‘Progressive’ Washington’s Obamacare Train Wreck

Here’s my problem: I’m a Bill of Rights guy in what’s become a Second Bill of Rights country. That’s why I can’t work up much of a pulse over the intramural healthcare debate among Senate Republicans.

The Democrats, the party of Obamacare and the dream of socialized medicine, has for Trump-deranged reasons become the Party of No on the matter of addressing the catastrophe they have wrought. So, the Senate debate, like the GOP-controlled House debate before it, is a family fight. The family is splitting up, though. The dynamic that led to Donald Trump’s election tells us why. The party no longer stands for what it has long purported to stand for: freedom, self-determination, and limited government. Nothing better illustrates this than its  Janus-faced approach to Obamacare.

Republicans, of course, have campaigned full-throatedly on the imperative to “repeal and replace” Obamacare for seven years. They’ve never been serious about it for a moment.

To be trendily trite, I’m old enough to remember when “repeal and replace” was deceptive because it understated the party establishment’s commitment to the GOP’s conservative base. In the beginning, Republicans boldly beat their chests and bellowed that they’d repeal Obamacare root-and-branch. “Repeal and replace” was actually the first moving of the goalpost, the first implicit admission that, in principle, they were all for a government-managed health-insurance system. If you really want to move to the free market, you repeal statism. When you’re talking “and replace,” you’re just haggling over the price.

In a few short years, “repeal and replace” has gone from a subtle understatement of what Republicans conned voters into believing they’d do, to a gross overstatement of what they’re willing to try. No one who has been paying attention can be surprised by this regression.

Obamacare has always been sleight-of-hand, on both sides. From the beginning, Democrats lied about its feasibility: “Like your doctor, keep your doctor,” “like your plan, keep your plan,” plunging premiums, lower costs, etc. All the while, they knew it was unworkable. That was not a flaw, it was the design. The plan was to orchestrate a collapse of the private insurance market, blame the private insurers rather than the death-spiral regulations, and gradually inure people to the need for a complete government takeover—the panacea of “single payer.”

Equally patent is that, at most, Republicans wanted to slow the train down, not stop it. Many of them, after all, have been on it from the get-go. “Repeal!” and, then, “repeal and replace” made for great fundraising and electoral wedge issues. But when it got down to brass tacks, it was always “Maybe the Supreme Court will strike it down,” or “Maybe we can sue Obama over these waivers,” or “Maybe it will collapse of its own weight.”

Republicans have controlled the House, where all spending originates, since 2010, and the Senate since 2014. Not a dime for Obamacare could have been spent had they not approved it. Never did they use the power of the purse as the Framers intended: Congress’s decisive check against ruinous policy.

That is because today’s Republicans do not see government as the Framers did—as a necessary evil that must be limited, its powers diffused so its tyrannical tendencies can be suppressed.

The modern GOP is the party of the Bushes, John McCain and Mitt Romney (the architect of Romneycare, Obamacare’s progenitor). These are fine, patriotic Americans, but limited government conservatives they are not.

“We have a responsibility,” President Bush proclaimed in 2003, “that when somebody hurts, government has got to move.” Government, in the modern GOP telling, is a force for good, not a necessary evil. You start thinking like that, it’s a short leap to convincing yourself that government can get everybody covered—not that the “coverage” would be a mirage and that statism would undermine the system of medical care.

Four years ago, the conservative crusade to defund Obamacare collapsed due to lack of GOP support—actually, due to surfeit of GOP derision. As unrealistic as the Republican establishment portrayed Senator Ted Cruz’s defunding strategy to be, at least it was a strategy— akin to a Hail Mary pass. The desperate aim was to kill Obamacare in the cradle, before its tentacles spread, making its reversal politically untenable.

