The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-20-2013, 02:33 AM   #1
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
All Hail King Midas

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,503

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default Defunding Obamacare - Can it happen?

It actually probably will be defunded if momentum continues in the way it has.

First of all, before anyone points the finger for its impending failure, we have to remember that it was passed using reconciliation - a procedural maneuver. It didn't pass due to popular support. In fact, they had a hard time getting it through the senate at all, losing the referendum in Massachusetts of all places, when Scott Brown was elected. This legislation has been doomed ever since, and the dominoes are falling into place to knock it down.

This defund Obamacare movement that is going on - I don't think this is going to play out the way it's being portrayed in the media where the Republicans take a lot of blame and Obama comes out looking like a hero. I think that the country is split enough on Obamacare and its impact that it will end up being a fight.

Anyone who is anywhere close to someone working in a small business has heard first hand the nervousness that these businesses have over the legislation. I'm sure this defund legislation is going to pass the House - I'm starting to wonder about the Senate.

Ted Cruz in the Senate says that we will use any procedural move possible to defund. That includes filibuster. After the success that Rand had with it, I have a hard time seeing whyCruz wouldn't go there. And if that's the direction that this goes in, America will be faced with a moment where for, say 12 hours, they're being confronted with a barrage of facts about what is going on with Obamacare, why it's not working right now, and why they should think twice about NOT defunding it.

I honestly don't think it's going to take too much of that kind of talk to get the American people stirred up about it and what this thing is doing to our economy, not to mention the concerns around what it will do to healthcare itself. It's not popular legislation by a long shot. Already Rassmussen has favorability for defunding it at 51%. Whatever anyone things about Rassmussen, his polls aren't 10 points off. They're in the neighborhood.

The mainstream media is playing this off like it's a tempest in a teapot, but I think it's going to be more of a battle than most are imagining. And regardless of what happens in the next two weeks, Ted Cruz is going to come out a winner.

Even if Cruz fails to get the defund through now, he puts key Senate Democrats on the line for mid-terms in state where there is a lot of grass roots support to defund. Despite what any Democrat will tell you, that is hugely significant:
Consistent with previous analyses, we find that supporters of health care reform paid a significant price at the polls. We go beyond these analyses by identifying a mechanism for this apparent effect: constituents perceived incumbents who supported health care reform as more ideologically distant (in this case, more liberal), which in turn was associated with lower support for those incumbents. Our analyses show that this perceived ideological difference mediates most of the apparent impact of support for health care reform on both individual-level vote choice and aggregate-level vote share. We conclude by simulating counterfactuals that suggest health care reform may have cost Democrats their House majority.

http://apr.sagepub.com/content/early...33768.abstract
The Republicans are 6 seats away from a Senate majority, and they are headed towards likely picking up 3 of them in Montana, West Virginia, and South Dakota. And according to Nate Silver, the other three are out there:
Republicans could then win three more seats from among red states like Louisiana and Arkansas, where vulnerable Democratic incumbents are on the ballot, or they could take aim at two purple states, Iowa and Michigan, where Democrats have retired. More opportunities could also come into play if the national environment becomes more favorable to Republicans (such as because of a further slide in Mr. Obama’s approval ratings). Meanwhile, while Kentucky and Georgia are possibly vulnerable, Republicans have few seats of their own to defend; unlike in 2012, they can focus almost entirely on playing offense. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...a-tossup/?_r=0
In that light, this move is politically brilliant. It turns the midterms into a referendum on Obamacare just as the thing is coming out of the gates. That'll be a slam dunk for Republicans. Anything can happen after that.

I think this is what will happen: There will be a fight in the Senate, and Cruz will narrowly lose, but the eventual compromise will be the bill getting funded until sometime shortly after 2014 elections. At that point, whether Obamacare continues will be determined by how the Senate turned out. If the Republicans have the votes, they'll defund and replace Obamacare with their own legislation. If they don't, Obamacare will survive at least until 2016 - but probably longer. It might have enough inertia at that point to be safe.

I think Obamacare is on the ropes. I would no longer be surprised to see Obama have to sign an act that defunds and replaces his signature legislation.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 09-20-2013, 02:42 AM   #2
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Most of the law is permanent and cannot be "defunded" as such. It's more or less a myth.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 07:29 AM   #3
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,263

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Most of the law is permanent and cannot be "defunded" as such. It's more or less a myth.
Anything can be defunded. But that's not the right play here.

