Re: Repeal

1

It's going to be killed. You may as well enjoy the parts of that you can.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:14 AM
horizontal rule
2

My only hope right now is that the true blue states like New York and California, that set up robust exchanges, set up state-level mini-ACAs (similar to Massachusetts before the ACA) so that people here continue to get covered, which will minimize the damage for blue state residents and yes, heighten the differences between the democrats and republicans.

Of course, if the GOP gets their wish list item of allowing health plans to cross state lines, that goes out the window, because then individual states will lose any/all ability to regulate insurance within their borders.


Posted by: sam | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:17 AM
horizontal rule
3

It will be like the Mann Act. You can cross states lines without trouble unless you are doing so for immoral purposes, such as trying to help a poor person.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
4

1: You don't think they'll try to salvage some of the most ridiculously popular provisions in order to fly under more people's radar?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:27 AM
horizontal rule
5
The vindictive side of me wants them to burn the entire thing to the ground and turn it into a maximized clusterfuck and make everyone hate the GOP.

That's the same side of you that wanted to see Donald Trump get the Republican nomination.


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:28 AM
horizontal rule
6

I'm hoping for a repeat of the GWB Social Security attempt to privatize social security -- Republicans spend a bunch of time and energy on it and don't end up passing anything.

I'm not optimistic that will happen, but I think it would be the best outcome.


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:29 AM
horizontal rule
7

4: The provisions that are actually popular cost tax dollars or require the mandate in order to not cost tax dollars.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:30 AM
horizontal rule
8

5: No, the vindictive side of me wanted Ted Cruz to get the nomination.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:33 AM
horizontal rule
9

7: Oh sure, I get the contradiction and why they've fucked themselves. I just still think they might salvage some of them. Certainly things like staying on your parents' insurance until age 26 - that doesn't cost anything and it's pretty popular.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:34 AM
horizontal rule
10

6 is what I'm hoping for too. I'm probably a little more optimistic than Nick, but still not very.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:34 AM
horizontal rule
11

9: That might stay. Also, I bet that shitty websites are still used.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:37 AM
horizontal rule
12

Didn't they already vote to kill some of those ridiculously popular provisions at 3 am?


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:41 AM
horizontal rule
13

I always thought Obamacare was a huge triumph, but I also had a lot of sympathy for the lefty Obamacare detractors.

But look at how durable Obamacare is! The Republicans are fanatical and unified, and are still going to have a hard time with repeal. It really is possible that repeal will lead to electoral problems for the fuckers. (Of course, non-repeal would also be trouble for them.)


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:42 AM
horizontal rule
14

13: One persons "huge triumph" is anthers "demonstrations of the low bar of what is possible in today's environment" I suppose.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:46 AM
horizontal rule
15

Anthers seems a bit picky.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:50 AM
horizontal rule
16

always has been. Gets it from his mothers side.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:52 AM
horizontal rule
17

This is totally my reaction too. Plus I walk around thinking to myself 'This country is so fucked.' and 'I hate all these Wisconsinites now and I didn't before. Idiots.'


Posted by: hydrobatidae | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 12:12 PM
horizontal rule
18

"I would totally kick your ass, but these guys here keep holding me back". "Guys?" "Guys?" "Aw, shit"


Posted by: F | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 12:21 PM
horizontal rule
19

12: What was passed in the Senate last night, as far as I can tell and Lemieux tells me, is nothing but a symbolic shell, a placeholder for provisions to be passed later. This will be I presume be quickly passed to the House where Ryan will do the same, and then there will months of reconciliation? "Obamacare is repealed!!" but no parts of Obamacare are repealed. Yet.

There were the usual "13 Amendments" but have no details on those. Could be Rudy Heinrich Day or Life is Good or no Federal money to people with kinky hair who support terrorism or could be substantive.

I don't have a clue as to what they will actually do, and nobody including them does either, although Ryan may have ideas. Very bad things.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 12:24 PM
horizontal rule
20

14: You get my point exactly. It's remarkable that such a thing was accomplished in that country, and I am astonished that it was so well-constructed that it might actually survive in this country.


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 12:44 PM
horizontal rule
21

2 Our law is still on the books, do we would still have it if the ACA were repealed, although more people got coverage under the ACA than under Rombeycare. We were able to find it through a Federal Medicaid waiver. It isn't clear how we'd pay for it without the Federal money.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 4:23 PM
horizontal rule
22

2 Our law is still on the books, do we would still have it if the ACA were repealed, although more people got coverage under the ACA than under Rombeycare. We were able to find it through a Federal Medicaid waiver. It isn't clear how we'd pay for it without the Federal money.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 4:23 PM
horizontal rule
23

Same here. Mini ACA needs many billions that we might conceivably have, I guess, but it would be a heavy political lift and take years to pull together.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 6:25 PM
horizontal rule
24

19: Yes, this was the framework to do it via reconciliation later and avoid the filibuster.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 7:07 PM
horizontal rule
25

Honestly don't know what I can say to Americans these days except "good luck and try to keep the pressure on your politicians." The Trump voters who appear to have believed that the ACA and Obamacare were different things are a solid source of black (pun intended) comedy, though.


