Opinions on just about anything in politics are like noses - every one has one and they are all different!

When it comes to Graham-Cassidy Obamacare Repeal, it is not repeal.  On that, we can all agreed.  What does it actually do or not do?  We are not sure even Graham or Cassidy can answer that questions.  Here are some of the opinions we have heard:

1.  This is just a game being played by the establishment.  Everyone knows McCain won't be running for anything any more and we all know he's meaner than a junk yard dog,  That makes him the perfect fall guy.  It gives cover to every Senator up for re-elections, like Jeff Flake.  They can appear to be the good guys here while McCain is the bad guy, which he actually is!

2.  McCain pretended he voted no the last time "by accident."  But the whole thing was planned by McConnell and McCain.

3.  This plan is worse than the last plan and actually doesn't real change anything but the order of the provisions.

4.  This is not repeal.  This is not replace. This is a waste of good paper.

And on it goes.  You probably have your own favorite opinion.  Hang on to that and let's look at a few of the opinions by the media and other Congressional members.

The Truth about Graham-Cassidy (GC) Senate Bill from the Jackson Press

  1. It does NOT repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
  2. It does NOT repeal the individual and employer mandates; it only zeroes out the penalty dollars, leaving it possible for later Congresses to increase. (GC Section by Section)
  3. Maintains dependence on ACA’s federal and state exchanges.
  4. The federal government is still in charge (unless states reassert 10th Amendment authority, which they can do without federal permission).
  5. ACA insurance regulations remain nationalized and under federal control.
  6. Sets up three state-based funds using federal dollars collected under the ACA ($35B for insurers; $1.176T in stability funds to states for 2020 – 2026; $11B contingency fund for certain states.
  7. Unelected federal bureaucrats determine funding formulas.
  8. Unless prohibited, federal funds could “turbocharge” single-payer in states.
  9. Only smallest of ACA 19 taxes are repealed (restrictions on use of HSA/FSA, the increased penalties on non-health care uses of HSA dollars, the Medical device taxes, and the elimination of deduction for employers who receive a subsidy from Medicare for offering retiree prescription drug coverage).
  10. ACA “qualified health plans” would be prohibited from offering abortion other than in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.
  11. Allows all individuals to buy Obamacare catastrophic plans beginning January 1, 2019.
  12. The September 30 “deadline” for repeal is “fake news,” says Chris Jacobs.

To be clear, the Graham-Cassidy bill does not repeal the Affordable Care Act, or its exchanges or the Obamacare coverage. Senator Rand Paul says it only repeals 90% of ACA spending.

Then there is this:

What's in the latest Obamacare repeal bill? from CNN Money

Republican senators' latest attempt to repeal Obamacare could be the most far-reaching of GOP efforts this year.

Senators Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana last week released a bill that would eliminate or overhaul major sections of the health reform law. The duo had been trying to garner interest in earlier versions of their bill for months, but hadn't gotten much traction.

Now, however, Republicans likely have only two weeks left to use their 2017 budget reconciliation bill as a way to dismantle Obamacare with a simple majority in the Senate. The Graham-Cassidy bill is the only repeal effort left on the table, coming even as a bipartisan Senate committee is working on legislation to stabilize the Affordable Care Act.

The Congressional Budget Office said Monday it may take several weeks for it to release an analysis of the Graham-Cassidy bill so it remains to be seen how many fewer people could be insured under it or what the impact on premiums may be. 

Yet another reading of the Bill:

What’s In The Bill? from Health Affairs Blog

Earlier iterations of the Graham-Cassidy bill have been around for some time. See here and here and here. Two versions were released today. This summary follows the version on Senator Cassidy’s website, which reflects the official summary linked in the press release, rather than the version released with the press release itself.

The fundamental idea of the Graham-Cassidy bill is to terminate the ACA’s Medicaid expansions, premium tax credits, cost-sharing reduction payments, small business tax credits, and Basic Health Program as of 2019 and redistribute the money funding those programs to the states, using a complex formula described below. The bill would also impose per capita caps on Medicaid funding generally, also offering the states the alternative of a broader Medicaid block grant. Finally, the bill contains a number of tax cuts and health care regulation changes taken from earlier Senate repeal bills.


Confused?  That's the point!

NOTE:  No one ever actually talks or writes about HEALTHCARE.  This is about health insurance.  Why don't they just say that?

Views: 169

Replies to This Discussion

Oh, yeah, thanks a lot for this.  So, what does it actually do and say?  Do they obfuscate on purpose or is it built into their gene pool?

