The results of Fox News' investigation into what Republican Obamacare replacement would be

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/04/28/3431439/fox-news-host-presses-gop-senator-on-obamacare-replacementto-no-avail/

Ridiculous.  Republicans have had 5+ years with which to proffer alternatives to the Patent Protection and Affordable Care Act.  They haven't even considered it.  Rather, the Republican House has voted 51 times to revoke Obamacare.

Does anyone think that this is anything but another ruse? An attempt at sabotage?  Republicans hate real people; Republicans are the party of privilege and wealth.  Their constituents are corporations.  They would rather see real people die than provide a program that would keep them healthy.  

The Republicans have had their ass handed to them by the American public so many times that they are having to think up not just new lies, but new ways to lie.  Senator Portman's plan is to propose a healthcare plan, but then bog it down with details and snags...only to dust off his hands and walk away, saying, It can't be done. It's just another tactic.

Does anyone honestly think a Republican can be taken at his word?

Original Quill wrote:Ridiculous.  Republicans have had 5+ years with which to proffer alternatives to the Patent Protection and Affordable Care Act.  They haven't even considered it.  Rather, the Republican House has voted 51 times to revoke Obamacare.

Does anyone think that this is anything but another ruse?  An attempt at sabotage?  Republicans hate real people; Republicans are the party of privilege and wealth.  Their constituents are corporations.  They would rather see real people die than provide a program that would keep them healthy.  

The Republicans have had their ass handed to them by the American public so many times that they are having to think up not just new lies, but new ways to lie.  Senator Portman's plan is to propose a healthcare plan, but then bog it down with details and snags...only to dust off his hands and walk away, saying, It can't be done.  It's just another tactic.

Does anyone honestly think a Republican can be taken at his word?

I think we're just going to have to wait for the day, 10-20 years in the future, that Obamacare has become so entrenched and established that Republicans running for office are so frightened by any accusation that they want to change Obamacare that they emotionally insist that the believe in it and would never change it

Just like what happened with Social Security and Medicare, basically.

Here’s another sign that the stance on Obamacare held by many GOP Senate candidates — whether you call it “repeal,” or “repeal and replace with something-or-other to be specified later” — is becoming increasingly unsustainable and could get harder and harder to explain as these campaigns intensify.

In a weekend interview with WMUR, Scott Brown — who is running for Senate in New Hampshire — attempted to explain his stance on health care. He endorsed the general goals of protecting people with preexisting conditions and expanding coverage to those who need it. But he then denounced Obamacare as a “disaster,” citing the usual litany of Obama tyrannies and horror stories often hawked by Republicans.

So, how would Senator Scott Brown go about accomplishing the goals he says he supports? Well, he urges reform on the state level. Here’s the key quote from the interview (just after the 10-minute mark):


“I’ve always felt that people should either get some type of health care options, or pay for it with a nice competitive fee. That’s all great. I believe it in my heart. In terms of preexisting conditions, catastrophic coverage, covering kids — whatever we want to do, we can do it. As a matter of fact, in New Hampshire, I would encourage everybody to do a New Hampshire plan that works for New Hamphsire, that deals with individual freedoms, and doesn’t have mandates put on by bureaucrats in Washington….a plan that is good for New Hampshire…can include the Medicaid expansion folks who need that care and coverage.”

Asked if he agrees with the “philosophy” behind the Affordable Care Act, and if his problem is merely its “mechanism” for carrying out those philosophical goals, Brown replied: “Absolutely,” before reiterating that the law is a disaster.

New Hamsphire recently moved forward with its version of the Medicaid expansion. Brown supports repeal — which would do away with the expansion — and yet to my knowledge, he has not taken a position directly on the expansion when asked. Repeal would scrap Obamacare’s consumer protections and other efforts to expand coverage. Brown (who supported Romneycare in Massachusetts) appears to think federal reform should be repealed and replaced with state level reform. Until he says otherwise, that seems to mean he doesn’t envision a federal “replace” plan.

Brown’s comments are the latest in a trend we’ve already seen: Republican Senate candidates endorsing Obamacare’s general goals, while claiming the law should be done away with and replaced with something that does some of the same things. North Carolina GOP Senate candidate Thom Tillis says that of course he supports protecting people with preexisting conditions, just not with Obamacare. Tom Cotton and Terri Lynn Land, the GOP Senate candidates in Arkansas and Michigan, are both refusing to take a clear position on the Medicaid expansions in their states even as they mouth nice noises about expanding health care to those who need it.

