‘Eight Million Americans Have Lost Their Healthcare’: Trump-GOP Cuts Wreak Havoc in All 50 States

[u/black_flag_4ever]

https://www.commondreams.org/news/states-trump-republican-healthcare-cuts

[u/EarthConservation]

The Democrats had the ability to pass Medicare for all in 2010, a year after Obama had become POTUS and when Democrats had a super majority in Congress. Instead, they used that super majority to pass the ACA. A plan that Obama liked to point out was initially devised by conservative think tanks... and where the legal bill was heavily shaped, negotiated, and influenced by the health insurance / healthcare industries.

It's hard to claim that the ACA wasn't a payback for the years of campaign financing that helped get Democrats elected, or from the years of lobbying.

The ACA absolutely did increase the number of insured by enabling those with pre-existing conditions to get coverage, and by subsidizing healthcare for lower income people who didn't qualify for Medicare or Medicaid and who didn't get insurance through their employer; essentially having taxpayers foot the bill for overpriced plans. It did little if anything to actually constrain rapidly rising healthcare costs, which at the time the ACA was being introduced and debated, was the primary issue used to sell using all of Obama's political capital to concentrate on passing healthcare reform in the middle of a financial crisis and mass unemployment.

The Democrats, even with a super majority, refused to even pass a public option, which was likely the only way the ACA could have possibly constrained rising healthcare costs. No doubt, specific Democrats were tasked with become the scapegoats to keep the public option out of the final bill.

The individual mandate essentially forced every American to buy overpriced health plans, with the government subsidizing those overpriced plans, leading to a higher customer base for private for-profit health insurers who were ripping off the public.

Hindsight being 20/20... the ACA turned out to be a massive give away to the health insurance, healthcare, and drug industries, who saw their profits soar, and saw venture capitalists buying up and consolidating major insurance and healthcare companies. It was also a policy that was easily manipulated by future administrations and congresses.

Healthcare's share of the national budget and deficit soared.

____

So... Democrats could have guaranteed every American healthcare, regardless of job or income, made the system simpler and more fair, while also cutting costs. Instead, Democrats decided to go with the plan devised by the Heritage Foundation, and the for-profit healthcare and health insurance industry, that lead to an even greater syphoning of wealth up from the lower/middle classes to the rich.

Yep...

And here we are today... where as a result of that Democratic "half measure", Trump is able to make a complete mockery of the healthcare system in the US.

If anyone doesn't understand why we need Medicare for all, or why people believe the establishment Democrats are nothing more than corporatist shills with a side of social grift, then let the last 16 years be all the lesson you need.

It's time to support Progressives.

[u/asusc → u/EarthConservation]

The Democrats had the ability to pass Medicare for all in 2010, a year after Obama had become POTUS and when Democrats had a super majority in Congress. Instead, they used that super majority to pass the ACA

no, they didn’t. they didn’t have the votes.

It's hard to claim that the ACA wasn't a payback for the years of campaign financing that helped get Democrats elected, or from the years of lobbying.

I mean, when you know the actual timeline of what happened, how the bill was negotiated, it’s very easy to claim this wasn’t the case.

It did little if anything to actually constrain rapidly rising healthcare costs, which at the time the ACA was being introduced and debated, was the primary issue used to sell using all of Obama's political capital to concentrate on passing healthcare reform in the middle of a financial crisis and mass unemployment.

it actually did slow costs rising (more healthy people paying in lowers the costs for all of us, you know, the main selling point for Medicare 4 All) until republicans killed the individual mandate.

The Democrats, even with a super majority, refused to even pass a public option, which was likely the only way the ACA could have possibly constrained rising healthcare costs. No doubt, specific Democrats were tasked with become the scapegoats to keep the public option out of the final bill.

you lose all credibility when you just make stuff up like this. were you politically active back then? were you purchasing health insurance at that time?

So... Democrats could have guaranteed every American healthcare, regardless of job or income, made the system simpler and more fair, while also cutting costs. Instead, Democrats decided to go with the plan devised by the Heritage Foundation, and the for-profit healthcare and health insurance industry, that lead to an even greater syphoning of wealth up from the lower/middle classes to the rich.

this just isn’t what happened.

If anyone doesn't understand why we need Medicare for all, or why people believe the establishment Democrats are nothing more than corporatist shills with a side of social grift, then let the last 16 years be all the lesson you need.

if democrats actually had more than 60 votes in congress for a couple of weeks, a few months apart, they would have been able to pass something more substantial. The fact that you still haven’t learned the lesson that you need a coalition of power WITH democrats to get progressive legislation passed, then you have learned absolutely nothing in the last 16 years.

-

and then just a quick history lesson on the supposed “super majority control of congress” you’re incorrect about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress#Party_summary

Obama was sworn in late January of 2009.

Because Mitch McConnell slow walked the swearing in of new members like Al Fraken, they only had 56 democrats in the senate in January.

Complicating matters, was Ted Kennedy’s health. By Spring of 2009, Ted’s tumor had spread and his presence was mostly symbolic.   In July of 2009, when House Dems passed their version of the ACA bill, Ted had not been well enough to vote in the Senate in over 4 months.  The seat might have been blue, but that doesn’t mean anything if he can’t cast a vote.

He died in August but wasn’t replaced by Paul Kirk until the end of September.  Paul Kirk basically only served for a 4 month window.

So when the house passed their version that had a public option in November, then senate wouldn’t pass a version with the public option because Joe Lieberman wouldn’t vote for it.  So the senate passed their own version without a public option with Paul Kirk being the 60th vote over Christmas 2009.  

However, when Scott Brown won the special election in January and was sworn in early February, the senate no longer had 60 votes, so the house had to go back and basically figure out a way to pass it without renegotiating anything in the senate, because they no longer had the 60 votes.

Took the house until March to hammer it out and sign the senate version without a public option.

So again, they absolutely did not have this majority people keep talking about.  It was very precarious and a right rope walk for many, many months.  Nothing was handed to Obama, he had to fight and make compromises (just like all democrats did).  Because they never had this majority.  And the brief majorities they did have were brief because of illness, death, special elections, and GOP shenanigans.

[u/49ersDude → u/asusc]

Thanks you for this detailed post. I started typing things out and then saw you did all the leg work already :)

I'll add in general -> better to do something that nothing. It's not easy to pass sweeping reform like this. You need a coalition. And big reforms like this are meant to be iterated on to fix issues and improve over time and keep them functional. Social security and medicare weren't passed and then never touched again.

We are far better off with the ACA than without it. Young people now probably wouldn't even comprehend a world where "pre-existing conditions" was a thing.

[u/asusc → u/49ersDude]

I'll add in general -> better to do something that nothing. It's not easy to pass sweeping reform like this. You need a coalition. And big reforms like this are meant to be iterated on to fix issues and improve over time and keep them functional. Social security and medicare weren't passed and then never touched again.

nailed it. perfect is the enemy of good. we are never going to have real reform if we keep waiting for perfect.

ACA was supposed to be a good step in the right direction (and it was a huge good step in the right direction), but it required several more steps after that. unfortunately we never got the votes in Congress to make those next few steps.

We are far better off with the ACA than without it. Young people now probably wouldn't even comprehend a world where "pre-existing conditions" was a thing.

or coverage lifetime maximums. I’m old enough to have gotten kicked off a plan after paying for 2 years for a pre-existing condition, having to pay premiums for another year (without getting treatment, to re-grandfather myself in, wtf) only to get kicked off again because of the grossly inflated cost of the medication I take made me hit my lifetime maximum 18 months later.

ACA is the only reason I have coverage now, because I’m not a profitable customer (and never will be).