By contrast, as I contended at the time, the GOP had no strategy to undo Obamacare because it had no intention of undoing Obamacare. To repeat just some of the reasons I outlined back then:

Remember, Republicans are the guys who gave us a new Medicare prescription-drug entitlement when Medicare was already tens of trillions of dollars in debt. They are the guys who ran in 2012 as the saviors of Medicare—even though they well knew that slamming Obama over taking money out of Medicare would make it much more difficult to address Medicare’s unsustainable costs in the future. They are the guys who accept core premises of Obamacare: Republicans do not make the case that health care is like any other commodity in a free market rather than a corporate asset to be centrally managed. The disagreement between statist Democrats and the GOP establishment is about the degree of government intrusion in health care, not the matter of government intrusion in principle. Republicans are also the guys who want to keep some of Obamacare’s core, anti-free-market elements—e.g., provisions that forbid denial of coverage owing to preexisting conditions and that keep “children” on their parents’ coverage until age 26.

The Democrats, the media, and all the Left will tirelessly portray any proposed repeal of Obamacare as a callous denial—a removal—of coverage from millions of underprivileged Americans, including those struggling with sickness. Moderates and “compassionate conservatives” already lecture us about the need to get real and make our peace with the welfare state; what will they be saying four or six or eight or who knows how many years from now? They will be arguing that Obamacare’s prodigious infrastructure is now part of our social fabric—that repealing it at this point (whenever that point happens) would be radical, the very antithesis of the Burkean conservative disposition. The GOP’s will to fight for repeal—which has never been as strong on action as it is on election-season rhetoric—will dissipate.

Well, here we are.

It was inevitable. After all, how many Republicans today would enthusiastically endorse Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “Second Bill of Rights”? In Washington, nearly all of them, I’d wager.

As an up-and-coming “progressive” state senator, Barack Obama berated the Constitution as a “charter of negative liberties.” He was referring to the Bill of Rights, which says what government may not do to you—suppress your speech, deny your freedom of conscience, subject you to unreasonable search and seizure, take your life, liberty or property without due process of law, and so on.

Progressives, to the contrary, champion the Second Bill of Rights posited in FDR’s 1944 state of the union message. It is the wish-list of things government must do for you. It departs radically from liberty’s premise that the sovereign states and people do best when they do for themselves, with minimal interference from Washington. And it conveniently elides mention of the stubborn fact that government—which is a structure, not a guardian angel—lacks the means to do anything for anyone: It can only do for me if it takes from you.

Prominently included in the Second Bill of Rights is “The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.” It sounds wonderful—who would want to deny anyone the ability to seek health care? But even where rights were codified, they had never been understood to include the right to have other people pay for our enjoyment of them.

This is why the Second Bill of Rights has never been adopted, at least formally. It is, similarly, why the United States has never ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which purports to guarantee “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health,” by government’s “creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.”

How many of today’s Republicans do you figure would dare publicly oppose the proposition that there is a right to medical care? If you’re using your hands to count and still have fingers to spare, it is a measure of how unserious we have become about actual healthcare.

Just as our fact-free, narrative-obsessed society has contorted the idea of a “right” into a subsidy, so too have we twisted opposition to federal control of a good or service into a desire to deny that good or service to others – naturally, because we are racist, sexist, ageist, and in the “intersectional” thrall of a -phobia catalogue.

It is simply a fact that centralized Washington control over health coverage, and thus of healthcare, is a disaster. It is unaffordable. It inevitably produces lousy medical outcomes. It drives costs ever higher. It incents the young and healthy to go without insurance, thus making coverage prohibitively expensive for the older and sicker. It stifles experimentation and innovation. It is unsustainable. And it is beyond tinkering here and a band-aid there because the cancer killing the patient is the government’s managerial role.

We do not have a major political party in this country that believes this enough both to say it and to act on it. We do not have a party willing to say that, in our system, health insurance and medical care are supposed to be left to market forces and regulation left to the states—which are best able to address the needs of their citizens. We do not have a party willing to insist that the way to achieve affordable, quality coverage while providing help to people who truly need it is best charted by 50 states free to compete, experiment and imitate; it will never come from Washington.

