Marianne2 said: "Supposedly they are going to introduce a bill on tax law next. Wonder what they will "fix" to benefit the richest people?
It seems like they have a list of things they want to do and are going down it until something passes so they can claim being successful. So far, Trump is 0-3, with 2 things being the same thing. The sad thing is, these people don't seem capable of learning. It's just whatever they want with threats if they don't get their way.
" The Trump administration is 0-3 on: Muslim ban (#1 and #2), Mexico wall (Mexico is NOT paying for it), and Trumpcare. He also got a SEAL and a bunch of civilians killed in a botched raid in, what, week two? It's all a blur of failures now. I'm worried about the anti-Civil-Rights judge at the moment, though, and whether anything will really come from an investigation of Russian collusion run by Republicans.
Rumpelstiltskin said: "The Trump administration has all but guaranteed that ACA will fail. By stating that they won't enforce the individual mandate, they've taken away the only teeth the bill has to balance the costly older and sick population with younger/healthier people who might otherwise choose to forego health insurance until they have an employer who pays for it. Trump says that ACA is failing at every opportunity, and does everything in his power to make sure it happens. And the people at risk are the people who elected him. He's using his own constituents as a human shield.
That said, I don't know if the White House can instruct the IRS to just ignore the law. What mechanism is there to pretend the tax penalty for not having insurance doesn't exist?
" Are insurance companies required to report who's covered? I don't know all the details about coverage reporting, but the tax forms themselves don't seem to require proof of coverage. As for harming his own constituents--good. They deserve to suffer for their own choices, but the downside is that everyone else has to suffer for it as well.
lovepuppy said: "Ugh, I saw a tweet somewhere by an ultra-conservative who said the only reason why it wouldn't pass was because it wasn't conservative enough, so watch out--the next time it'll be EVEN MORE conservative! .....Except that cuts out a nice swathe of the middling Republicans, right? There's no logical train of thought coming from this party.""
Not necessarily. You are forgetting another major piece of why this bill didn't get very far: THE PEOPLE called their Congresspeople and threatened to vote them out if they passed this thing. Keep calling. Keep doing it, especially if you don't like what they come up with, next. They work for us. If it means the New World Order is being vigilant and making the effort and making the calls to hold their feet to the fire, so be it.
" No, I'm not forgetting that piece. I was pointing out the ultra-conservative logical flaw (and thus they didn't care about the paid protesters and such) that somehow making a repeal bill more conservative would have allowed it to pass; it's like they forget that not all Republicans, as repugnant as the party is as a whole, are THAT extremist. Really, removing emergency care as a minimum requirement? Jesus. Indeed, let's not forget 2018.
dramamama611 said: "I have one question. Can anyone explain to me, why it's better pull the bill and you have it voted on? We all know he didn't have enough votes but what's the advantage?
" From the Republican majority point of view, not having a vote committed to historical records means less humiliation.
#BoycottTrumplikePattiMurin
Updated On: 3/25/17 at 09:18 AM