The swamp water is wide and very, very deep! Just like Obamacare was NEVER about health care it was about the confiscation and spending of an additional $1 Trillion dollars, pushing Medicare and Medicaid closer to a bankruptcy ... and then the cries for a single payer system to "solve the problems" that government created on both sides of the isle.

$1 Trillion dollars is a pile of dollar bills laying flat  .... 67 miles high.

The Note: is what it is all about. It is a forced subsidy for certain insurance companies, those admitted and participants in each state. The reason is simple. Those insurance companies have a lot of influence, bribes and payments to politicians and administrators in the form of trips, gifts, junkets etc. etc. Billions of dollars spent to make themselves the recipients of Trillions spent by government on a system to subsidize medical care at full price plus. And once it is in place the system will ration that medical care it pays for to guarantee profits that are currently unheard of in the industry, not for the doctor or nurse or hospital workers benefit but for the insurance company's bottom line. What we are seeing is the enshrinement of the insurance companies as monopolies with government approval to operate but with less and less oversight by anyone who is paying for the insurance by government mandate. In the "old days" if your doctor didn't perform or his office was to busy to do a see you in a reasonable time, at a price affordable by you, you could find another medical group or doctor to take your self or your family to. Not so in the land of Insurance monopoly. They must be "admitted" carrier to your state and the doctor must have some agreement with that insurance company to be paid, usually at a much lower rate since we are talking monopoly and supposed government oversight.

Since the start of insurance and government participation medical cost have skyrocketed beyond most peoples ability to pay for the actual care when the profit of the insurance is added to raw cost to doctors and hospitals with book keeping sufficient to government and insurance company specifications added to the total. The hospitals have been bankrupted and taken over by insurance companies to the detriment of our care and doctors employed within the systems. Foreign workers and doctors, who can work cheaper, have been brought in to lower cost to the insurance companies in an effort to lower overall cost and pump up profits of the corporations. I could go on and on but it is akin to putting the mafia in charge of law enforcement with the insurance companies take over of medical care we have now.

Let us call it what it is. It is a scheme to put insurance companies at the head of the line in collecting money for medical care. It is an Insurance Company Subsidy none of us can afford and the medical care will further suffer in the name of the corporate profit. The Doctors do the work, We do the paying, The Government forces us to pay through laws and coercion, The Insurance Companies take a handsome profit by law and ask the Government for more and more bypassing the customers in the transaction because we don't matter in the equation anymore. Our opinion or preferences mean nothing. Just as the actual care for the sick means nothing but profit or loss for the Insurance Companies bottom line.

What this bill is  is a start.  the ACA is so imbedded  in every departments policies that it will have to be pulled out over time just because it is a huge mess.  This does repeal the mandates for individuals and employers sothe "49employees, 30 hours" rule is gone (will stimulate the economy).  Turns money over to the States to run their own health insurance programs. If that is ALL it did it would be worth voting for.

Here is a different point of view from Tea Party Patriots:

On the good side, the bill begins by repealing the individual mandate and the employer mandate. It would no longer be a requirement of the law that individuals who do not receive health insurance from their employer or from a government program of some kind go out and purchase their health insurance from an ObamaCare exchange or pay a tax penalty. And it would no longer be a requirement of the law that employers with more than 49 employees offer health insurance to their employees or pay a penalty. The removal of that legal requirement for employers would allow many small businesses to grow beyond their current size – they’ve been arbitrarily capped at 49 by employers who can’t afford to hire that 50th employee, because that would trip the employer mandate requirement.

In addition, the bill repeals the Medical Device Tax – a tax that encourages our most important medical innovators to move their research and development operations overseas. And repealing that tax would return between $250-$300 billion to the economy over ten years.

Further, the bill repeals all ObamaCare subsidies and spending. No more insurance company bailouts!

So the bill cuts taxes, cuts spending, and cuts the deficit. Those are all good.

Perhaps most importantly, the bill ends the federal entitlement to Medicaid, and equalizes the per-person spending in ObamaCare.

ObamaCare spending is tilted unfairly toward states that choose to have high Medicaid costs. Under ObamaCare’s current spending formula, for instance, Massachusetts, a state with just two percent of the nation’s population, receives seven percent of the total money spent. That’s twice as much as the next-highest state, California, which itself receives far more on a per-capita basis than all but Massachusetts.

In fact, ObamaCare’s spending formula is so lopsided toward high-cost states that just four states – Massachusetts, California, New York, and Maryland – with just 20 percent of the nation’s population receive 40 percent of the total ObamaCare funding.

