'll notice that the case still isn't being effectively made. 

I really don't understand the hurry to get the AHCA bill on the floor, when September (at the earliest) would have had the advantage of allowing more time for comments and revisions, and also for laying the groundwork as you've laid it out.

I'd suggest also that making the case for what's wrong with Obamacare would also be a good place to start for addressing the issues piecemeal, rather than all at once.

My position is that Federalism does not allow the government to meddle in the Health Care system.    It is not a constitutionally granted power,   and it is more akin to European nannystateism than it is to anything American. 

It is fundamentally at odds with a Free Society simply as a matter of principle.  The Government should confine itself to defending our borders and enforcing criminal laws across state lines.   

Repeal the thing.  Do not replace it at all.   The Government has no legitimate or moral business involving itself in healthcare.   

I oppose the very principle of government control of healthcare.   Again,  that's Euro-weenie crap. 


By seeking compromise,  you are ceding the premise to the other side.   

[INVAR]

My position is that Federalism does not allow the government to meddle in the Health Care system.    It is not a constitutionally granted power,   and it is more akin to European nannystateism than it is to anything American. 

It is fundamentally at odds with a Free Society simply as a matter of principle.  The Government should confine itself to defending our borders and enforcing criminal laws across state lines.   

Repeal the thing.  Do not replace it at all.   The Government has no legitimate or moral business involving itself in healthcare.   

I oppose the very principle of government control of healthcare.   Again,  that's Euro-weenie crap. 

By seeking compromise,  you are ceding the premise to the other side.

And THAT ladies and gentlemen is the nuts and bolts of the entire issue in a:

[DiogenesLamp]

Never gonna happen. Progressivism will only work when the issue is defined by them in black and white terms. They are never conflicted on what they should do, the losers be damned.

We are only enjoined to consider all sides when their agenda is threatened, and then only to paralyze the opposition.

And this is why I advocate fighting through a new paradigm.   


Their propaganda system needs to be destroyed or conquered and the days of allowing them to define the premise of the debate need to be gone.   

Their premises of the purpose of government need to be rejected and replaced with originalism.   

Their ideas need to be fought at every opportunity,  not accepted as the starting point for every debate.   

We need to address liberals with an effective new strategy. 

Something like this for example.   

[DiogenesLamp]

One possibility is the move of some doctors toward offering "concierge medicine," where they don't accept insurance.  For routine medical care you either pay as you go, or you can buy a yearly "subscription."  The rationale is twofold: first, it gives the doctors a lot more leeway in how they practice medicine, and second, it significantly reduces their operating overhead.  I've known a few doctors who have gone this route, and apparently they like it. 

I don't know how well it would work as a general system, and it doesn't cover things like hospitalization and catastrophic care.  But in conjunction with true insurance (as opposed to the overarching cost-sharing system we have now) it is a possible approach.

And this is the direction in which we should be going.  Suggestion,  not coercion.   

[r9etb]

By seeking compromise,  you are ceding the premise to the other side.

And by rejecting it, you're ensuring that everything you say you're against with Obamacare, will persist.

Politics just isn't as easy as you seem to think it is. 

[INVAR]

And this is why I advocate fighting through a new paradigm.   

Their propaganda system needs to be destroyed or conquered and the days of allowing them to define the premise of the debate need to be gone.   

Their premises of the purpose of government need to be rejected and replaced with originalism.   

Their ideas need to be fought at every opportunity,  not accepted as the starting point for every debate.   

We need to address liberals with an effective new strategy. 

Something like this for example.   

Unfortunately for most, when you take that position (as you should if you want Liberty), then you will be chastised for your 'tone' and lack of gentle Christian compassion which is argued to be the ONLY way to persuade tyrants to stop treading upon you and your property.  We are told you should be glad to retain 10% of your property and liberty for otherwise you would lose all of it.

Apparently the 'wisdom' from our 'betters' is that Compromising with tyranny is the only way to remain free.

[Silver Pines]

It is real easy for people like Levin to govern from behind the microphone.

@kevindavis

I don't think he's governing as much as just issuing a common-sense response.

[bigheadfred]

I am at work, on break, so I can't talk much. I want to point out that as a worker I do have insurance as a sort. Workman's comp. Just throwing it in the mix.

[DiogenesLamp]

I think it's fair to note that Roe v. Wade and Gay Marriage both came through the courts, as did the Supreme Court striking down state gun control laws. 

So did Obamacare.   Without that Idiot Roberts turning Traitor,  that heap of Fascist garbage would have been left to die on Obama's doorstep like he and it so rightly deserved.

Obamacare *WAS*  a court overreach,  Same as the other stuff. 

