Jump to content
Paa Langfart

Latest Obama care Repeal exempts Alaska

Recommended Posts

Remember Murkowsky the Alaska Senator who was one of 3 senators who deep sixed the last pub bill to replace Obamacare?  Seems they are trying to buy her vote this time around.

 

Quote

As GOP leaders continue to drum up support for the health-care proposal written by Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy (La.) and Lindsey O. 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 exempts low-density states whose block grants either decrease or stay flat between 2020 and 2026 from the Medicaid per capita cap. Under that scenario, Alaska and Montana would be exempted from the funding cap that applies to all other states during that period.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) has been negotiating behind closed doors with Senate GOP leaders on the measure, and neither she nor the state’s junior senator, Dan Sullivan (R), have said how they would vote if the legislation came to the floor next week. Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) joined nine other governors Tuesday in sending a letter to Senate leaders indicating opposition to Cassidy-Graham in its current form.

In an interview Thursday, Walker said he was still looking for the kind of assurances that would allow him to support the bill but had not yet received them.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/09/21/cassidy-graham-bill-provision-would-exempt-alaska-montana-from-a-cap-on-medicaid-spending/?utm_term=.55c9310c56da

So everyone else but Montana and Alaskans can get screwed.  These fugging republicans are the scum of the earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Paa Langfart said:

Remember Murkowsky the Alaska Senator who was one of 3 senators who deep sixed the last pub bill to replace Obamacare?  Seems they are trying to buy her vote this time around.

 

So everyone else but Montana and Alaskans can get screwed.  These fugging republicans are the scum of the earth.

exemptions started with the dems ...just keeping the standard. It always seems bad when your own devices are used against you...

  • Poo 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


GOP bill is horsepoo.  Worse than Obamacare.  Left and right know it.  Congress knows it.  POTUS knows it. 

Simple.  Trump simply wanted to get rid of Obamacare because it has Obama's name to it.  He doesn't care how bad the replacement is.  He doesn't care about healthcare.  He cares about Obama.  GOP doesn't care how bad the replacement is either....all they want is it gone because they made that their campaign soapbox for years and yet have nothing better to offer up. 

 

 

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just insane people are going to such lengths to kill something like this just because a former President's name is attached to it (and unofficially at that).    If you think it's anything but that, you are wrong.     If they really cared about coming up with something better, they could, and it would start with Bernie's bill and then work on it from there to fit our country.  

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans have just days left to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act with only 50 votes and no Democrats. With two no votes already — Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) — "undecided" Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) could cast the decisive vote against it. As a result, one Republican Senate aide toldIndependent Journal Review on Thursday that the bill's sponsors, Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), are potentially considering "buying" Murkowski's vote by letting her state more or less keep ObamaCare.

The draft is by no means final, nor is it certain that Murkowski would accept the revision. For her part, Murkowski has told reporters that when it comes to the Republican legislation, "what I'm trying to figure out is the impact on my state."

Independent Journal Review lists three provisions that could benefit Murkowski's state. "Alaska (along with Hawaii) will continue to receive ObamaCare's premium tax credits while they are repealed for all other states" and the draft "delays implementation of the Medicaid per capita caps for Alaska and Hawaii," IJRreports. Politico also reports of a potential "Medicaid delay" that would "apply to Alaska, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana, based on their low-density populations."

For the rest of America, Graham-Cassidy would convert ObamaCare's subsidies and Medicaid payments to block grants to states, allowing each state ample leeway to decide coverage rules and patient protections, plus cut Medicaid sharply and change its structure. 

 

http://theweek.com/speedreads/726094/new-draft-republican-healthcare-bill-reportedly-let-alaska-hawaii-keep-obamacare

 

Wow.  

Wow

Wow.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




14 hours ago, heel31ok said:

exemptions started with the dems ...just keeping the standard. It always seems bad when your own devices are used against you...

Or we could say both parties are trash for doing it.

You continue provide ample evidence that your morality is sub par. 

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans to the country.

 

"If you like your Obamacare you can keep your Obamacare.... (just move to Alaska)"

 

 

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, heel31ok said:

libs spread their best...

Do you have any real thoughts in that tiny brain of yours?  Also, do your family and friends (assuming you have some) know what a disgusting human you are?

Edited by rhyslloyd
fuged up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/21/opinions/i-cried-when-they-passed-obamacare-axelrod/index.html

 

I wept the night the Affordable Care Act passed.