We need such a party. For now, we have Obamacare Democrats and Obama-lite Republicans—the express and the local, headed for the same train wreck.

Content created by The Center for American Greatness, Inc is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com


About Andrew C. McCarthy

Andrew C. McCarthy is a former chief assistant U.S. attorney best known for successfully prosecuting the “Blind Sheikh” (Omar Abdel Rahman) and eleven other jihadists for waging a terrorist war against the United States – a war that included the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and a subsequent plot to bomb New York City landmarks. He is a recipient of the Justice Department’s highest honors, helped supervise the command-post near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan following the 9/11 attacks, and later served as an adviser to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. His several popular books include the New York Times bestsellers Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad and The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America. He is a senior fellow at National Review Institute and a contributing editor at National Review. He is a frequent guest commentator on national security, law, politics, and culture in national media, and his columns and essays also appear regularly in The New Criterion, PJ Media, and other major publications.

Support Free & Independent Journalism Your support helps protect our independence so that American Greatness can keep delivering top-quality, independent journalism that's free to everyone. Every contribution, however big or small, helps secure our future. If you can, please consider a recurring monthly donation.

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.

43 responses to “‘Progressive’ Washington’s Obamacare Train Wreck”

  1. The political involvement in America’s health care industry is the ultimate goal.
    It’s an elaborate scheme, now deemed “Constitutional”, that taxes heavily, all individuals and entities that have income of any sort that is gained by legal means.
    It is just one more conspiracy to insert the politicians into the public sector revenue stream whereby the politicians can enrich themselves and reward their donors.
    The Mafia should sue the U.S. Congress for infringement of their business model.

  2. We have long had the party of big government and the party of slightly less big government. The party of small, limited government hasn’t been seen in decades.

  3. Dear Mr. McCarthy:

    1) first you embrace “the great mistake” (or lie if you prefer): health care coverage is not health care. In Canada, for example, coverage is universal, but service is not. Waiting lists keep a million people from getting services, service limitations keep millions from seeing doctors, those who get poor service have no recourse, newer (i.e. more expensive) drugs and treatments are not available. The situation is trending that way at the VA too: people die waiting for services; people suffer pain and disability for long periods waiting for help; the help they do get depends as much on the luck of the draw as anything else. etc etc etc.

    2) second, you confuse what happens to congresscritters after they get to washington (social preasure turns them into democrats) with what they want to have happen. Basically, they are inundated by a single viewpoint, punished for variance, and given no alternatives. Many go to congress expecting to contribute to ending Obamacare etc etc; then discover that all voices proclaim the emperor beautifully dressed, and so eventually join the chorus.

    3) want to help? propose viable (in economic and social terms, not short term political terms) alternatives. e.g. http://www.winface.com/amt/integrated_health.html

    • Interesting i.e. reinsurance, if I understand you correctly.

      I think that private insurance should operate within a certain window, say between $2,000 and $200,000. Below $2000 could be HSA-like savings to pay for expenses. One could also purchase riders to extend coverage for what the government won’t cover above $200,000.

  4. Forgive my ignorance, but can anyone tell me what was so unworkable about the US health-care market 10 years ago, before Harambe’s husband wrecked it? I have preexisting conditions, and yet I’ve never been uninsured. Still, I’ll be generous and call the preexisting conditions overcharge a bug. Here’s what we should have done:

    1 – Tort reform
    2 – More tort reform
    3 – Yet more tort reform
    4 – Set up some kind of risk-management pools (such as the ones provided through employers) for people with preexisting conditions.
    5 – Make insurance more competitive by allowing interstate purchases.

    Voila’ an easy health-care solution that would have made things better for everyone–except for ambulance-chasers and the doctors’ insurance usury industry. What am I missing?

    • Torts are mouse nuts in the grand scheme of things. Places with tort reform do not have affordable healthcare.

      The solution is to force providers to compete on price and quality. That means killing regulations that set prices or standards of care that go beyond patient safety.

      If care is not competitive, what is the point of competitive insurance? Answer: nothing.

