Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express


Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Larry said:

 I assume this is yet another case of "well, there's a statement that's kinda similar to his, that is technically true". Which therefore makes it close enough for politics. 

 

Oh, I assumed it was another case of a dumbass that should have kept his **** holster shut............but I'm sure your interpretation is better :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Could you please provide me a link to the stories where Congress passed a law eliminating the tax deductions for business expenses?  

 

Thanks in advance.  

 

 
 

I wrote that wrong, one of my points was supposed to be that they can write off R&D on their corporate returns,  my bad.

6 hours ago, bearrock said:

This is where fight over essential benefit becomes important.  If presceiption drug is a covered essential health benefit, no matter how much the shots cost, you are only liable up to your annual out of pocket maximum.  There is a real problem with allowing substandard insurance policy that ends up providing inadeqaute coverage.  At minimum, each policy should come with standard disclosure on how much of ordinary treatment for the more common diseases would be covered.

 
 

I actually have really good coverage but what I'm told is because its a proprietory brand they wont cover it all but when I pay out of pocket they apply it towards my deductible which does help with future purchases of other types of drugs and services.

Edited by jschuck12001
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said:

I wrote that wrong, one of my points was supposed to be that they can write off R&D on their corporate returns,  my bad.

I actually have really good coverage but what I'm told is because its a proprietory brand they wont cover it all but when I pay out of pocket they apply it towards my deductible which does help with future purchases of other types of drugs and services.

My mom went through a similar issue during her treatment for cancer.  There was a high copay for Neulasta, but because her total annual out of pocket costs far exceeded her annual limit (with all the chemo, surgery, and radiation, that was going to be a given because her annual limit was very low), so at the end of the day, it didn't make any financial difference.  

 

She really thought the Neulasta shots helped with the chemo side effects and she didn't suffer any other illness during chemo and her white cell count stayed in normal range during the entire treatment.  Cancer is no fun, but I think they've made so much progress and I'm sure they've made even more progress since my mom's treatment (she's now in remission, so it's been awhile).  Best of luck to you jschuck, I'll say a prayer for you.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud any American, black-white-Dem-Rep, that cares enough to voice their concerns and try to hold their representatives accountable. Look at the word itself- "representative"- they are supposed to, required to represent our interests and welfare in the federal government. I sincerely mean this whatever your political persuasions, this IMO is a YUGE problem, the seemingly total disconnect between the constituents and the politicians. We deserve better. The nation deserves better.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Representatives are our employees, subject to selection every two years.

 

I did read today that Democrats should hold town halls wherever Republicans refuse to, or where their arrogance appears. Time to vote those traitors out.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

LSF, I'm sure you saw NY Rep Maloney on TRMS, suggesting that Dems "adopt" districts where the Repub reps refuse to have townhalls, take calls, etc., thought it was one helluva idea.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Susan Collins just said the Senate is not using the House bill as a starting point, they are starting from scratch. Whatever the Senate comes up with has to be voted on by the House, correct?

 

As I understand it (Note:  "As I understand it" does not always equal "fact") there's some kind of procedure where, if the House and Senate vote to pass bills that are "close enough" to each other, then they can utilize a system called "reconciliation":  (This term seems to be used for more than one thing).  

They create a "conference committee", consisting of carefully picked members of both houses.  The conference committee comes up with a third version of the bill.  And, if this version is "close enough" to the bills that were passed, then both housess pronounce that there's no need to vote again, because they already passed something that was "close enough".  

 

The version produced by conference can even include things that were in neither of the two bills that were passed.  

 

(One article I read said that seats on the conference committee are fought over.  For one thing, because it's a great place to insert pork.  Sometimes the House version may have 12 earmarks, and the Senate version may have 8.  And the conference version may have 67.  All without a single legislator voting (on the record) for any of the earmarks.  

 

In case you can't tell, I have no clue what the rules are, for two bills to go through this process.  

 

That's how Obamacare passed.  Each chamber passed a version that was slightly different.  It went to conference committee to iron out the differences.  And went directly from conference committee to Obama, without another vote.  The famous "we have to pass it to see what's in it" references this process.  (Not, as a generation of Republican spinmeisters want you to believe, because the bill was written in secret, and the legislators weren't allowed to see it till after they voted.  But because the only way to find out whether the final bill will contain the House's nits, or the Senate's, was for both houses to pass one, and then let the conference committee argue about the details.)  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just catching up on Ryan BSing on ABC. I really don't think Paul Ryan understands the purpose of insurance. This idea of essentially selling cheap insurance plans that don't cover anything, which is 100% what the GOP plan is, will ultimately pass the costs along to tax payers and people that pay for more comprehensive insurance. 

 

The good thing is that his bill really is DoA in the Senate. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, visionary said:

 

 

Wondering whether Trump is ignorant of the fact that Medicare cuts are one of the biggest "features" of the legislation he's throwing parties to celebrate.  Or did he know that when he sent this, anyway?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Wondering whether Trump is ignorant of the fact that Medicare cuts are one of the biggest "features" of the legislation he's throwing parties to celebrate.  Or did he know that when he sent this, anyway?  

Do you think Trump cares? I don't think he cares one bit what he said in the past. He will only focus on the "repeal and replace" aspect and other choice words that got the crowds at his rallies to cheer like build a wall and throw immigrants out. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theonion.com/infographic/tips-not-condemning-millions-americans-sickness-an-55935

 

Tips For Not Condemning Millions Of Americans To Sickness And Death

 

Do your research: Find out if any of the people you are paid to represent are human beings who use healthcare.

 

 

  • Try to better understand the concerns of your constituents by dying a slow, painful death while bankrupting your entire family.

  •  

  • Check whether or not a single medical professional, patient advocate, economist, or literally anyone familiar with the subject in question supports the legislation you’re about to vote in favor of.

     

    Acknowledge that serving in public office sometimes means putting aside your personal beliefs about how all poor people deserve to die in a wet ditch.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Busch1724 said:

And didn't Aetna make 3 billion in profits last year? We're talking profits! Health insurance is where capitalism is not a good application. 

 

3 Billion profit in the ACA marketplace?

Maybe we should try indentured servitude for healthcare providers since capitalism is not in favor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Jumbo changed the title to Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...