3 ms·

Actually Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of price transparency, but Senate Democrats can block and have effectively blocked (assisted by now-decease

Actually Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of price transparency, but Senate Democrats can block and have effectively blocked (assisted by now-deceased McCain) any non-taxation-related changes to Obamacare. Reference: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1393/require-price-transparency-health-care-providers/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpomete...

Someone1234 8y ago
Your claims are simply erroneous and your link doesn't support them. From your own link: > The House GOP bill that has emerged as the leading option to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act includes no added price transparency provision. So the bill that McCain helped defeat didn't contain improved transparency according to your own source. And the GOP hasn't introduced significant legislation since to address the problem, therefore Democrats supporting (or not supporting) it is all hypotheticals based on no actual legislation.
- ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
  The link I provided documents the 2016 Republican platform of full price transparency in healthcare. You quibble about how they failed to repeal ACA and follow up with new regulation. Factually, Trump and the Rs failed with their 3-step plan, right after step 1 -- hence we remain stuck with the lack of price transparency under the Democrats' Obamacare. So, blaming Republicans is not factual.
magicalist 8y ago
> Actually Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of price transparency, but Senate Democrats can block and have effectively blocked (assisted by now-deceased McCain) any non-taxation-related changes to Obamacare This is a bizarre summary of the failed repeal of the ACA with a bill that wouldn't have even included the proposal they supposedly wanted. Reference: the article you linked to
- ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
  It's a fact that Trump and Republicans ran on a platform of free-market healthcare and full price transparency, unlike their opponents. The article I linked points out that this price transparency could not be achieved in the very first legislative step -- by the nature of that first bill, related exclusively to tax and revenue since it originated in the House. Politics is an art of compromises, to achieve what is doable with sufficient majorities, as well as taking into account popular support in view of the next round of elections. In this case, the only change that could pass was to remove the tax-shaped penalty so that people are allowed to ignore Obamacare plans. Next would have been a basic repeal of Obamacare (blocked by Senate Democrats and McCain). Finally would have been new and very different regulation, including price transparency (which could not even be attempted since step two was blocked, the consensus was that new regulations should only be passed after repealing Obamacare, and Republicans failed to build a majority around that approach).
  - Latteland 8y ago
    But they didn't do that when they got power.
    - ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
      You're right, the Democrats did not require full price transparency when they had overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate, plus the Presidency. Also, the Democrats later managed to block the repeal of Obamacare, which would have been a prelude to passing new regulations including full price transparency in healthcare, thus defeating the plans of the Republicans.
      - Latteland 8y ago
        You are completely wrong, the democrats didn't have an overwhelming majority in the senate. They had the minimum they needed to pass obamacare, 66. Remember that they wanted to have a single payer option and the damn democratic senator from nebraska didn't want that, and he thought if "he single-handedly stopped single payer" he'd be re-elected. So that one senator stopped single payer from being in the bill - he did vote for it after that. And that guy wasn't re-elected. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Anywhoo, you are completely and utterly incorrect about the dems have an overwhelming majority to do whatever they wanted. In the senate they had the bare minimum, and anyone who felt they wanted a change could get it. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34446325/ns/politics-health_care_reform/t/single-payer-health-care-plan-dies-senate/#.W81xrd_Yov8 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34446325/ns/politics-health_care_r...
ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
Down-voting won't erase the fact that this was the Republican platform in 2016: "Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals." [1] [1] Scroll down to point #5 in https://web.archive.org/web/20161110004206/https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform https://web.archive.org/web/20161110004206/https://www.donal...
- Someone1234 8y ago
  The Republicans control all three branches (inc. both houses of congress) of the federal government. If they wanted to bring forward legislation that addressed this issue they've had at least two years to do so (arguably more since Obama would have happily signed a pro-price transparently bill, it is an issue he spoke on). Where is the link to the GOP's actions rather than their empty promises?
  - ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
    Bah, I'm not interested in your goalposts. I replied to someone who falsely claimed that "Republicans who are supposedly for markets don't push for price transparency". We all know that Democrats are the party entirely responsible for Obamacare and its lack of price transparency. [Added for emphasis] Democrats created Obamacare without the full price transparency several people here seem to care about. Yet, you all choose to denounce Republicans -- who demonstrated in their attempt that they don't have a sufficient majority to repeal Obamacare, let alone introduce better healthcare regulation once it has been repealed.
    - Someone1234 8y ago
      They're your own goalposts: > Actually Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of price transparency, but Senate Democrats can block and have effectively blocked The Democrats cannot block a piece of legislation that doesn't exist. You yourself set up the criteria and you've failed to meet it. > I replied to someone who falsely claimed that "Republicans who are supposedly for markets don't push for price transparency". Quite correctly. You cannot link to the Republican legislation that supposedly tackles this issue while they continue to control all three branches (inc. both houses of congress) because there is no legislation. They're tried nothing and accomplished even less.