This strategy — call for repeal to keep the GOP base happy, while insisting on support for the law’s goals, to avoid alienating moderates — relies on keeping the “replace” part vague. As Jonathan Cohn has explained, there just isn’t any real policy space for an alternative to Obamacare that accomplishes what the law does, and Republicans are not willing to embrace the tradeoffs necessary to realizing its goals in any case. It’s certainly possible that GOP Senate candidates may get away with this dance and that Republicans could win the Senate in spite of its obvious flaws. But Brown’s interview suggests the possibility that it could prove harder and harder to sustain as these Senate races heat up. After all, he has openly professed support for health reform’s goals. So you’d think he’d come under some media pressure to explain how, precisely, he would accomplish them. Is the above answer really going to cut it in the crucible of a hard-fought Senate race?

Of course, as Brian Beutler has noted, it’s on Dems to force Republicans to publicly account for the true implications of their actual stance, which is to do away with the law’s benefits for millions and replace it with nothing. And in that regard, Dems have something working on their side: Nobody believes there is any Republican alternative to Obamacare.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/04/28/morning-plum-scott-browns-obamacare-repeal-follies/

Ben wrote:Just like what happened with Social Security and Medicare, basically.

Definitely, Ben.  But that day is here and now.  Over 8-million people have signed up for Obamacare.  It is already an operational success.  Republicans may not yet be frightened, yes...but their shouts are ringing pretty hollow.

Just like the 2012 presidential election, the Republicans are getting their collective ass handed to them.  They had better start getting on some bandwagons, or it won't be defeat, but forgetfulness, that plagues them.  They are rapidly going the way of the old Whig Party.

ObamaCare Facts' Daily Updates on ObamaCare

The latest ObamaCare News from ObamaCare Facts. We provide daily ObamaCare news updates to help you keep up to date on what's happening with ObamaCare Today. Due to the ever changing nature of the new health care law staying up to date on the latest ObamaCare news is a must. Find out how ObamaCare will affect you, your family and your business.

Open enrollment 2014 is closed unless you qualify for a special enrollment period. To avoid the penalty make sure you have coverage that starts by May 1st, 2014. Insurance purchased before the 15th of each month starts on the first of month following the next month after you have paid your premium. In other words enroll before April 15th to get covered by May 1st.

ObamaCare News April 2014

The Oregon Exchange: Cover Oregon Moves to HealthCare.gov

Published April 23rd, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
Despite successfully covering about 240,000 Oregonians, Oregon is dropping it's state marketplace in favor of the federal marketplace healthcare.gov. Find out what it means for Oregonians and their health insurance and learn about other changes to the Oregon marketplace.

CBO Report: The ACA is projected cost $104 billion less than the previous projections

Published April 23rd, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
The ACA is projected to cost $104 billion less than the previous projections according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). We hear a lot of numbers swirling around the media in regards to the Affordable Care Act. With any big program the way you break down the numbers, and the steps you omit or include when explaining your findings, can have a big impact on the message the data seems to convey. Get the facts on ACA costs straight from the source with the latest report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Get the April 2014 CBO report on the Affordable Care Act.

Medicare Advantage Myth

Published April 21st, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
Rick Scott claims seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage are going to see an average premium increase between $50 and $90 per month. Unfortunately for that talking point, it's not true. Get your ACA Medicare myths debunked here and more ACA myths debunked here.

8 Million Enrolled Through Health Insurance Marketplace

Published April 18th, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
8 million people signed up for private insurance in the Health Insurance Marketplace. For states that have Federally-Run Marketplaces, 35 percent of those who signed up are under 35 years old and 28 percent are between 18 and 34 years old, virtually the same youth percentage that signed up in Massachusetts in their first year of health reform. Read the official whitehouse.gov fact sheet.

Uninsured Rate Around 12.9%

Published April 17th, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
New Gallup Poll Suggests Uninsured Rate Drops from 18% to 12.9% during open enrollment.

The new uninsured rate is pretty impressive despite anti-ObamaCare states dragging the numbers down (Texas for instance currently has less Americans insured by Medicaid than before the law, single handedly decreasing nation-wide Medicaid enrollment numbers due to their refusal of Medicaid expansion.) Remember these numbers include signups inside and outside of the marketplace. Get the scoop on the uninsured rate from LA Times.

