Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what were people paying for healchare before COVID? I don't think this makes sense. Why would a temporary subsidy make healthcare affordable, while the original ACA (AFFORDABLE care act) wasn't affordable? It doesn't make sense. It sounds like a handout to get people on government reliance.

I guess they plan to just keep increasing the subsidy every year for eternity? Honestly, why they are fighting over this now is a little baffling. The temporary subsidy has to end some day. If you're going to fight, at least fight for some sort of permanent restructuring.

Anonymous wrote:So what were people paying for healchare before COVID? I don't think this makes sense. Why would a temporary subsidy make healthcare affordable, while the original ACA (AFFORDABLE care act) wasn't affordable? It doesn't make sense. It sounds like a handout to get people on government reliance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My unpopular opinion..

As a Dem I think their shutdown strategy of holding the line on premiums is a losing one.

Like it or not, the GOO has the upper hand with Trump at the helm. Sooner or later, the govt needs to reopen. The shut down creates a distraction for Trump and proj 2025 to leverage opportunities. A lot can happen in the shutdown with him as Pres, legally or not.

The better strategy is to use the leverage of anger when GOP increases costs to bring more folks to the Dem side. If you are a Dem, you support what they are doing but those independents and GOP folks are who you want to convince. The way to do that is not to inflict more pain and ultimately lose this fight but to jet the pain happen and say - hey vote for us instead!

The only thing happening now is pain for all. This is nothing but a damn show out in by the Dems to court public favor- to say hey - aren't we cool?! They are not. I put money on the fact that the only people who will be backing down to reopen the govt will be Dems as GOP are clearly anti gov. This is exactly what they want. As long as the right people get paid - those in their side - they win.

This whole mess is the Dem debacle and I'm a Dem. This is just not the right fight to have. Not at all. They will end up in a weaker position than the start because they won't have gained anything.

This is how Trump win the Presidency - they built a org, a momentum, a team, a cause. It's what the Dems should be doing. What's going on now is the people working separately from political leadership and that's what the Dems need to fix.

I agree somewhat. The Dems are in a losing position like the GOP was during the Obama administration when the ACA passed. The GOP offered no better ideas and the Dems came out looking good. Now the shoe is on the other BUT the Dems could drop the rope in this tug of war and let the GOP land on its keester. Instead, hardline partisan politics on both sides will hurt the electorate by holding up the budget. SMH

While the GOP got the blame for the 2013 shutdown, they did quite well in the 2014 midterms. I suppose today's Dems are looking toward a similar outcome.

I think continuing to dig in will backfire on the Dems. They will be seen more like MAGA / GOP on this one. Bity will be seen as focusing too much on the feud between them and forgetting they are supposed to working for the American people.

The Democrats have been very clear that this is about healthcare access and the ACA subsidies. People are finding out now (see the article on Idaho below) and through the next couple of weeks why this matters.

This is exactly the right time for them to hold fast, both morally and politically.

Idaho kicks off Affordable Care Act open enrollment as premiums are set to rise nationwide
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/idaho-kicks-affordable-care-act-open-enrollment-premiums-are-set-rise-rcna237298

Many Idahoans will have to decide whether they’ll be able to afford coverage once the enhanced subsidies that kept premiums lower for many middle-class families expire at the end of the year.

Bob McMichael, 63, and his wife, Leslie, 62, already know they won’t.

Both are retired and make about $42,000 a year. They currently pay $51 a month for their ACA plan. Late last month, they got a notice that their monthly premium would increase to $2,232 next year without the subsidies.

Gideon Lukens, a senior fellow and director of research and data analysis on the health policy team at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research group, said that a 60-year-old couple earning $85,000 a year in Idaho could see about a $1,500 increase in their monthly out-of-pocket premiums.

Everyone should have access to affordable health care but there should be some accountability. The guy in the article is a 63 year old retired teacher who retired at age 60 and his wife is 60. Something doesn’t make sense that they would only pay $51 a month for health care. So an article explains:

“McMichael, 63, retired three years ago. After retirement, he said he and his wife were on Medicaid expansion — until she tapped into Social Security early, and they earned too much to qualify. Then they got on an insurance plan through the exchange.

McMichael said he’ll have to wait until open enrollment to see if there’s other insurance that’s affordable…

He said he and his wife are pretty healthy; they aren’t on routine prescriptions, and don’t have serious illnesses.”

I work in education and most teachers often don’t retire until 65 because they have to wait to be eligible for Medicare. And to be fully eligible for SS you have to be 67. Retiring at 60 and the wife was 59 is unfortunately a luxury in this country.