I don't want to wait for a half century to get rid of it, so unless those straight repeal votes appear somehow in both the House and Senate (and I don't think they will), I'll take getting rid of as much of it as we can now, even if that means leaving some of it in place.

The longer something is tolerated as a principle,   the more ingrained it becomes in the system.   Our side was utter fools for trying to palliate that monstrosity.   They should have insisted it go into effect immediately,   and they should have worked to make it's effects as horrible as possible. 


The public needed to be bitchslapped hard by this thing to wake them up to the fact they had elected a f***ing moron who did not have their best interests at heart.   

But what did we do?  We tried to shovel sugar into the poison instead of letting people suffer immediately over it's consequences.   


That was dumb politics. 

[INVAR]

Politics just isn't as easy as you seem to think it is.

It's not "politics".

It's tyranny.

Plain and simple.  Nothing complicated about it.

[XenaLee]

I don't think God has taken a position on the AHCA.  You have.  Hence, my initial reference to the crucifix.

Like it or not, we live in a democratic republic in which the votes of citizens determine the direction of the country. If you actually enjoy being hated for either your opinions, or the way you choose to present them, then you are essentially enjoying losing on the issues about which you claim to care so much.

In other words, you'd rather be a martyr than actually achieve anything worthwhile.  And that, I believe, is a rather ugly form of pride.

Not really..... since "most" Americans did NOT want ObamaCare to be the "law of the land".  So much for bowing to the will of the people.

[Jazzhead]

So did Obamacare.   Without that Idiot Roberts turning Traitor,  that heap of Fascist garbage would have been left to die on Obama's doorstep like he and it so rightly deserved. 

Traitor?   He was simply doing his job as a judge.  Are you demanding that judges act as political animals? 

The "Fascist garbage" you refer to was the individual mandate.   That mandate (as well as the employer mandate)  would have been eliminated by the AHCA.   The survival of that "fascist garbage" is the direct result of the obstruction of the Freedom Caucus.   So give Justice Roberts a break.   

[Jazzhead]

Well it's certainly been unfair to our side.   How about we let the liberal side get their turn at "unfairness"?     

Republicans now hold all branches of government.  All we need to do to prevail is be unified.  The failure to fix the ACA is our own damn fault.   We can't handle the responsibilities of governance;  we're happier being aggrieved back-benchers.   

[INVAR]

Traitor?   He was simply doing his job as a judge

By declaring a penalty to be a "tax" and rewriting legislation?

Separation of powers much?

I didn't think so.

Republicans now hold all branches of government.  All we need to do to prevail is be unified. 

Unifying in order to promote Statism, Communism, Liberalism and tyranny is not an option.

[EC]

Republicans now hold all branches of government.  All we need to do to prevail is be unified.

Couldn't agree more. So, who exactly has to bend their beliefs to unify? I'm assuming it won't be you.

[Bigun]

By declaring a penalty to be a "tax" and rewriting legislation?

Separation of powers much?

I didn't think so.

Unifying in order to promote Statism, Communism, Liberalism and tyranny is not an option.

Not for me it isn't! That's for sure!

[bigheadfred]

The reason I bring up workman's comp. Businesses that offer insurance pay that, too. My employer pays it. How can it or can't it be expanded or modified to include small business overall coverage with addendums for family?

Maybe it is another dumb idea.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@EC

So, who exactly has to bend their beliefs to unify?

That's a great question that kind of cuts to the core of the whole thing.

The side that should bend the most is the side that has the most to lose if no deal is struck - the side least willing to live with the status quo.  That's a basic rule of bargaining.

[DiogenesLamp]

They were lying to us the whole time, it was "drama," as you put it.  A cynical lie to get votes, never meaning to follow through.  I wish I could say I'm surprised, but I'm not.  What's surprising are some of the arguments I've heard in favor of the crap sandwich that was just defeated.

Yup.

[DiogenesLamp]

@r9etb

If we're not willing to make major changes because we may lose some control afterwards, we may as well give up the ship.  After all, the Democrats did lose the House after ObamaCare passed, but the result was that they actually got ObamaCare.  Had they been afraid of the reaction, they wouldn't have gotten it all.

If we get through a bunch of major reforms on different legislation, and lose the House as a result, I'm fine with that.  Unless we lose the House, Senate, and Presidency, we'll be able to protect what we achieved.  My concern is that the prospect of getting clobbered will mean that complete repeal will not pass in the first place, and we'll waste so much time trying to force votes on it that the clock will run out.  And then we'll lose the House without actually having accomplished a damn thing.

Thank you.   Quite a rational perspective on it in my opinion.