Kathleen Sebelius Out, Sylvia Mathews Burwell In

Published April 14th, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
On Friday April 11th, Kathleen Sebelius (health secretary in charge of overseeing the Affordable Care Act) announced her resignation and President Obama has nominated Sylvia Mathews Burwell as the next health secretary. Check out this article from CNN on the new health secretary.

ObamaCare Medicare Reversal

Published April 8th, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
The Obama administration announced yesterday that it would be reversing scheduled reductions to the Medicare Advantage program, dealing a huge victory to private insurers and the bipartisan group of lawmakers who advocated for maintaining the higher reimbursement rates that President Obama claimed only padded company profits. Check out this article from Thinkprogress.org on ObamaCare and Medicare.

Small Business Unites Democrats and Republicans on the Affordable Care Act

Published April 7th, 2014 by ObamaCare Facts
More often than not the Affordable Care Act is a divisive talking point for political battles. Democrats support the program and Republicans oppose it (although the individual aspects of the law tend to be much less polarizing when polled separately). That being said both sides have come together in support of a minor change to limits on deductibles for small business health plans sold through the SHOP. Check out this article from the Washington Post on the ACA and small business.


http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-news.php

Andy, was there a point in there somewhere? I just see a bunch of news briefs on the topic of Obamacare.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Andy, was there a point in there somewhere? I just see a bunch of news briefs on the topic of Obamacare.

Oh, there's a point.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Andy, was there a point in there somewhere? I just see a bunch of news briefs on the topic of Obamacare.

Oh, there's a point.

Why not just make it, rather than daintily prancing around it like you normally do?

BigAndy9 wrote:Here’s another sign that the stance on Obamacare held by many GOP Senate candidates — whether you call it “repeal,” or “repeal and replace with something-or-other to be specified later” — is becoming increasingly unsustainable and could get harder and harder to explain as these campaigns intensify.

In a weekend interview with WMUR, Scott Brown — who is running for Senate in New Hampshire — attempted to explain his stance on health care. He endorsed the general goals of protecting people with preexisting conditions and expanding coverage to those who need it. But he then denounced Obamacare as a “disaster,” citing the usual litany of Obama tyrannies and horror stories often hawked by Republicans.

So, how would Senator Scott Brown go about accomplishing the goals he says he supports? Well, he urges reform on the state level. Here’s the key quote from the interview (just after the 10-minute mark):


“I’ve always felt that people should either get some type of health care options, or pay for it with a nice competitive fee. That’s all great.  I believe it in my heart. In terms of preexisting conditions, catastrophic coverage, covering kids — whatever we want to do, we can do it. As a matter of fact, in New Hampshire, I would encourage everybody to do a New Hampshire plan that works for New Hamphsire, that deals with individual freedoms, and doesn’t have mandates put on by bureaucrats in Washington….a plan that is good for New Hampshire…can include the Medicaid expansion folks who need that care and coverage.”

Asked if he agrees with the “philosophy” behind the Affordable Care Act, and if his problem is merely its “mechanism” for carrying out those philosophical goals, Brown replied: “Absolutely,” before reiterating that the law is a disaster.

New Hamsphire recently moved forward with its version of the Medicaid expansion. Brown supports repeal — which would do away with the expansion — and yet to my knowledge, he has not taken a position directly on the expansion when asked. Repeal would scrap Obamacare’s consumer protections and other efforts to expand coverage. Brown (who supported Romneycare in Massachusetts) appears to think federal reform should be repealed and replaced with state level reform. Until he says otherwise, that seems to mean he doesn’t envision a federal “replace” plan.

Brown’s comments are the latest in a trend we’ve already seen: Republican Senate candidates endorsing Obamacare’s general goals, while claiming the law should be done away with and replaced with something that does some of the same things. North Carolina GOP Senate candidate Thom Tillis says that of course he supports protecting people with preexisting conditions, just not with Obamacare. Tom Cotton and Terri Lynn Land, the GOP Senate candidates in Arkansas and Michigan, are both refusing to take a clear position on the Medicaid expansions in their states even as they mouth nice noises about expanding health care to those who need it.