So what happens reading articles like this is it causes resentment that some middle class people are still having to work and pay thousands for crappy insurance while others retire early and pay $51 a month.

The system is set up so the rich get richer, private equity gobbles up more and more healthcare dollars, the poor get subsidies, while the middle class pays expensive premiums, costly deductibles, and has long waits to actually see a health care provider (who is no longer a MD but a new PA or NP).

So middle class Trump supporters blame the poor and want them not to have better health care instead of realizing the massive wealth inequity in this country that is run by oligarchs.

Anonymous wrote:

It's a strategy. The plan is that either ACA subsidies get extended, or the Democrats continue to refuse to sign off on the CR and the government shuts down. That means that the GOP does one of the following:

1. Fixes the problem with the subsidies as requested, and people maintain healthcare access, and the government opens up, or

2. Allows the government to stay shut down while the health care premium prices soar (and the GOP owns that politically), or

3. Does what they have done before and pass a rule that allows them to pass the CR with a simple majority, which opens back up the government BUT ALSO the health care premium prices soar (and the GOP owns that politically)

This isn't a lack of strategy. It's a plan. It works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the Dems haven't filed a lawsuit to get a court order to re-open the government. How can we just coast along for weeks or months with no government? How is this legal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My unpopular opinion..

As a Dem I think their shutdown strategy of holding the line on premiums is a losing one.

Like it or not, the GOO has the upper hand with Trump at the helm. Sooner or later, the govt needs to reopen. The shut down creates a distraction for Trump and proj 2025 to leverage opportunities. A lot can happen in the shutdown with him as Pres, legally or not.

The better strategy is to use the leverage of anger when GOP increases costs to bring more folks to the Dem side. If you are a Dem, you support what they are doing but those independents and GOP folks are who you want to convince. The way to do that is not to inflict more pain and ultimately lose this fight but to jet the pain happen and say - hey vote for us instead!

The only thing happening now is pain for all. This is nothing but a damn show out in by the Dems to court public favor- to say hey - aren't we cool?! They are not. I put money on the fact that the only people who will be backing down to reopen the govt will be Dems as GOP are clearly anti gov. This is exactly what they want. As long as the right people get paid - those in their side - they win.

This whole mess is the Dem debacle and I'm a Dem. This is just not the right fight to have. Not at all. They will end up in a weaker position than the start because they won't have gained anything.

This is how Trump win the Presidency - they built a org, a momentum, a team, a cause. It's what the Dems should be doing. What's going on now is the people working separately from political leadership and that's what the Dems need to fix.

I agree somewhat. The Dems are in a losing position like the GOP was during the Obama administration when the ACA passed. The GOP offered no better ideas and the Dems came out looking good. Now the shoe is on the other BUT the Dems could drop the rope in this tug of war and let the GOP land on its keester. Instead, hardline partisan politics on both sides will hurt the electorate by holding up the budget. SMH

While the GOP got the blame for the 2013 shutdown, they did quite well in the 2014 midterms. I suppose today's Dems are looking toward a similar outcome.

I think continuing to dig in will backfire on the Dems. They will be seen more like MAGA / GOP on this one. Bity will be seen as focusing too much on the feud between them and forgetting they are supposed to working for the American people.

The Democrats have been very clear that this is about healthcare access and the ACA subsidies. People are finding out now (see the article on Idaho below) and through the next couple of weeks why this matters.

This is exactly the right time for them to hold fast, both morally and politically.

Idaho kicks off Affordable Care Act open enrollment as premiums are set to rise nationwide
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/idaho-kicks-affordable-care-act-open-enrollment-premiums-are-set-rise-rcna237298

Many Idahoans will have to decide whether they’ll be able to afford coverage once the enhanced subsidies that kept premiums lower for many middle-class families expire at the end of the year.

Bob McMichael, 63, and his wife, Leslie, 62, already know they won’t.

Both are retired and make about $42,000 a year. They currently pay $51 a month for their ACA plan. Late last month, they got a notice that their monthly premium would increase to $2,232 next year without the subsidies.

Gideon Lukens, a senior fellow and director of research and data analysis on the health policy team at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research group, said that a 60-year-old couple earning $85,000 a year in Idaho could see about a $1,500 increase in their monthly out-of-pocket premiums.

As a reminder, THIS is what it's about ⬆️

It's NOT about "free shit for illegals." Never was. That's been a GOP lie from the start, as illegals are SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED.

Nor is it "an additonal $1.5 trillion in spending for Democrat programs." It's not "new" - it's an extension of existing programs, nor is it for "Democrats."