Posted by: Lord Castock | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 7:29 PM
horizontal rule
26

On the bright side, everybody in my family who is currently not healthy is getting Medicare.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 7:53 PM
horizontal rule
27

26: My parents are on Medicare and Medicaid both. Scary times.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 7:59 PM
horizontal rule
28

Yes. I don't really want to get into it now because it seems to be getting better so I'm going to try to repress some memories.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 8:15 PM
horizontal rule
29

is nothing but a symbolic shell, a placeholder for provisions to be passed later.

Yeah, okay, maybe it's just an empty shell of cruel and vindictive and spiteful intentions that have yet to be realized. But that doesn't mean they don't mean to make good on their promises (er, threats) as soon as the opportunities arise.

It's the pure spite of those intentions that have left me feeling disoriented, unnerved, and somewhat unmoored. I honestly expected better of the American voting public, and of its elected officials. I was wrong in my expectations.


Posted by: Just Plain Jane | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:00 PM
horizontal rule
30

Have s/b has, of course. Because I'm a coastal elite liberal who was educated by the nuns.


Posted by: Just Plain Jane | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:04 PM
horizontal rule
31

Jane, you get Devils tix for next Friday? Singing O Canada like Casablanca?


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:19 PM
horizontal rule
32

Jane, you get Devils tix for next Friday?

They're playing the Habs? No, I don't have tickets, but I might be persuaded...


Posted by: Just Plain Jane | Link to this comment | 01-12-17 11:40 PM
horizontal rule
33

The first Habs game I ever saw live: when I was about 12 years old, my dad took me and one of my sisters to Montreal, to see the Canadiens in action. But first we went to Brother André's (shortly thereafter venerated as Saint André of Montreal) shrine at St. Joseph's Oratory. Because, you know, hockey is all well and good, but: priorities.


Posted by: Just Plain Jane | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 12:08 AM
horizontal rule
34

It is the sheer monstrous wickedness of the proposal that gets me: the existence of people like Grover Norquist who are happy to cause children tp die if it means lower taxes on those who earn more than $250,000 and are unashamed to say so is still shocking in a way that --- say -- young men murdering babies directly is not. Because there is no emotion in the Republicans, no anger: just calculating greed and lack of empathy. That seems somehow less human than murderous rage.


Posted by: NW | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 12:40 AM
horizontal rule
35

Ryan town hall:
Questioner: Thanks to the affordable care act, I'm standing here today alive... Why would you repeal the ACA without a replacement?
Ryan: Oh, we wouldn't do that! We want to replace it with something better! First of all.... um... I'm glad you're standing here.
Polifact: We rate Ryan's statement "I'm glad you're standing here" as "false".


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 2:16 AM
horizontal rule
36

Anyway, Ryan's town hall was actually informative, as evidenced by Gaba thread. Ryan made it clear that his plan is to undo the concept of insurance by pitting politics against the nature of health spending. When 5% of people account for 50% of costs, all you have to do it tell the other 95% that if they vote to take away coverage from the suckers who are sick, the rest of them will save money. If everyone votes their wallets, fundamentally the ideas of health insurance and democracy are incompatible. Fortunately most people, unlike Ryan, have a conscience and sort of feel bad about letting people die from expensive but treatable conditions. Most people also believe in "there but for the grace of <insert deity> go I."


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 2:23 AM
horizontal rule
37

*Everyone in the world* seems to be trying to destroy the very idea of insurance instead of mere saving.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 2:50 AM
horizontal rule
38

If everyone votes their wallets, fundamentally the ideas of health insurance and democracy are incompatible.

Well, no, only if everyone votes their wallets and knows (or thinks they know) for certain whether they're in the 5% or the 95%.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 2:51 AM
horizontal rule
39

Ah, so the future of social insurance is dependent on the American public being introspective and having a good sense of statistical risk. Now I feel better.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 3:14 AM
horizontal rule
40

Unless you get totally crushed by a bus or the like one day we'll all be one of the 5%.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 4:03 AM
horizontal rule
41

He means you specifically, SP. It's your duty to sacrifice yourself.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 4:17 AM
horizontal rule
42

I bet you'd feel really bad if I actually got hit by a bus in the near future.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 4:23 AM
horizontal rule
43

The counter-flow bus lane is actually a non-trivial player in my mental game of feared causes of my death.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 7:06 AM
horizontal rule
44

Jane: Habs-Devils on Jan 20.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 9:05 AM
horizontal rule
45

I've never considered Habs-Devils games as a possible cause of death before, but now I'm scared.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
46

||

Okay, this is over 40

Just read a review of a new Wallace Stevens biography, and encountering references to Stevens in my semi-annual Fredric Jameson book, the review ends by claiming that Stevens was not an "intellectual poet."