They should be pushing for delay and hammering on the fact that the Emperor already delayed most of it anyway, except for the part that kicks Joe Six Pack square in the nuts for being a dirtbag lazy non-insured freeloader.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:38 AM   #4
B-Large
Ring of Famer
 
B-Large's Avatar
 
Expunged... Accidently?

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,828

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Most of the law is permanent and cannot be "defunded" as such. It's more or less a myth.
Basically this. Its mandatory spending, so the strategy is to whip up BS about the law and make it as miserable for everybody as possible is the last resort action.

If the GOP really feels this law is the end of america as we know it, much like Medicare and SS, they can get super majorities and repeal away...
B-Large is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:47 AM   #5
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

I suppose we could always ask epicnyukllama why he/she/it got into the "nursing" field.



Except I know several nurses, and I already know the answer wasn't $$$.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 04:49 AM   #6
elsid13
Lost In Space
 
elsid13's Avatar
 
Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 19,802
Default

Here a thought, instead waste everyone freaking times and stopping the federal government from doing what it needs to. Pass a CR and address this issue separately.
elsid13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 06:03 AM   #7
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,044

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

won't happen. the referendum on obamacare already happened in the last election and even if reps took control of both houses they still wouldn't overcome a veto by the president. reps would need to win the WH in 2016 which is pretty unlikely. also obamacare may by name be unpopular only 23% want to see it repealed.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 08:01 AM   #8
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,932

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
won't happen. the referendum on obamacare already happened in the last election and even if reps took control of both houses they still wouldn't overcome a veto by the president. reps would need to win the WH in 2016 which is pretty unlikely. also obamacare may by name be unpopular only 23% want to see it repealed.
I don't see that as being true because the law has not been implemented. We'll see though. I personally hope it gets trashed.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:41 PM   #9
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,044

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco View Post
I don't see that as being true because the law has not been implemented. We'll see though. I personally hope it gets trashed.
It almost all in full effect already. as of oct 1 it is running in its entirety except for like one part of it. this train has already left the station and reps will never have the votes to overcome a veto. Obama isn't going sign away one of his biggest achievements.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 07:59 AM   #10
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,932

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

If law makers that voted for it opted out, then that should tell your everything you need to know.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 08:43 AM   #11
bronco militia
OMG...this is horrible!
 
bronco militia's Avatar
 
THE GREATEST

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: colorado springs, co
Posts: 24,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco View Post
If law makers that voted for it opted out, then that should tell your everything you need to know.
honestly, I only think it means the next election. Most of these clowns are spineless.
bronco militia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 08:12 AM   #12
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,014

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

We'll be playing this game over and over again until we decide, like wiser industrialized nations before us, that healthcare must be nationalized into a single payer system, which is the best of all the bad options available. You won't invent the perfect system. Why? Because people die no matter what you do.

Obamacare is a band-aid. The continual rise in costs will eventually bankrupt the health care system in the U.S., and maybe the U.S. itself if we let it. Pay me now. Pay me later. Das macht nichts.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 08:14 AM   #13
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,932

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
We'll be playing this game over and over again until we decide, like wiser industrialized nations before us, that healthcare must be nationalized into a single payer system, which is the best of all the bad options available. You won't invent the perfect system. Why? Because people die no matter what you do.

Obamacare is a band-aid. The continual rise in costs will eventually bankrupt the health care system in the U.S., and maybe the U.S. itself if we let it. Pay me now. Pay me later. Das macht nichts.
Yep...if we're gonna do it and be as fiscally sound as possible...single payer.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 08:43 AM   #14
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,977

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
We'll be playing this game over and over again until we decide, like wiser industrialized nations before us, that healthcare must be nationalized into a single payer system, which is the best of all the bad options available. You won't invent the perfect system. Why? Because people die no matter what you do.

Obamacare is a band-aid. The continual rise in costs will eventually bankrupt the health care system in the U.S., and maybe the U.S. itself if we let it. Pay me now. Pay me later. Das macht nichts.
^^

Like I've said a billion times, trying to treat health care as a for profit, insurable thing is idiotic.

Everyone gets sick, and it's not monetarily profitable to actually take care of sick people.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:05 AM   #15
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,932

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
^^

Like I've said a billion times, trying to treat health care as a for profit, insurable thing is idiotic.