      One example; medicare does not permit undercharging. If a doc wanted to grow her business by waving medicare co-pays they would go to jail. If a surgery center wanted to offer cheaper hip replacements medicare would not pay for the work.

      • You might think tort reform is mouse nuts, but it’s a cog in the wheel. When that cog gets stuck, the entire wheel has to work overtime to overcome it. Docs and hospitals are ordering 2-3x more procedures simply due to the risk of a lawsuit. While individually, that might seem like mouse nuts, in reality…it’s enormous when you look at the capacity of our health care system being stressed with 10 million more patients and the same # of docs/hospitals. Take those extra tests and time away…and you have freed up capacity to treat other patients less expensively. The fact is…ObamaCare was designed to remove moral hazard from health insurance, and to divorce health insurance from healthcare. In Venezuela and other socialist paradises…maybe this works..but not in America. Everyone needs insurance, but everyone also needs to own up to the fact that they themselves are personally responsible for lowering their own healthcare costs.

      • Torts are mouse nuts? Not if you’re an OB/GYN, where it’s significantly higher than $40k a year. This is money that they either a) try to recoup via making the whole system more expensive or b) give up on paying by leaving the practice altogether. Even for other specialists (e.g., orthopedics = $20k+, anesthesiologists = $12k+, etc.), the costs mount up once you have to meet all the requirements for training and equipment updates, not to mention the lack of reimbursements from the insurance companies.

    • Agreed! But obummer, his sycophants and crony repubic-ans saw government control as another way to collect the $$$. And whoever has the $$$ has the power over people. And since most noticeably 2001 add in the left-stream media vs. Conservatives, the DC/east coast elites have oligarchical power over the rest of “fly-over country Americans.” All while the Constitution is shredded.

    • The call was for change nine/ten years ago. I for one was thrilled when the mold was broken and Ameriainc elected their first black president. I ws one of those who following the last three years of the Bush administration was eager to see change.
      UNFORTUNATELY – the change we got was 99% wrong – – things got worse and it will take us fifty years to overcome the ill effects of the Obama agenda.
      It became obvious 12 years ago that the voters were in no way in control. The obvious influence special interest groups, wealthy investors, CEO influences from major corporations and supreme court decisions was turning away rom the Best Interest of the Nation and the American people.
      The “change” we thought we were going to get went way out of kilter as the personal agendas of Obama and his lap dog attorneys generals took the nation down the wrong route of change.
      Today, the left is till benefitting form the Obama Administrations $2.2 billion dollar marketing budget and they can not get back to real reporting and a balanced media honesty.
      Between twisted minds within the Democratic party leadership and the “can be bought” media there can be no established direction in where America is going, how we will get there or who will pay the price for what too many years of Personal Agendas has done to this nation!

  5. These senators have to know that a failure to act on the Obamacare abomination will result in the total implosion of the Republican party do they not? They will WISH they were in the position of Democrats if they blow this.

    • I don’t think they know that. I think they are taking the bet that voters will be too afraid of the Democrats. And if they lose, well, what personally have they lost? They won’t be heading back to Kansas, they will stay in DC making millions leveraging the personal influence they acquired over the years.

  6. Sorry, but the election of Trump reflects a repudiation of a GOP agenda of “freedom, self-determination, and limited government” as simply a smokscreen for the triumph of Davoisie, neo-liberal busy bodies like Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos who don’t vote Republican anyway. That agenda (trade, immigration) has resulted in the comprehensive destruction of the American people. I would think that someone writing for AG would get that. I’m afraid McCarthy has imported NRO here. Did any of you people actually read the Journal of American Greatness? It seems like it is totally forgotten.

  7. “Checklist Conservative” McCarthy is no different than the Republicans who ran on the “repeal” & “repeal & replace” platforms: It’s easy to throw stones from the outside; and when you combine that with the feckless Senate leadership which — unlike Harry Reid — allow his caucus to go undisciplined, with rogue senators on both the right as well as the left.