Hmm. Stevens in my mind was deliberately the anti-Elliot, with "Comedian as the Letter C" a direct rebuke of Wasteland. Hmm. Was Stevens anti-intellectual like maybe Dylan Thomas? Is lyrical poetry anti-intellectual? Basho? I'm no expert, but no, I don't think Stevens was turning the intellect against itself, nor quite lyric. Romantic, yes...but something else.

|>


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 2:01 PM
horizontal rule
47

I guess maybe Stevens is materialist in opposition to Elliot's transcendentalism. These guys are a good example of varieties of conservatism.

Useful maybe to compare Stevens to Blake, imagination being central to both but expressed in different ways, hard to imagine Stevens engaging the usual modernist architectonic constructivism.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 2:13 PM
horizontal rule
48

2: if the GOP gets their wish list item of allowing health plans to cross state lines

This is already allowed.

The truth is that it actually is legal today and specifically enabled by the Affordable Care Act.

Several such regionally based cross-state arrangements already exist:

the ACA already allows states to reach compacts with other states to allow cross-border insurance sales (compacts are essentially interstate treaties). Georgia, Maine and Wyoming have passed laws enabling such compacts. No other states have joined them, and not a single insurer has expressed any interest in taking advantage of them.

Insurance companies haven't gone for it, because

The key is that healthcare is almost always delivered locally. Even if a Southern Californian's insurer is located in, say, Idaho, his or doctors and hospitals are almost certain to be nearby. To provide coverage, Joe's Insurance would have to make network deals with local providers in its new markets, creating its own local networks and agreeing on fees.

Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 01-13-17 6:47 PM
horizontal rule
49

I just read the actuarial table linked here and it turns out my family is fucked if they go back to underwriting. We're not a particularly unhealthy family- we've never met our OOP max, only one with a significant health risk in their medical history, a few others with sporadic issues. But according to this chart I would have one who would be auto-denied (4 year old girl due to an illness at 10 months that was discussed here previously); four of us would be either higher premiums or possible deny; and only one who might get tier 1 premiums.
This is the one thing that would make me seriously consider leaving the country. Well, that or when Trump gets around to rounding up the Jews.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-16-17 12:48 PM
horizontal rule
50

He would only round up all the Jews that aren't married to his daughter. And I think he's got at least one that's single.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-16-17 1:28 PM
horizontal rule
51

49: Don't you get employer insurance? Also, Massachusetts had community rating and guaranteed issue even before health reform. Premiums were based on age and zip code. (medical care costs more in Boston than it does in the Berkshires.)


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 01-16-17 3:35 PM
horizontal rule
52

51- yes, but underwriting could also mean that they can reinstate waiting periods when switching jobs. Probably we're safe in MA, but I'm also thinking when she's older and may live elsewhere. What kind of medical system declares someone uninsurable for the rest of her life when she's 10 months old?


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-16-17 11:53 PM
horizontal rule
53

46, 47: You probably don't need to care about whether Wallace Stevens was intellectual, or anti-intellectual (though I will say this: for an insurance company executive, Stevens was unusually literary in his tastes, and surprisingly high-minded). Nor need you worry about the (persistent, but not quite documented) rumours that he converted to the Catholic faith on his deathbed (not a bad faith to convert to at the eleventh hour; but I would say that, wouldn't I?).

It may be enough to just read his poetry.

Take from the dresser of deal,
Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet
On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come
To show how cold she is, and dumb.
Let the lamp affix its beam.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.


Posted by: Just Plain Jane | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:03 AM
horizontal rule
54

If one were to submit to an emperor at the eleventh hour, the emperor of ice-cream would not be a bad emperor to submit to.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:22 AM
horizontal rule
55

Huh, I've heard that line before but didn't realize it was Stevens.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:27 AM
horizontal rule
56

Yeah, people usually think it was Eisenhower.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:35 AM
horizontal rule
57

As well they might.

Anyway, though I (obviously) have essentially no familiarity with Stevens's work, I can't resist noting his membership, which we've discussed before, in the early-twentieth-century intelligentsia associated with the insurance industry in Connecticut. Benjamin Lee Whorf, for one, was a longtime colleague of Stevens at The Hartford.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:40 AM
horizontal rule
58

If you remove the "in Connecticut" qualification you can add Kafka.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:44 AM
horizontal rule
59

Yeah, the original discussion was more broad, I think. I forget who else it included.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 12:45 AM
horizontal rule
60

Insurance companies haven't gone for it, because

Surely the main reason is that insurers don't really care about selling insurance in both Georgia and Maine, except at the margin. What they care about is selling from the lowest regulation/tax state to the rest of the country. Inter-state compacts don't let you do that.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 4:09 AM
horizontal rule
61

Yeah, selling insurance across state borders would totally make sense, if it was regulated at the Federal level. Nobody seems to be asking for that, though.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 4:34 AM
horizontal rule
62

re: 58

Charles Ives, too.