Everyone gets sick, and it's not monetarily profitable to actually take care of sick people.
It is for the Doctors, Hospitals, Medical Suppliers, and Pharma. They are the ones raking us over the coals.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:19 AM   #16
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,263

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
^^

Like I've said a billion times, trying to treat health care as a for profit, insurable thing is idiotic.
Good luck with that system built on all-volunteer Doctors, Nurses, Scientists, and Technologists.

Personal interest (profit motive) drives all of them. It drives everyone. Even when you don't like it.

The real problem is cost. Overinsurance and it's Tragedy of the Commons effect on the market only help to make it worse.

Single Payer's only solution is price control and rationing, with the side effects of disincentive and stagnation.

Private Pay's only solution is means. with the side effect of significant disparity.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:26 AM   #17
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,014

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Good luck with that system built on all-volunteer Doctors, Nurses, Scientists, and Technologists.

Personal interest (profit motive) drives all of them. It drives everyone. Even when you don't like it.

The real problem is cost. Overinsurance and it's Tragedy of the Commons effect on the market only help to make it worse.

Single Payer's only solution is price control and rationing, with the side effects of disincentive and stagnation.

Private Pay's only solution is means. with the side effect of significant disparity.
Tragedy of the Commons does not apply. Medical treatment is not a limited resource. Use a graduated, progressive single payer system combined with a strong, health care education system. Like I said, there can be no perfect system. Disease happens. People die.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 10:05 AM   #18
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,263

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Tragedy of the Commons does not apply. Medical treatment is not a limited resource. Use a graduated, progressive single payer system combined with a strong, health care education system. Like I said, there can be no perfect system. Disease happens. People die.
Virtually every resource is a limited resource. Especially one bound by as much regulation as Healthcare.

And single payer systems all have a budget. That is a limited resource.

Patient A receiving an cutting-edge surgery to try to add a year or two to his life might cost as much as insulin for a few hundred Patient B diabetics over the same timeframe.

Give Patient A unfettered access to the "commons" (the single payer budget) and he'll take whatever he needs. All those Patient B's would get to fight over whatever's left.

For that reason, all single payer systems feature a gatekeeper to the "commons" Employing spreadsheets and formulas (or even who's who lists) to determine what Patient A is really worth compared to Patients B.

Well Funded Patient C gets to laugh at all of them and see his own provider who doesn't dink around with Patients A, B or their gatekeeper.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:29 AM   #19
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Good luck with that system built on all-volunteer Doctors, Nurses, Scientists, and Technologists.

Personal interest (profit motive) drives all of them. It drives everyone. Even when you don't like it.

The real problem is cost. Overinsurance and it's Tragedy of the Commons effect on the market only help to make it worse.

Single Payer's only solution is price control and rationing, with the side effects of disincentive and stagnation.

Private Pay's only solution is means. with the side effect of significant disparity.


Doctors, nurses, etc. make good money in places with those types of health care systems.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:29 AM   #20
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

You know what? **** it. Defund the military. Problems solved.

houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:34 AM   #21
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,977

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Good luck with that system built on all-volunteer Doctors, Nurses, Scientists, and Technologists.

Personal interest (profit motive) drives all of them. It drives everyone. Even when you don't like it.
You are confusing personal profit and institutional profit. Individuals profit from non-profit ventures all the time.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:36 AM   #22
Irish Stout
Ring of Famer
 
Irish Stout's Avatar
 
Run for it Marty!

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,957

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Wesley Woodyard
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Good luck with that system built on all-volunteer Doctors, Nurses, Scientists, and Technologists.

Personal interest (profit motive) drives all of them. It drives everyone. Even when you don't like it.

The real problem is cost. Overinsurance and it's Tragedy of the Commons effect on the market only help to make it worse.

Single Payer's only solution is price control and rationing, with the side effects of disincentive and stagnation.

Private Pay's only solution is means. with the side effect of significant disparity.

All volunteers? Not quite. Though health care practitioners in single-payer countries do on average get paid less than in the US, they're far from being volunteers and they still get paid significantly more than an average professional.

Check out this comparison from 2009:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ies-make/?_r=0

Also, I'd argue that disincentives and stagnation shouldn't be a real concern. Most well paid Doctors aren't going out of their way to develop new theories, treatment, etc... most of those things come from Doctors across the world and at home who have new and better ideas on how to best help their patients. Plus, nothing in a single payer system would limit those Doctors and others from being able to patent procedures, techniques, or new tech, which could then be sold for extra profit to themselves above and beyond salary. Nothing stops them from publishing. In fact, nothing really changes, except in the long run their school costs likely come down somewhat as well as their long term salary expectations, but not significantly.

