Big Beautiful Bill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fundamental question here:

Does this bill fund the all the gov. departments for the next fiscal year?

Or is it just a lot of special policy provisions in one bill?

This bill has nothing to do with funding govt. agencies. This just sets the framework for spending for the next 10 years and topline numbers (at least the House version did, don't know how aligned the Senate one is) for spending categories and how much each should cut or increase (e.g. ways and means should cut 3T reflecting tax cuts while energy/commerce and health reduce spending) Actual approps are being worked on and marked up right now.

That’s not entirely right. This bill actually has a bunch of aproppriations in it for DoD and DHS in particular. They are supplemental to their regular appropriations.

Yes - supplemental. I think these can be zeroed out with a different House/Senate. I am not sure that actual money goes to agencies outside the approps process though. The bill sets aside the funds over four years (or longer)which have to be allocated through regular order via appropriations bills. The committees however have the authority to spend upto these levels on top of the 302b allocations every year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
With this bill, it's going to be a disaster at ERs all over the country - which definitely doesn't reduce costs. A whole bunch of near death people that could have been treated many stages earlier if they had insurance.

Ever been to an ER?

[Anonymous]

Good news. Chuck Schumer made sure the official title is not One Big Beautiful Bill, had it stripped from the text.

[Anonymous]

It's a budget bill, like other bills that get passed every year, and easy to repeal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a lie.

Those people did not get FEDERAL medicaid dollars anyway. The plan is that states that use their OWN tax dollars to cover undocumented immigrants will have federal dollars withheld. So there is only a federal cost savings if the states stop covering people with their own money, in which case the difference to Medicaid is ZERO.
DACA has never gotten medicaid and it was ONLY in 2024 that they could buy insurance on the exchange. That's gone now.

I suspect the plan is really this--and this is what is going to surprise people:
part of it is attrition because reporting requirements (including work reporting requirements) will result in people not getting all their documentation provided in time, so they get kicked off, then if they reapply they do not go as far retroactively to provide coverage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Now all those people will go to the ER. And if they are admitted and don’t have a family
member to pick them up once discharged? They get to stay at the hospital indefinitely on our dime! (Happens way too often at my sister’s hospital in a major city).

[Anonymous]

^ lost part of my post

A lot more will be people on medicaid expansion. Because they get insurance cards many don't even KNOW they are on medicaid expansion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think Republicans understand how health insurance works. They seem to think these are personal savings accounts. It's very cost effective to be run over by a garbage truck and die. But a battle with cancer is something else. You and your children's medical issues are not predictable, which is why we have insurance. That's great that you were run over by a garbage truck. Very cost efficient death. Bur Randy in small town Indiana is going to need the people paying into health insurance to pay for the treatment for his child's leukemia. And I don't think they get that at all. And Randy didn't save up for leukemia. I think Randy is a moron, but I want his kid to get the care they need.

With this bill, it's going to be a disaster at ERs all over the country - which definitely doesn't reduce costs. A whole bunch of near death people that could have been treated many stages earlier if they had insurance.

They are finally repealing Obamacare. They just don't want to admit to it.

They’re repealing Obamacare and spending more still to build prisons

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Now all those people will go to the ER. And if they are admitted and don’t have a family
member to pick them up once discharged? They get to stay at the hospital indefinitely on our dime! (Happens way too often at my sister’s hospital in a major city).

It has nothing to do with someone able to pick them up and usually involves people who need ongoing care. Hless people get discharged from the ER every day with serious conditions because they have been stabilized. It's more likely people who 1) need psych placements which are hardest to find 2) need nursing home placements which may be hard to find especially if there is no medicaid 3) don't qualify for nursing home care but are too frail to just be discharged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think Republicans understand how health insurance works. They seem to think these are personal savings accounts. It's very cost effective to be run over by a garbage truck and die. But a battle with cancer is something else. You and your children's medical issues are not predictable, which is why we have insurance. That's great that you were run over by a garbage truck. Very cost efficient death. Bur Randy in small town Indiana is going to need the people paying into health insurance to pay for the treatment for his child's leukemia. And I don't think they get that at all. And Randy didn't save up for leukemia. I think Randy is a moron, but I want his kid to get the care they need.

With this bill, it's going to be a disaster at ERs all over the country - which definitely doesn't reduce costs. A whole bunch of near death people that could have been treated many stages earlier if they had insurance.

Well, Randy is 30, his kid is 3, he and his wife each make 20/hr, the insurance deductible is $9000 and for the leukemia treatment one of the parents has to take months off work to stay in Indianapolis and meanwhile there is daycare for the other kid and turns out the kid can't go to daycare when he does come home because his immune system is shot from treatment so one of the parents has to stay home for a couple of years. This isn't that much different than a garbage truck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, all those rural and small town voters in Texas, Missouri, Indiana and elsewhere will be reaping the whirlwind in the years ahead. 17 million of them are about to lose their health insurance. Rural hospitals will be closing. Their monthly energy bills will be skyrocketing. Alternative energy jobs are gone. I have no idea how small town America is going to make it through. Plus, while markets may be up, the value of the dollar has declined by 15 percent since Trump took office, which is far more impactful to rural America than those with a 401k account. For the farmers, their source of labor is gone. They are either getting deported or they're not crossing the border to begin with. Plus Republicans have wrecked their ag markets with their dumb trade wars. And obviously any rural voter that voted over the deficit has clearly been hoodwinked. Republicans just added another $3.3 trillion of debt.

These voters will be very reachable in 2028. We are here today because Democrats anointed a deeply unpopular 83 year old geriatric as their candidate. And followed up at the last minute with a deeply unpopular VP who couldn't even make it to the Iowa caucuses when she ran, much less win Iowa. This would be a very different America if Democrats actually had an open primary. We'll see what Democrats do this time. The path is cleared for them. But if they continue to roll with their corrupt and cynical old guard - like Pelosi, Schumer, the Clintons - or embrace the wealthy dilettante progressives like Mamdani in NYC - they will still lose even in the face of idiocy of the GOP. This is the moment for Democrats. And I am not optimistic.

It all depends how you look at it.

Millions will lose Medicaid. Do the people that pay the bills for it via federal taxes and matching state taxes want to pay for health insurance for complete strangers? You seem to think they are OK with getting less in their pay check for one of your dreams, hopes and aspirations.

I'm not so sure. All you seem to care about is shifting burdens of others to the middle class for health care, education, climate initiatives to make you feel better and you basically have a robin hood view of the world. That's ALL that seems to drive you. Hint: your view isn't everyone's view.

So we back to everyone getting basic care at the emergency room covered by tox dollars by the taxpayers. That was so great and now it's great again!

If by great you mean the absolutely most expensive and inefficient way to deliver healthcare then yeah it's so great again.

EMTALA will be the next to go.

[Anonymous]

Here is a compilation of video footage of Trump repeatedly saying he wouldn’t touch Medicaid. I mean, we all know he’s a liar, but here’s concrete proof.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DLkUr_9MEFl/?igsh=aHF4aml5c203bGFw

[Anonymous]

I remember someone being attacked for rudely yelling 'You Lie' at Obama. Now we are talking about illegal immigrants getting taxpayer funds for health care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course Lisa voted yes. So much for her “concern”

She’s more disappointing than the ones who just admit they will toe the line.

[Anonymous]

A rainy gloomy Washington symbolic of the day