Through my closed office door in the White House, I could hear President Obama and my colleagues cheer as the final tally came in from the House of Representatives that, at long last, would send the ACA to his desk. But I wasn't there. Sensing my emotions welling, I had excused myself from the gathering in the Roosevelt Room as the votes mounted and walked across the hall to be alone and collect my thoughts.
This unexpected burst confused me. I had, after all, been involved in many public battles over the course of my career. So why was I sobbing now?
Proud as I was, I knew it wasn't because of the prodigious political accomplishment the president had just achieved, some over-the-top elation because my boss had notched a historic victory. It was much more personal: My thoughts were focused on my own experience in the health care system, as the father of a child with a chronic illness.
When my daughter, Lauren, was 7 months old, my wife found her gray and limp in her crib. Susan, at first, thought our beautiful little baby had died. But soon, Lauren stirred. One arm shot into the air and stiffened, her eyes rolled back in her head and she began frothing at the mouth.
Lauren had epilepsy. This seizure was one of thousands she would experience over the next 18 years. She lived through more than a dozen hospitalizations, brutal, failed treatments and brain surgery before we were able to find a combination of drugs to stop them.
I was a young reporter at the Chicago Tribune when Lauren got sick and we had insurance through my job. But that insurance didn't cover Lauren's very expensive medications and, since she now had a pre-existing condition, we couldn't shift to a policy that would. Our out-of-pocket expenses ran as much as a thousand dollars a month. My salary at the time was around $40,000 a year.
All those memories came rushing back the night the ACA passed -- all the pain and financial worry we had felt as young parents, struggling to keep our baby alive. I cried because I knew that because of the law that had passed that evening, many other families would not have to face the same ordeal.
Once I collected myself, I found the president to thank him on their behalf. He simply put his hand on my shoulder and said, "That's why we do the work."
Since that time, I have encountered so many Americans who have been helped by this law who felt moved to give their testimony.
There was the young, hairless man in a baseball cap who stopped me on the street in Chicago. He obtained insurance as a result of the ACA and shortly after, was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a potentially deadly form of cancer.
"I wouldn't have gone for a checkup without insurance," he said, his own eyes brimming with tears. "And I couldn't have covered the treatment."
I recalled that encounter recently at a conference at which I was speaking. After the talk, a young couple chased me down in the parking lot.
"That's my story," the young woman said with tears of her own. "I had cancer and without the ACA we would be bankrupt -- or I would be dead. Maybe both."
Wherever I go in the country, I encounter such stories. Some from patients themselves; often from grateful relatives and friends of those who have benefited from the ACA.
I can't remember anyone stopping me to share the "horror stories" President Trump and the relentless proponents of "repeal and replace" invoke, though I know there are some who had had bare-bones policies and now are paying more for more coverage than they say they need. (I didn't know what I needed until I needed it.)
Without question, the law can be improved. Among the needed steps, additional measures should be taken to stabilize rates in the private insurance exchanges through which 3% of Americans buy their insurance. A bipartisan group of senators was at work on such a plan before being sideswiped by the latest frantic effort to dismantle Obamacare.
The ACA has not only provided the opportunity for health coverage to tens of millions who lacked it, it has afforded new benefits and protections that make all Americans more secure. It has promoted preventive care and innovations in the delivery of care that have strengthened our entire health care system.
That is why every major medical organization, disease and patient advocacy group -- even America's major insurers -- have strongly condemned the latest plan from Senators Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy to scrap the ACA.
Under the Graham-Cassidy plan, millions would lose coverage altogether. Rates on older Americans would rise dramatically. And, though the bill includes language that would continue to offer coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, it does not require that it be provided at an affordable price. It is an empty and cynical promise.
 
Republican and Democratic governors have rejected the plan, warning that its draconian cuts in Medicaid funding over time would hurt their states. Those cuts would threaten nursing home patients, people with disabilities and those who need drug treatment, which is particularly cruel in the midst of the opioid crisis. Insurers say the Graham-Cassidy plan would wreak havoc in the insurance markets.
So why visit all of this on the American people, racing yet another repeal-and-replace bill through without proper hearings or scrutiny? Because, says the president and Republican leadership in Congress, "repeal and replace" was a promise made to their base and if Congress fails again to act, it will depress Republican turnout in 2018. This isn't about the health of Americans. It's about the health of the party.
I remember accompanying President Obama to a closed Democratic Senate caucus, where he made a passionate case for the ACA. He didn't make a political argument. He knew he was asking the members to cast a risky vote that could, and would, cost some of them their jobs.
Instead, he asked them for their votes because the ACA would improve the lives of many Americans.
"Remember why it was we all ran for public office in the first place -- the school board, or city council or legislature?" he asked, speaking without a note in front of him. "We did it because we wanted to make a positive difference in the lives of our communities and of people. That's why we got into this work.
"Now we have a chance to do something really meaningful -- something folks in this town have been talking about since Roosevelt -- both Roosevelts -- but have never gotten done.
"This is our moment. This is our chance to make a real difference now and for future generations."
What a contrast with what we are watching today, a destructive bill, raced through the Senate without proper reflection or scrutiny in order to meet a September 30 deadline after which the rules would compel a bipartisan answer on this life-and-death issue.
I wonder what case President Trump, Vice President Pence and Mitch McConnell are making behind closed doors today?
Are they arguing that this law will somehow improve the lives of the millions of Americans who will lose coverage? Or are they warning their comrades of retribution from an angry base if they don't pay off on their mantra of "repeal and replace?"
I will weep again if this retrograde and reprehensible bill becomes law.
I won't weep because of some perceived blow to "the Obama legacy," any more than I cried because of the political achievement seven years ago.
I'll cry for the sick and vulnerable and for all the families who will needlessly be exposed to the awful trials mine has known.

 

 

  • Pie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      18,787
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    PanthersToast88
    Joined
  • Topics

×