It is recognized generally that western Europe and the US have the worlds best doctors and part of that is that those doctors are coming out of US medical schools.

So your position is that people become healthcare practitioners for the money, not because they have a drive to do that? Typically that is the opposite concept of most people with success in their field. Usually they go to do what they love and the money follows. The only time that doesn't seem to be true is with Wall Street types and sometimes lawyers... and probably most politicians.
Irish Stout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:45 AM   #23
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,014

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Stout View Post
All volunteers? Not quite. Though health care practitioners in single-payer countries do on average get paid less than in the US, they're far from being volunteers and they still get paid significantly more than an average professional.

Check out this comparison from 2009:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ies-make/?_r=0

Also, I'd argue that disincentives and stagnation shouldn't be a real concern. Most well paid Doctors aren't going out of their way to develop new theories, treatment, etc... most of those things come from Doctors across the world and at home who have new and better ideas on how to best help their patients. Plus, nothing in a single payer system would limit those Doctors and others from being able to patent procedures, techniques, or new tech, which could then be sold for extra profit to themselves above and beyond salary. Nothing stops them from publishing. In fact, nothing really changes, except in the long run their school costs likely come down somewhat as well as their long term salary expectations, but not significantly.

It is recognized generally that western Europe and the US have the worlds best doctors and part of that is that those doctors are coming out of US medical schools.

So your position is that people become healthcare practitioners for the money, not because they have a drive to do that? Typically that is the opposite concept of most people with success in their field. Usually they go to do what they love and the money follows. The only time that doesn't seem to be true is with Wall Street types and sometimes lawyers... and probably most politicians.
Yep. The massive amount of profit being gouged from the American people by the American health care industry does not go to doctors. It goes to insurance companies.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2013, 06:53 AM   #24
Breaker
Bleeding Orange and Blue
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,084
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
^^

Like I've said a billion times, trying to treat health care as a for profit, insurable thing is idiotic.

Everyone gets sick, and it's not monetarily profitable to actually take care of sick people.
First off, healthcare is both private and non-profit, look up how many non-profit hospitals there are in the country. Secondly, if non-profit hospitals were held accountable and they were actually forced to give a significant percentage of their profits to "charity care" costs of healthcare for the poor would decrease drastically.

"California hospitals–including Cedars Sinai, Kaiser Permanente and Stanford University--dwarf the level of charity care provided. Overall, the 196 hospitals surveyed received $3.3 billion in 2010 state and federal tax exemptions and spent only $1.4 billion on charity care--a gap of $1.8 billion. Three-quarters of the hospitals got more dollars in tax breaks than they spent on charity care. Half spent less than 2.46 percent of their operating expenses on charity care."

Healthcare for the poor becomes pretty damn reasonable when the $13,000 MRI is given as charity care by an institution receiving massive tax breaks, and not charging Medicare for it, or hounding the poor guy who cant pay it. People that can afford to pay for things are not going to go to the nearest, competent hospital for care, and they will pay a pretty penny for it. I find it laughable that "progressives" rail all day against corporations getting tax breaks, but don't say a single damn word about non-profits robbing people blind. BTW, a non-profit only means that they don't have investors, but they can still pay employees as much as they want.
Breaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 09:43 AM   #25
B-Large
Ring of Famer
 
B-Large's Avatar
 
Expunged... Accidently?

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,828

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
We'll be playing this game over and over again until we decide, like wiser industrialized nations before us, that healthcare must be nationalized into a single payer system, which is the best of all the bad options available. You won't invent the perfect system. Why? Because people die no matter what you do.

Obamacare is a band-aid. The continual rise in costs will eventually bankrupt the health care system in the U.S., and maybe the U.S. itself if we let it. Pay me now. Pay me later. Das macht nichts.
Really, in the end, who cares who pays the bill anyway?

The Government pays through taxes and relatibely low admin expense

Private Insurers who cut 20% out of every $1 of premium for admin and other non-health related BS.

Honestly if you want savings, take the difference between Medicares 4% overhead and Private insurance's 20% overheard (and its only 20% because its mandated to be by law) and you should have Billions and Billions in money to pay actual expenses.
B-Large is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:21 PM.


Denver Broncos