The Graham-Cassidy bill addresses this inequity by repealing ObamaCare’s funding formula and instituting a formula that is much more equitable. When it is fully phased in in 2026, each state’s spending would be capped on a per-capita basis, with every state receiving exactly the same amount of money for each funding recipient. That means there would no longer be an advantage for states that want to offer high-cost Medicaid coverage to their populations – they would no longer be able to foist the cost off on federal taxpayers all over the country, but would have their spending limited instead.

With ObamaCare funding moving from Washington to the states, innovation would rule. States would be able to design their own healthcare systems, tailored to the needs of their individual populations. Some would experiment with expanded Health Savings Accounts, while others might try to implement a single-payer system. The states would once again be laboratories for healthcare innovation, and the nation as a whole would benefit from seeing what works and what doesn’t.

On the bad side, the bill does not fully repeal ObamaCare. It leaves in place most of the tax increases, and all of the insurance company regulations that have been driving premium prices through the roof. It does not explicitly repeal Congress’ illegal special exemption from ObamaCare.

And because it would allow states to design their own plans, that means that some states could even choose to implement single-payer systems – and Republicans who passed this plan would be, in some ways, responsible for that.

ObamaCare is failing. Perhaps we should simply let ObamaCare fail on its own. Some might see that as an immoral shirking of our responsibility to our fellow citizens, but others will insist that Republicans promised full repeal, and anything less than full repeal is unacceptable.

I have not verified this info yet but it is worth reading. If it is not 100% accurate it is close.

McCain had best vote yes on the bill...why? Read on...
If Sen. John McCain votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 153,700 Arizona households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
In 2015, US households had to pay the IRS $69,770,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $454 per household.
82% of Arizona households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
If Sen. McCain votes NO, Arizonans will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

Our so-called "representatives" are showing their real allegiance to a cause ... the stealing of our income dollars for Medicaid expansion. This bill does NOTHING to stop that at all, it just gives the states the cash cow. It keeps in place fewer insurance options in counties all across America and does NOTHING to expand free-market options. Remember that the insurance companies still get cash to offset their health insurance LOSSES unfairly changing "risk" to an entitlement for cash subsidies. States that would put forth a "single payer system" will loose it all by higher premiums, fewer Doctors, and fewer dollars as fewer pay for those premiums, and opt out. That is why the IRS was the enforcement arm of this theft. After all those sigle payer systems fail they would then ... beg for a NATIONAL payer system as a "right" for all ... which only destroys sovereignty for the Marxist "public good". This does nothing to limit the "budget baseline" accounting system Congress uses to increase their spending year after year!

Repeal ALL of Obamacare ... and let the free-market capitalism replace it all.

You did't read the post:

"Further, the bill repeals all ObamaCare subsidies and spending. No more insurance company bailouts!"

It takes the IRS out because it kills the mandates.  

The States have been getting medicaid money since its inception. Wih the ACA the amount have been different by State depending  on how the State reimburses.  MA gets more money than California.  This changes the formula to a flat rate per person..... means that payments are equalized across the nation.  If States want to reimburse more they can with State funds.  Also gives each State the abiltiy to set up risk pools for pre-existing conditions.  What is wrong with this???


You pose an assumption while dancing around the issue on government taking from the sovereign individual by mandating we purchase a government approved product. It doesn't change the facts of the Why .. and purpose of it ... as seen by John Roberts as a "tax". Zeroing out the tax dollars is not an elimination of them, government still chooses what to force on states, this will be seen as just another entitlement. Plus we still have the government INVOLVED in the process of authorizing WHAT we would be given to buy for they set up the formula for disbursements. No matter what they tell us the facts are still there which is taking from the private sector and giving into the public sector desires. That is not a sovereign choice it is a guideline to be followed ... and it does lead to a single payer system when it fails, as it will, within a "socialized medicine". This doesn't eliminate entirely the regulations imposed, and those in the political class will never lessen the cash taken for spending by the Cabal of Thieves. Since the government is NOT in the profit business but only in the spending business why should we believe them and rely on them for our medical care ... and not the free-market? That is what's WRONG with this, for a policy is NOT medical care!

This article pretty much supports what you say, Joanne  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/24/obamacare-can-be-fi...



My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson



The best in books to make every conservative start thinking in new ways about America and the world being controlled by the Obama Administrations AND Republicans and Democrats.  Some surprises are in store for those who look!




Suppose the earth and its inhabitants exist in order to identify just what causes mankind continually to suffer so many troublesome problems and afflictions.








© 2018   Created by Arizona Freedom Alliance.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service