Although he actually was in Connecticut.



Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 4:55 AM
horizontal rule
63

Who is the Delaware of health insurance regulation? Probably Delaware.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:12 AM
horizontal rule
64

||
Is unfogged mobile blank for everyone?
|>


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:13 AM
horizontal rule
65

You have unfogged mobile? Check your privilege.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:16 AM
horizontal rule
66

There's unfogged mobile?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:17 AM
horizontal rule
67

65 is me. Unfogged needs to check it's Name box privilege.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:17 AM
horizontal rule
68

If you're a member of the ruling class like Mossy, apparently yes.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:18 AM
horizontal rule
69

The little car icon top left that's been there since God was a lad, and yes, it's blank.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:20 AM
horizontal rule
70

I would tell Walt to check his apostrophising, but maybe it's time to accept that that particular hill has already been died on.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:23 AM
horizontal rule
71

I, like chris, am smart enough to game the system, thus demonstrating my worthiness.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:27 AM
horizontal rule
72

57: Well, the context of reading the review of the Steven's biography was that I was simultaneously reading 30 dense pages of Fredric Jameson on William Carlos Williams Paterson (and skimming the book itself). Of course for Jameson, form is political. Stevens was a casual Republican.

All very deep and difficult and probably pointless.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:35 AM
horizontal rule
73

Like most of your reading, by the sound of it.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:38 AM
horizontal rule
74

I can't even get the fucking Name box to work, and you expect me to apostrophise correctly?


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:43 AM
horizontal rule
75

Like I said, that hill is looking pretty bleak.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:46 AM
horizontal rule
76

The Name Box is tricky. I have to have the "Remember personal info?" box checked on my phone but not on my computer. Also, for some reason autocomplete says I've used dozens of "Opinionated" names since the last time I cleaned my browser.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:47 AM
horizontal rule
77

AND WHOSE FAULT IS THAT?


Posted by: OPINIONATED MOBY SOCK PUPPET | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:53 AM
horizontal rule
78

The fault is in the stars.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 6:57 AM
horizontal rule
79

The fault is Mossy and his hipster mobile and his apostrophe obsession. You're just an innocent victim.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:01 AM
horizontal rule
80

It's a Samsung. Definitely not hipster.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:13 AM
horizontal rule
81

I have Samsung. (Looks at Mossy with profound new sense of respect.)


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:17 AM
horizontal rule
82

What did you take me for, an Apple user? I am affronted, sir, affronted.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:20 AM
horizontal rule
83

Of course the dick-swinging neo-Cold War Russophobic bloodlust above is appalling. Terrifying. I started on the Web, not because of Lesser Bush or 9/11 but to oppose the supposed center-leftys Klein and Yglesias jumping on board the genocide bandwagon.

The Left is opposed to war. The Far left is opposed to all war. A socialist citizen of the Imperialist Hegemon doesn't really need to think much. War is bad, revolution is to prevent the inevitable wars of Finance Capitalism. Mandel and Mattick, good commies, opposed WWII all the way through.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:21 AM
horizontal rule
84

I also have a Samsung phone. I'm too cheap for Apple.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:23 AM
horizontal rule
85

The little car icon top left that's been there since God was a lad, and yes, it's blank.

For real? Wouldn't, I don't know, a mobile phone have been a better icon? And why is Unfogged encouraging browsing while driving?


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:35 AM
horizontal rule
86

Ogged is trying to kill us all. I thought everybody knew that.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:38 AM
horizontal rule
87

A Nokia 3310 icon would be somewhat embarrassing today. Not necessarily more embarrassing than the blog roll of the dead, but still.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:40 AM
horizontal rule
88

Of course the Samsung-swinging neo-WAP Applephobic phonelust above is terrifying.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 7:56 AM
horizontal rule
89

It's ok to genocide Apple designers, they're Democrats.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 8:14 AM
horizontal rule
90

A sociable citizen of the Imperative Hedgehog doesn't really need to think much.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 8:17 AM
horizontal rule
91

82: I thought you were fancy. You know, classy. Not the kind of guy who puts his pants on one leg at a time, like the rest of us.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 8:18 AM
horizontal rule
92

You can put two pant legs on simultaneously? Mind. Blown.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 8:28 AM
horizontal rule
93

My Samsung is terrible, but at least I'm not a hipster.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 01-17-17 9:02 AM
horizontal rule