5 ms·

I'm for universal healthcare but the ACA is collapsing in many states. I happened to ride back to Santa Fe with the CEO of Blue Cross of Omaha who told me that

by ddp 10y ago

I'm for universal healthcare but the ACA is collapsing in many states. I happened to ride back to Santa Fe with the CEO of Blue Cross of Omaha who told me that BC/BS of NM lost $100m on the ACA in 2015. That's a lot of money for anyone to lose. He believed there were a few relatively simple fixes that would go a long way to bring some sanity to the system. And let's face it, tax penalties are not the way to achieve health coverage for all Americans. Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare...

bojl 10y ago
>Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare... He tried to include the public option but it only had 59 votes to the 60 required to pass it
- venomsnake 10y ago
  You only need 51 votes. If Democrats really cared they could have just sit in the senate until the republican speakers collapsed. And it would have gotten to a vote. It may have taken a couple of days but whatever. Edit: Can anyone explain the downvotes please? A filibuster can be overcome by just siting and listening to the other side until they can no longer speak from exhaustion.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    They can trade off speaking during the filibuster. Say only 20 of the minority decide to be completely intransigent. How many weeks do you think it will take to exhaust them when they each only need to speak for ~9 hours a week to maintain the filibuster?
    - venomsnake 10y ago
      They don't have the right to leave the senate hall I think. So I do think they will have to make number one and two from time to time. The answer also is as much as needed.
      - maxerickson 10y ago
        The Senator that has the floor can't leave the Senate. They can leave if they aren't holding the floor. So 52 weeks later, maybe you compromise to get some things done (or maybe sooner)?
- ddp 10y ago
  How about you take it to a vote and see what happens? If you just cave up front, I guarantee you you're going to lose. That's my point.
jonknee 10y ago
> Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare... You must have missed the entirety of 2009 that extensively debated the topic with Obama very much gunning for universal coverage and the GOP very much trying that no one got covered. The public option would solve much of the current issues, but was shot down by the Tea Party. Same for expanded Medicaid to cover the poor, Republican governors refused to expand. The ACA is far from perfect, but not because Obama wanted it to cover less.
st3v3r 10y ago
"Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare..." How old were you when the ACA was passed? I ask not to be snarky, but to see if you remember the huge fight that erupted over the whole thing. Go back and read some of the coverage of the time, and ask yourself if you really think that he would have had the political capital to push the public option through.
thephyber 10y ago
> Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare... President Obama didn't create the ACA. Congress did. It was modeled after a system that works very well in Massachusetts and was developed by Republican, free-market think tanks. And every Congress since has tried to sabotage it rather than fix it. Last I heard, the current Congress still doesn't have a great solution to solve the core issues. And that is after 40+ votes to dismantle it. I think you mischaracterize the Democrats of 2009. There was a significant desire to push for "a single payer option" (a partial "universal healthcare"), but there was also severe resistance, even within the party. And Republicans largely didn't want to deal with any option the Democrats came up with. I'm glad something was done, even if it was an imperfect law. It forced the issue to eventually be dealt with. I would have preferred that Republican Congress critters would have chosen to try and fix the law rather than sabotage it (they were largely waiting for Republican president that could get credit for fixing the flaws).
- DrScump 10y ago
  Republicans largely didn't want to deal with any option the (2009) Democrats came up with. No Republican was even allowed to read the final bill before the vote. Do be fair.
Steko 10y ago
> BC/BS of NM lost $100m on the ACA in 2015 And they would have broken even on Risk Corridors if it wasn't for Marco Rubio.

by ddp 10y ago

bojl 10y ago

>Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare... He tried to include the public option but it only had 59 votes to the 60 required to pass it

venomsnake 10y ago
You only need 51 votes. If Democrats really cared they could have just sit in the senate until the republican speakers collapsed. And it would have gotten to a vote. It may have taken a couple of days but whatever. Edit: Can anyone explain the downvotes please? A filibuster can be overcome by just siting and listening to the other side until they can no longer speak from exhaustion.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  They can trade off speaking during the filibuster. Say only 20 of the minority decide to be completely intransigent. How many weeks do you think it will take to exhaust them when they each only need to speak for ~9 hours a week to maintain the filibuster?
  - venomsnake 10y ago
    They don't have the right to leave the senate hall I think. So I do think they will have to make number one and two from time to time. The answer also is as much as needed.
    - maxerickson 10y ago
      The Senator that has the floor can't leave the Senate. They can leave if they aren't holding the floor. So 52 weeks later, maybe you compromise to get some things done (or maybe sooner)?
ddp 10y ago
How about you take it to a vote and see what happens? If you just cave up front, I guarantee you you're going to lose. That's my point.

jonknee 10y ago

> Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare... You must have missed the entirety of 2009 that extensively debated the topic with Obama very much gunning for universal coverage and the GOP very much trying that no one got covered. The public option would solve much of the current issues, but was shot down by the Tea Party. Same for expanded Medicaid to cover the poor, Republican governors refused to expand. The ACA is far from perfect, but not because Obama wanted it to cover less.

st3v3r 10y ago

"Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare..." How old were you when the ACA was passed? I ask not to be snarky, but to see if you remember the huge fight that erupted over the whole thing. Go back and read some of the coverage of the time, and ask yourself if you really think that he would have had the political capital to push the public option through.

thephyber 10y ago

> Boo on Obama for not even bothering to try for Universal Healthcare... President Obama didn't create the ACA. Congress did. It was modeled after a system that works very well in Massachusetts and was developed by Republican, free-market think tanks. And every Congress since has tried to sabotage it rather than fix it. Last I heard, the current Congress still doesn't have a great solution to solve the core issues. And that is after 40+ votes to dismantle it. I think you mischaracterize the Democrats of 2009. There was a significant desire to push for "a single payer option" (a partial "universal healthcare"), but there was also severe resistance, even within the party. And Republicans largely didn't want to deal with any option the Democrats came up with. I'm glad something was done, even if it was an imperfect law. It forced the issue to eventually be dealt with. I would have preferred that Republican Congress critters would have chosen to try and fix the law rather than sabotage it (they were largely waiting for Republican president that could get credit for fixing the flaws).

DrScump 10y ago
Republicans largely didn't want to deal with any option the (2009) Democrats came up with. No Republican was even allowed to read the final bill before the vote. Do be fair.

Steko 10y ago

> BC/BS of NM lost $100m on the ACA in 2015 And they would have broken even on Risk Corridors if it wasn't for Marco Rubio.