This strategy — call for repeal to keep the GOP base happy, while insisting on support for the law’s goals, to avoid alienating moderates — relies on keeping the “replace” part vague. As Jonathan Cohn has explained, there just isn’t any real policy space for an alternative to Obamacare that accomplishes what the law does, and Republicans are not willing to embrace the tradeoffs necessary to realizing its goals in any case. It’s certainly possible that GOP Senate candidates may get away with this dance and that Republicans could win the Senate in spite of its obvious flaws. But Brown’s interview suggests the possibility that it could prove harder and harder to sustain as these Senate races heat up. After all, he has openly professed support for health reform’s goals. So you’d think he’d come under some media pressure to explain how, precisely, he would accomplish them. Is the above answer really going to cut it in the crucible of a hard-fought Senate race?

Of course, as Brian Beutler has noted, it’s on Dems to force Republicans to publicly account for the true implications of their actual stance, which is to do away with the law’s benefits for millions and replace it with nothing. And in that regard, Dems have something working on their side: Nobody believes there is any Republican alternative to Obamacare.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/04/28/morning-plum-scott-browns-obamacare-repeal-follies/

Hi Andy,

Brown's view on Obamacare is constructed out of what was originally a retreat by Mitt Romney. For Romney implemented the exact same health plan in Massachusetts. In fact, the basic plan was crafted by the RW Republican foundation, The Heritage Foundation. When challenged during the presidential race, How can you oppose your own ides??, Romney retreated into a states rights position...never mind that state plans would not migrate if a person wanted to move state-to-state, and it would not be fundable in smaller, less wealthy states like New Mexico, Wyoming and Alaska.

Brown's position is precisely what I mean: blow smoke with thousands of unworkable solutions, and walk away when it does not work. But first, as Ben says, they have to deal with the overwhelming success of the Affordable Care Act.

Original Quill wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:Here’s another sign that the stance on Obamacare held by many GOP Senate candidates — whether you call it “repeal,” or “repeal and replace with something-or-other to be specified later” — is becoming increasingly unsustainable and could get harder and harder to explain as these campaigns intensify.

In a weekend interview with WMUR, Scott Brown — who is running for Senate in New Hampshire — attempted to explain his stance on health care. He endorsed the general goals of protecting people with preexisting conditions and expanding coverage to those who need it. But he then denounced Obamacare as a “disaster,” citing the usual litany of Obama tyrannies and horror stories often hawked by Republicans.

So, how would Senator Scott Brown go about accomplishing the goals he says he supports? Well, he urges reform on the state level. Here’s the key quote from the interview (just after the 10-minute mark):


“I’ve always felt that people should either get some type of health care options, or pay for it with a nice competitive fee. That’s all great.  I believe it in my heart. In terms of preexisting conditions, catastrophic coverage, covering kids — whatever we want to do, we can do it. As a matter of fact, in New Hampshire, I would encourage everybody to do a New Hampshire plan that works for New Hamphsire, that deals with individual freedoms, and doesn’t have mandates put on by bureaucrats in Washington….a plan that is good for New Hampshire…can include the Medicaid expansion folks who need that care and coverage.”

Asked if he agrees with the “philosophy” behind the Affordable Care Act, and if his problem is merely its “mechanism” for carrying out those philosophical goals, Brown replied: “Absolutely,” before reiterating that the law is a disaster.

New Hamsphire recently moved forward with its version of the Medicaid expansion. Brown supports repeal — which would do away with the expansion — and yet to my knowledge, he has not taken a position directly on the expansion when asked. Repeal would scrap Obamacare’s consumer protections and other efforts to expand coverage. Brown (who supported Romneycare in Massachusetts) appears to think federal reform should be repealed and replaced with state level reform. Until he says otherwise, that seems to mean he doesn’t envision a federal “replace” plan.

Brown’s comments are the latest in a trend we’ve already seen: Republican Senate candidates endorsing Obamacare’s general goals, while claiming the law should be done away with and replaced with something that does some of the same things. North Carolina GOP Senate candidate Thom Tillis says that of course he supports protecting people with preexisting conditions, just not with Obamacare. Tom Cotton and Terri Lynn Land, the GOP Senate candidates in Arkansas and Michigan, are both refusing to take a clear position on the Medicaid expansions in their states even as they mouth nice noises about expanding health care to those who need it.

