Thanks Tierney. Is it true that the Senate cannot use reconciliation on the bill if the CBO figures the plan increases the deficit?
Little Paulie thinks he finally has his Ayn Rand Plan. More of an Alisa Rosenbaum Plan. Broke at the end.
That State Line the GOP want to cross is the one with the LEAST REGULATIONS.
Lower Premiums with very little if any true Health Care Benefits…
These “salesmen” are the ones that come to your door when your looking for
Nursing home insurance and they sell you a term life policy.
IT’S TIME FOR SINGLE PAYER AMERICA.
GET THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY OUT OF HEALTH CARE !!!
“Read my lips: no higher premiums, and the care will be very, very very good—it will be fantastic!” ?
Ayn Rand’s plan when she was terminally ill was to suck on the big government teat. Let’s go with the older, wiser Ayn Rand’s view.
…and the Trumpanzees will go against their economic best interests and support the plan, denouncing even conservatives who find fault with it.
Shell game.
It’s too bad people are too stupid not to play it.
ACA already permits inscos to sell policies across state lines. Both states have to approve the policies sold tho.
Yes it can. The Bush tax cuts for example. The Democrats put a rule in place where it could not increase deficits. This rule was removed in 2015 though.
It is against the spirit of the process though but the GOP has done in for some big deficit boosters.
Like Paul Ryan has been doing for almost his entire adult life.
The whole needing three parts is a major major problem. The first part likely having no affect on premiums but allowing increased tax deductions for insurance companies and likely increased deductibles as well. Given increased costs to older people, loss of coverage for the poor, poor tax credits and maybe a slight decrease for the young it probably breaks to be the same or worse anyway.
I imagine the plan is to force their plan through and then try and guilt the Dems to go along for the third part. Otherwise the system will collapse.
And I’m not sure how the courts would treat FORCING a state to allow an insurer not approved in that state to operate there.
I think that you can’t use reconciliation to raise taxes. Screwing the country by massively expanding debt is perfectly OK though.
Just listened to a Conservative from Club for Growth talk about 'FORCING" The
Insurance Industry to supply Health Insurance across STATE LINES.
Don’t think there will be much “FORCING” to Headquarter insurance companies
in the State with the least benefits for the (OLD GOP STANDBY) “THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE” !
The GOP might have a point, in that it’s probably cheaper to purchase health care coverage that covers nothing.
[quote=“radicalcentrist, post:13, topic:52719, full:true”]
And I’m not sure how the courts would treat FORCING a state to allow an insurer not approved in that state to operate there.
[/quote]Imposed by the “states’ rights” party.
[quote=“maxaroo, post:16, topic:52719, full:true”]
The GOP might have a point, in that it’s probably cheaper to purchase health care coverage that covers nothing.
[/quote]But we will not, cannot, must not talk about total out of pocket expense for actual necessary medial care.
“It’s about making health care more affordable for everybody,” Meadows told TPM.
Then perhaps you should pass legislation that will actually accomplish that goal?
A gamble? Has “gamble” now become a synonym for “damned lie?”