And it's not just some leftist hyperbole. It's real and it's already starting to hit - in red states like Idaho.



Snap out of it, Republicans. You are being lied to. That's now a proven fact, just look at Idaho.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My unpopular opinion..

As a Dem I think their shutdown strategy of holding the line on premiums is a losing one.

Like it or not, the GOO has the upper hand with Trump at the helm. Sooner or later, the govt needs to reopen. The shut down creates a distraction for Trump and proj 2025 to leverage opportunities. A lot can happen in the shutdown with him as Pres, legally or not.

The better strategy is to use the leverage of anger when GOP increases costs to bring more folks to the Dem side. If you are a Dem, you support what they are doing but those independents and GOP folks are who you want to convince. The way to do that is not to inflict more pain and ultimately lose this fight but to jet the pain happen and say - hey vote for us instead!

The only thing happening now is pain for all. This is nothing but a damn show out in by the Dems to court public favor- to say hey - aren't we cool?! They are not. I put money on the fact that the only people who will be backing down to reopen the govt will be Dems as GOP are clearly anti gov. This is exactly what they want. As long as the right people get paid - those in their side - they win.

This whole mess is the Dem debacle and I'm a Dem. This is just not the right fight to have. Not at all. They will end up in a weaker position than the start because they won't have gained anything.

This is how Trump win the Presidency - they built a org, a momentum, a team, a cause. It's what the Dems should be doing. What's going on now is the people working separately from political leadership and that's what the Dems need to fix.

I agree somewhat. The Dems are in a losing position like the GOP was during the Obama administration when the ACA passed. The GOP offered no better ideas and the Dems came out looking good. Now the shoe is on the other BUT the Dems could drop the rope in this tug of war and let the GOP land on its keester. Instead, hardline partisan politics on both sides will hurt the electorate by holding up the budget. SMH

While the GOP got the blame for the 2013 shutdown, they did quite well in the 2014 midterms. I suppose today's Dems are looking toward a similar outcome.

I think continuing to dig in will backfire on the Dems. They will be seen more like MAGA / GOP on this one. Bity will be seen as focusing too much on the feud between them and forgetting they are supposed to working for the American people.

The Democrats have been very clear that this is about healthcare access and the ACA subsidies. People are finding out now (see the article on Idaho below) and through the next couple of weeks why this matters.

This is exactly the right time for them to hold fast, both morally and politically.

Idaho kicks off Affordable Care Act open enrollment as premiums are set to rise nationwide
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/idaho-kicks-affordable-care-act-open-enrollment-premiums-are-set-rise-rcna237298

Many Idahoans will have to decide whether they’ll be able to afford coverage once the enhanced subsidies that kept premiums lower for many middle-class families expire at the end of the year.

Bob McMichael, 63, and his wife, Leslie, 62, already know they won’t.

Both are retired and make about $42,000 a year. They currently pay $51 a month for their ACA plan. Late last month, they got a notice that their monthly premium would increase to $2,232 next year without the subsidies.

Gideon Lukens, a senior fellow and director of research and data analysis on the health policy team at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research group, said that a 60-year-old couple earning $85,000 a year in Idaho could see about a $1,500 increase in their monthly out-of-pocket premiums.

Everyone should have access to affordable health care but there should be some accountability. The guy in the article is a 63 year old retired teacher who retired at age 60 and his wife is 60. Something doesn’t make sense that they would only pay $51 a month for health care. So an article explains:

“McMichael, 63, retired three years ago. After retirement, he said he and his wife were on Medicaid expansion — until she tapped into Social Security early, and they earned too much to qualify. Then they got on an insurance plan through the exchange.

McMichael said he’ll have to wait until open enrollment to see if there’s other insurance that’s affordable…

He said he and his wife are pretty healthy; they aren’t on routine prescriptions, and don’t have serious illnesses.”

I work in education and most teachers often don’t retire until 65 because they have to wait to be eligible for Medicare. And to be fully eligible for SS you have to be 67. Retiring at 60 and the wife was 59 is unfortunately a luxury in this country.

So what happens reading articles like this is it causes resentment that some middle class people are still having to work and pay thousands for crappy insurance while others retire early and pay $51 a month.

The system is set up so the rich get richer, private equity gobbles up more and more healthcare dollars, the poor get subsidies, while the middle class pays expensive premiums, costly deductibles, and has long waits to actually see a health care provider (who is no longer a MD but a new PA or NP).

So middle class Trump supporters blame the poor and want them not to have better health care instead of realizing the massive wealth inequity in this country that is run by oligarchs.