This strategy — call for repeal to keep the GOP base happy, while insisting on support for the law’s goals, to avoid alienating moderates — relies on keeping the “replace” part vague. As Jonathan Cohn has explained, there just isn’t any real policy space for an alternative to Obamacare that accomplishes what the law does, and Republicans are not willing to embrace the tradeoffs necessary to realizing its goals in any case. It’s certainly possible that GOP Senate candidates may get away with this dance and that Republicans could win the Senate in spite of its obvious flaws. But Brown’s interview suggests the possibility that it could prove harder and harder to sustain as these Senate races heat up. After all, he has openly professed support for health reform’s goals. So you’d think he’d come under some media pressure to explain how, precisely, he would accomplish them. Is the above answer really going to cut it in the crucible of a hard-fought Senate race?

Of course, as Brian Beutler has noted, it’s on Dems to force Republicans to publicly account for the true implications of their actual stance, which is to do away with the law’s benefits for millions and replace it with nothing. And in that regard, Dems have something working on their side: Nobody believes there is any Republican alternative to Obamacare.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/04/28/morning-plum-scott-browns-obamacare-repeal-follies/

Hi Andy,

Brown's view on Obamacare is constructed out of what was originally a retreat by Mitt Romney.  For Romney implemented the exact same health plan in Massachusetts.  In fact, the basic plan was crafted by the RW Republican foundation, The Heritage Foundation.  When challenged during the presidential race, How can you oppose your own ides??, Romney retreated into a states rights position...never mind that state plans would not migrate if a person wanted to move state-to-state, and it would not be fundable in smaller, less wealthy states like New Mexico, Wyoming and Alaska.

Brown's position is precisely what I mean: blow smoke with thousands of unworkable solutions, and walk away when it does not work.  But first, as Ben says, they have to deal with the overwhelming success of the Affordable Care Act.

Yeah ta luvvie - here's another:

Former state treasurer Shane Osborn (R) is up with a new TV ad hitting Midland University President Ben Sasse (R) for being, in Osborn's portrayal, too soft on Obamacare.

"Sasse called Obamacare, quote, 'an important first step.' He said Obamacare’s mandate might be a good idea. He said it won’t be repealed. He gave up," says Osborn, who contrasts himself with his opponent.

The "important first step" reference is to remarks Sasse made in 2010 speech. He also criticized the law in the speech, which is not mentioned in Osborn's ad. Sasse's campaign said the ad was "dishonest."

"Here in Nebraska, honesty matters but Shane Osborn's dishonest attack is proof that he is willing to do and say anything to get elected. Nebraskans know the truth: No one has fought ObamaCare harder than Ben Sasse," said Sasse spokesman Tyler Grassmeyer.

While the full context of Sasse's remarks paint a clearer picture of the spirit of his words, the ad is a reminder that Republicans must be very careful how they speak about Obamacare in public setting, lest they fall victim to an attack from a fellow Republican at some point.

We saw this play out in the Georgia Senate race this year when Rep. Paul Broun (R) went after Rep. Jack Kington (R) with a web ad hitting him for saying it's not "the responsible thing to do" for Republicans to let Obamacare fail without trying to fix it.

The Nebraska primary has heated up in recent weeks. Sasse recently stumped with Sarah Palin and Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah). The primary is May 13.

Osborn's campaign is spending about $200,000 to air the ad in the state. It was first reported by Hotline On Call.

Obamacare is the issue that animates the Republican base this cycle. So don't expect to only see it raised in general elections against Democrats.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/28/republicans-dont-just-hit-democrats-with-obamacare-ads-theyll-also-hit-each-other/

I guess Andy cannot think for himself on the matter, shame really as this would be an interesting debate if anyone could argue the other view point.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


Oh, there's a point.

Why not just make it, rather than daintily prancing around it like you normally do?

Ben and Didge, I do think that andy is trying to express a good point, even if crafted from the Washington Post articles.  Republican attitudes in the wake of their retreat, are many and varied.  It's interesting to watch.

Let's keep our eye on topic. We'll jump on andy when he makes less credible points. Lol.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Why not just make it, rather than daintily prancing around it like you normally do?

Ben and Didge, I do think that andy is trying to express a good point, even if crafted from the Washington Post articles.  Republican attitudes in the wake of their retreat, are many and varied.  It's interesting to watch.

Let's keep our eye on topic.  We'll jump on andy when he makes less credible points.  Lol.

  

BigAndy9 wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Ben and Didge, I do think that andy is trying to express a good point, even if crafted from the Washington Post articles.  Republican attitudes in the wake of their retreat, are many and varied.  It's interesting to watch.

Let's keep our eye on topic.  We'll jump on andy when he makes less credible points.  Lol.

  

You were right Quill, there is your first less credible point