    Also, President Trump did not run as a “Republican” in “The Flight 93 Election:” He ran on a “radical middle” platform, which is why we don’t have President Hillary.

    Sister Julie Ponzi alluded to this in the Great Reads 6/26/17 Roundup pointing to a review of Henry Olsen’s new book The Working Class Republican: Ronald Reagan and the Return of Blue-Collar Conservatism.

    • Disagree. McCarthy writes, eloquently, for those of us who simply want the fedgov entirely out of health care except, possibly for a role in enforcement of valid contracts and, perhaps in testing of newly-developed drugs for safety.

      I write this as someone who is, to my shame and disgust, on Medicare. But Medicare should never have existed. (And, no, I’m not taking Social Security.)

  8. “The modern GOP is the party of the Bushes, John McCain and Mitt Romney (the architect of Romneycare, Obamacare’s progenitor). These are fine, patriotic Americans” <= to a #NeverTrumper like McCarthy; i.e. a cuck

    too bad Andrew, you could have played a major role in the Trumpening, but now you are dead.

  9. in short, Repeal and Replace was all along just a fig leaf for Rinse and Repeat.

  10. Yes. Responsible limited government is opposed by Democrats AND the progressive GOP leadership. That is why the McConnels, McCains, and Grahams dismiss Voters who support responsible limited government as “whackobirds”, “crazies”, “bigots”, and “racists” and then vow to “crush” them.

  11. I contacted all my federal elected folks (both Republican Senators and my Ashley Wilkes Democrat Representative) this morning–again–and told them in no uncertain terms that I don’t want any government intrusion into my sacred places (private life, private enterprise) relating to medical care or insurance. I titled my message to them “Why is Obamacare still in existence?”

  12. Responsibility, HA…. We don’t need no stinkin’ responsibility, we got gov’mint!

  13. We had the bill HR3762
    1/6/2016 to repeal Obamacare & Defund Planned Parenthood.

    Paul Ryan Starts 2016 with Obamacare repeal vote Plan 1/6/16

    Why all the toil and trouble in Congress with the GOP?! McConnell is not a leader (Trump is a leader) and Paul Ryan is a liar.

  14. The confusion in many minds arises from a lack of understanding of the difference between an entitlement and a right.

    As the very word “entitlement” illustrates, the benefits of an entitlement are outlined in a section (of a codified statute) known as a “Title” (< L. titulus, “a chapter”) are enacted by a duly legislated law and can be alienated by another duly legislated law. An “entitlement” is some benefit that can be found literally within a chapter of a law.

    The benefits of a right, however, at a minimum are granted by the organic act that creates a nation, i.e., from its constitution, and precede any and all statutes. They can only be alienated by changing the organic act, i.e., by amending its constitution. Indeed, some scholars contend that many important rights enjoyed by United States citizens precede even the Constitution.

    No entitlement has ever granted anyone a “right” to other peoples’ time and/or money, because no right to other peoples’ time or money existed or ever has, except as between a child and its parents. To claim that such a right exists between two adults is ridiculous (outside of formally Socialist countries, that is).

    The confusion between the meanings of the two words has been eternally pernicious in every debate concerning proposed “entitlement” reforms in the United States.

  15. Beautiful work, Andy!

    FedGov will never reform itself. We are going to have to do it ourselves.

    It’s time for all of us to stand up and support Article V convention of states, and pass the Liberty Amendments. Let’s return the power back to the states and to the people, where it rightfully belongs.

  16. Government should slowly unwind ObamaCare. We could do it in steps. The first two steps would be to end the mandate and undo the requirement of what a “proper” health care policy should cover. Let people, once again, pick their own coverage.

    We could also build “assigned risk” pools for preexisting conditions, but charge something extra to cover those conditions. Just keep whittling away until there is nothing left of ObamaCare.

    • Rick, that makes way too much sense. Our politicians do not operate on common sense they are better at promising stuff they cannot deliver just so they can keep their own gravy train a long time running.