Someone1234 8y ago

Your claims are simply erroneous and your link doesn't support them. From your own link: > The House GOP bill that has emerged as the leading option to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act includes no added price transparency provision. So the bill that McCain helped defeat didn't contain improved transparency according to your own source. And the GOP hasn't introduced significant legislation since to address the problem, therefore Democrats supporting (or not supporting) it is all hypotheticals based on no actual legislation.

ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
The link I provided documents the 2016 Republican platform of full price transparency in healthcare. You quibble about how they failed to repeal ACA and follow up with new regulation. Factually, Trump and the Rs failed with their 3-step plan, right after step 1 -- hence we remain stuck with the lack of price transparency under the Democrats' Obamacare. So, blaming Republicans is not factual.

magicalist 8y ago

> Actually Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of price transparency, but Senate Democrats can block and have effectively blocked (assisted by now-deceased McCain) any non-taxation-related changes to Obamacare This is a bizarre summary of the failed repeal of the ACA with a bill that wouldn't have even included the proposal they supposedly wanted. Reference: the article you linked to

ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
It's a fact that Trump and Republicans ran on a platform of free-market healthcare and full price transparency, unlike their opponents. The article I linked points out that this price transparency could not be achieved in the very first legislative step -- by the nature of that first bill, related exclusively to tax and revenue since it originated in the House. Politics is an art of compromises, to achieve what is doable with sufficient majorities, as well as taking into account popular support in view of the next round of elections. In this case, the only change that could pass was to remove the tax-shaped penalty so that people are allowed to ignore Obamacare plans. Next would have been a basic repeal of Obamacare (blocked by Senate Democrats and McCain). Finally would have been new and very different regulation, including price transparency (which could not even be attempted since step two was blocked, the consensus was that new regulations should only be passed after repealing Obamacare, and Republicans failed to build a majority around that approach).
- Latteland 8y ago
  But they didn't do that when they got power.
  - ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
    You're right, the Democrats did not require full price transparency when they had overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate, plus the Presidency. Also, the Democrats later managed to block the repeal of Obamacare, which would have been a prelude to passing new regulations including full price transparency in healthcare, thus defeating the plans of the Republicans.
    - Latteland 8y ago
      You are completely wrong, the democrats didn't have an overwhelming majority in the senate. They had the minimum they needed to pass obamacare, 66. Remember that they wanted to have a single payer option and the damn democratic senator from nebraska didn't want that, and he thought if "he single-handedly stopped single payer" he'd be re-elected. So that one senator stopped single payer from being in the bill - he did vote for it after that. And that guy wasn't re-elected. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Anywhoo, you are completely and utterly incorrect about the dems have an overwhelming majority to do whatever they wanted. In the senate they had the bare minimum, and anyone who felt they wanted a change could get it. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34446325/ns/politics-health_care_reform/t/single-payer-health-care-plan-dies-senate/#.W81xrd_Yov8 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34446325/ns/politics-health_care_r...

ilove_banh_mi 8y ago

Down-voting won't erase the fact that this was the Republican platform in 2016: "Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals." [1] [1] Scroll down to point #5 in https://web.archive.org/web/20161110004206/https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform https://web.archive.org/web/20161110004206/https://www.donal...

Someone1234 8y ago
The Republicans control all three branches (inc. both houses of congress) of the federal government. If they wanted to bring forward legislation that addressed this issue they've had at least two years to do so (arguably more since Obama would have happily signed a pro-price transparently bill, it is an issue he spoke on). Where is the link to the GOP's actions rather than their empty promises?
- ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
  Bah, I'm not interested in your goalposts. I replied to someone who falsely claimed that "Republicans who are supposedly for markets don't push for price transparency". We all know that Democrats are the party entirely responsible for Obamacare and its lack of price transparency. [Added for emphasis] Democrats created Obamacare without the full price transparency several people here seem to care about. Yet, you all choose to denounce Republicans -- who demonstrated in their attempt that they don't have a sufficient majority to repeal Obamacare, let alone introduce better healthcare regulation once it has been repealed.
  - Someone1234 8y ago
    They're your own goalposts: > Actually Trump and the Republicans ran on a platform of price transparency, but Senate Democrats can block and have effectively blocked The Democrats cannot block a piece of legislation that doesn't exist. You yourself set up the criteria and you've failed to meet it. > I replied to someone who falsely claimed that "Republicans who are supposedly for markets don't push for price transparency". Quite correctly. You cannot link to the Republican legislation that supposedly tackles this issue while they continue to control all three branches (inc. both houses of congress) because there is no legislation. They're tried nothing and accomplished even less.