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

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.

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.

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).

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.