  17. Yes, we need such a party.

    But first, we need enough like minded citizens to fill and vote for such a party.

    Politics is downstream from culture.

  18. This really comes as no surprise. There hasn’t been a “republican” party since New Deal Democrat Ronald Reagan switched parties and started calling himself a conservative. What we now have are two wings of the same party. Americans need to rise up and tell Congress to abolish party politics. It won’t happen though – “modern” Americans are gutless and care only about themselves and country be damned.

  19. After all the lies Republican threw a the ACA during it start, no wonder they can’t figure out what to do now. The bigly job killing, have proven to be untrue. It curbed the run away price increases pre ACA. It was modeled by the plan the Heritage pushed in the 90s, as a matter of fact Romney-care in Mass was also. The biggest problem the Republicans had was Obama, whom they couldn’t defeat. Too hell with the public’s health. Expand Medicare. Healthcare shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

  20. Excellent piece. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve tried to explain to nominal conservatives that acceding to any federal government control of health insurance as a compromise measure gives away the game because once you’ve done so you’re just arguing about the size of the program. And that program will grow over time, especially when the Democrats are back in control (which they eventually will be).

  21. Damn right, Andrew. And in disgust GOP voters will stay home in 2018 and then the Dems can take the house. The cycle will repeat again and again as we slowly ratchet toward progressive utopia.

    Get ready for VA grade medical care, nationwide- if we’re lucky.

  22. When I die I want Republican pallbearers so they can let me down one last time.

  23. The Republicans holding back progress don’t believe that their efforts to satisfy their donor base while stiffing their voter base will get them defeated next election. The voters need to send a sharp message.

  24. It’s only a matter of time till Directive 10-289.FDR got 60% of it back in 34.So now mainly healthcare is waiting it’s Destructor.
    Nuff Said!!

  25. A GOP “Repeal and Replace” doesn’t have to be perfect, but it does have to:

    * Be objectively better than the ACA and the difference needs to be explainable in a couple of sentences.

    * Offer some form of affordable catastrophic health care coverage for pretty much everyone.

    * Cost far less than the ACA.

    * Move the system toward patient responsibility for controlling costs, with government back up (patients can’t do it alone, because they’re negotiating for their life, and sellers know this).

    If we don’t have a system we can sell to the workers and middle class, we’ll lose in 2018 and 2020 and there will go any chance of doing some of the other things conservatives think need doing.

  26. Spot on like usual, Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Trump is shrewd enough to see this which is why he supports the 3-step plan that will leave Ocare in place while creating a ‘second way’ for the rest of the 150 million of us that want a free market solution. Same with Dodd/Frank and their friendly big banks.

  27. . . . “Repeal and replace” was actually the first moving of the goalpost, the first implicit admission that, in principle, they were all for a government-managed health-insurance system. If you really want to move to the free market, you repeal statism. When you’re talking “and replace,” you’re just haggling over the price.

    Exactly right. The Federal government has no business in what should be free markets for medical care and health insurance (they are not the same thing). We can restore these markets with a combination of catastrophic insurance and Health Savings Accounts, which enable individuals to balance insurance and basic medical care according to their own needs. Those ‘uninsurable’ for either financial or medical reasons (or both) will become eligible for MedLoans, which will replace Medicaid (welfare), because the expectation is that the MedLoan will be paid back by the individual or his family.

    For details see “The Principles of Freedom and Medical Care,” https://walkingcreekworld.wordpress.com/2017/01/09/the-principles-of-freedom-and-medical-care/

    If legislation repealing Obamacare and embodying these principles were introduced, and the public told about it, the statists might have to think twice about the ultimate conflict between Federally mandated healthcare and the Constitution.

    /L. E. Joiner – https://walkingcreekworld.wordpress.com

  28. Government has ceased to work because the party leadership is too much like two school kids in coopetition over some playground nonsense!
    For seven years we heard the Republicans complaining about parts of Obama care that seemed to be significant failures in the Democratic program pushed down American families throats.
    During that time the GOP ignored the complains and did nothing to fix the problems; we still have those problems.
    Obama care was forced upon us by the Democrats much the same way the GOP Health Care plan is now being pushed on us by the GOP leadership; “separate from TRUE bipartisanship efforts, our way like it or not, do as your told or pay the consequences, we don’t care what your problem is this is the way it is going to be.”
    Seven years later we are still faced with the same problems and the same approaches are being taken and we are hearing the same complains NOW from the other side; and both groups of “Scholl ground like arguments” – – all inflated, manipulated and maximized by the media!
    I have no use for Mitch McConnell; never have and never will. He is to the GOP as Harry Reid was to the Democrats; both as bad for America as the other – – one of the greatest reasons why after 52 years I changed my affiliation from the Democratic party to Republican party. Between Reid and Obama I could see more problems than solutions in their agendas. Harry is out of it (openly) and Obama is trying to cover his failures and Schumer and Pelosi have no idea what they are doing; and McConnell is still in the way and bulldogging his way through GOP followers we had some hope would turn out to be more mature leaders but have let us down.
    Do we need a new Health Care program? NO – we need an “updated” realistic Health Care program that fixes the problems we have identified over the past seven years. Call it what ever makes us/you happy: Obama Care, Pelosi’s Pill Proposal, Trump Trusted health; just make yourself happy.
    The GOP should be asking the Democrats for their input; attend meetings to debate the efforts, write a letter (to the GOP) with their expectations, advertise the Democratic input, make their objections heard. They claim they have not been asked ot help BUT when they want to make an issue they just go on TV and complain; sounds more adult, educated and sincere if they would tell us what they want – publicize it, go back over the complains and issues of Obama care in the past seven years that people were complaining about and try getting them changed. Foe seven years they heard the complains and did nothing and they still do not want change – just ignore the issues, refuse to do anything and as the Obama Administration became known for – “do nothing and in time the problems will go away” mentality!
    The GOP should be ready to accept Democratic help/efforts/suggestions arguments and work them out. Between the two of them they are a WAST OF TAX PAYERS MONEY!
    Trump should be insisting the party leaders attend a weekly meeting with him to keep him as his staff up to date with efforts to bring about a better, more sound and USER friendly health care law.
    PROBABLY – the most frustrating part of this whole mess is the absurd media and those “special groups” funding the idiotic commercials about the on-going efforts to bring about Health Care reform.
    Commercials that make accusations of what the GOP Health Care plan is doing; the media is ripping apart the efforts of pans that have not ben released, commercials are claiming millions and millions of people will lose their coverage with GOP plans, that certain groups of people will have their costs for acer increased by from 5% to 500%, that certain tings will not be covered; where is this information coming from? Not from anyone who knows the facts but rather special interest groups more interested in the political concerns that the American peoples concerns or needs.
    ……………………………………………………….. – – – – – – — – – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ………………………………………………… Until the plan is made public and until the plan is studied by knowing and educated people with honest opinions not manipulated by politicians and those destined to financial gain by the plan we will not get what our government should be giving us; honest, sincere, unbiased do our best programs

  29. Blaming the democrats for the damage done by pulling the revenue from the ACA is a dead horse that the cons keep beating!! A full 17% support the Trumpcare disaster being crafted to take the ACA’s place!! The ACA was an attempt at morality in the moral for-profit system the repubcons prefers! But it leaves out tens of millions of the sickest, and poorest Americans! When will the Cons realize that they can’t run America like a corporation!! The poor will eventually take up arms against the greedy rich and their repubcon lackeys!

  30. The essential problem, and it seems insoluble, is that there is zero constituency in 21st Century
    America for market based health care and health care insurance. Even the Tea Partiers expressly insisted upon rejecting any proposal to pare back Medicare. We can rant at the squishes in DC all we want, but we all (except me and Andy McCarthy) are dedicated to the proposition that we are entitled to great health care paid for by someone else.