ACA: Are the Dems blowing an opportunity?

[radcen]

ACA: Are the Dems blowing an opportunity?

Virtually the day it was signed the Reps have been calling for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare), at the very minimum, and replacement with something better, ideally. SEVEN YEARS went by, providing ample time to formulate something better. SEVEN YEARS!!! The Reps could have come up with a replacement or a fix and presented it to the people and used it as a campaign platform tool during that time.

But they didn't.

The Reps, it is now clear, did absolutely nothing but piss and moan and shout empty rhetoric. It is also clear that their big haul in last November's general election, where they scored both houses of Congress and the White House, was completely unexpected and unforeseen even by them. You could tell by their stammering and "deer in the headlights" looks when they realized they suddenly had to... <gasp!> ... do something.

Since then, their stated goal of replacing Obamacare has been an utter and abysmal failure. They can't even agree among themselves what should be done. Meanwhile, the ACA isn't necessarily popular, but it is becoming accepted as being "just how it is". That's dangerous for the Reps. The Dems, for their part, have indeed been playing petty politics and have gleefully watched the Reps twist in the wind and display their mind-boggling incompetency, which is to be expected in today's political environment, albeit somewhat irresponsible in it's own way. So, here we are at today, Saturday, August 5, 2017, roughly half a year into the new Administration and the new Congress. What now?

Should the Dems be working on fixes to Obamacare, or just let it go like the Reps did? It'd never pass with the Reps in charge, but that's not the point. Go back to what I said above about using a good plan as a public campaign platform tool. A marketing tool, if you will.

It is no secret that the ACA has flaws. Serious flaws. President Obama himself said publicly last year that unfortunately "affordable" wasn't one of the results of the Affordable Care Act. Costs to the people are still going sky-high with no end in sight. That's something that needs to be addressed and fixed, if fixing over replacement is what you believe to be the better path. That's just one example of areas of the ACA that needs to be addressed, but I'll leave it at that so this doesn't get too long. You get the point, the ACA needs work.

The 2018 Mid-term elections are just over a year away. Congress always see-saws back and forth as both parties constantly succeed at getting cocky and screwing up their own positions of power, so if it's not 2018 it will happen eventually that the Dems will be back in power.

Are the Dems blowing an opportunity? Enough time and amusement has passed watching the Reps flail away. I believe, if the Dem Party were smart, they'd start huddling and work out a plan that addresses the things about the ADA that need fixing and present it to the people publicly and use it as a campaign tool.

 

[cpwill]

So, the problem with this idea is that the Base will not accept anything that isn't "Single Payer", and the electorate has zero interest in paying the taxes that would accompany Single Payer.

 

[Lyndon'sJohnson]

It's all partisan political theater, which is mostly why both parties are so unpopular now. One party wants to throw away the whole thing, while one seems content to just be opposed to that. Until both parties throw away the b***s*** narratives, they won't get any bipartisan support for improving on the ACA and we can start talking about what can improve our healthcare system.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Isn't there a bipartisan group working on fixing the ACA right now?

Bipartisan group floats ObamaCare fixes | TheHill

The hell of it is, if we could just infect the GOP with an ounce of pragmatism, the two sides could easily come together and fix the problems with it.

 

[Mach]

I'm asking not as much debating. Is that how it usually works though?

Let's imagine "democrats", huddle up and come up with one of many ways to do what they feel is improving healthcare.

- republicans will pounce on it, and have apparently years to run negative propaganda against it, just like they did Obamacare, and they may defeat it before it sees the light of day

- since we don't have any power or any candidates, whose ideas would this represent? whoever does eventually get to be president, or whichever dems have a big say in congress...they will likely want to support a plan that's crafted with their own interests in mind, things they can defend to their own supporters. How can they do this BEFORE being in power for at least a few months, maybe a year?

- Republicans may just steal the Ds hard work, tweak it for their own interests, and get the kudos for fixing healthcare. Sounds like a win for the people, but they would not be rewarding the architects, but the thief (very political but they are politicians)

Democrats have spent enormous amounts of time during the Clinton and Obama years, in trying to craft such legislation, it's an enormous undertaking, and it has to move fast. Contrast that with Republicans, they don't really spend an enormous amount of time on any legislation so far...but when they do, it's to favor the health insurance giants and tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy. Which is not a partisan snipe, that's just the only thing they get really passionate about in their actual legislation.

Here is a quote from Bill Kristol who was heralded as the one to defeat healthcare reform in the Clinton years:

The long-term political effects of a successful... health care bill will be even worse—much worse.... It will revive the reputation of... Democrats as the generous protector of middle-class interests. And it will at the same time strike a punishing blow against Republican claims to defend the middle class by restraining government.
— William Kristol, "Defeating President Clinton's Healthcare Proposal", December 1993[14]

Who would have thought that Republicans would prefer to harm Democrats and the public, if it meant protecting their partisan rhetoric? Straight from the horses mouth.

 

[Beaudreaux]

There is a rather good discussion in this video that I feel is the beginning of the full frontal push from Progressives, and is a great preview of the National Single Payer/Medicare-For-All argument and I truly believe you will be hearing Cenk's talking points over and over again for the next however-long it takes to either kill the idea off or National Single Payer becomes law.

Warning - this is a long video, however, in my opinion it's damned sure worth the time.

There are two specific instances that I agree with Cenk and not Ben - the healthcare debate is not one of them. The rest of the points they bring up, I am either in complete agreement with Ben, or at least in enough agreement to not waste time parsing the differences and derailing this thread with an awesome thread topic.

 

[radcen]

I'm asking not as much debating. Is that how it usually works though?

Let's imagine "democrats", huddle up and come up with one of many ways to do what they feel is improving healthcare.

- republicans will pounce on it, and have apparently years to run negative propaganda against it, just like they did Obamacare, and they may defeat it before it sees the light of day

- since we don't have any power or any candidates, whose ideas would this represent? whoever does eventually get to be president, or whichever dems have a big say in congress...they will likely want to support a plan that's crafted with their own interests in mind, things they can defend to their own supporters. How can they do this BEFORE being in power for at least a few months, maybe a year?

- Republicans may just steal the Ds hard work, tweak it for their own interests, and get the kudos for fixing healthcare. Sounds like a win for the people, but they would not be rewarding the architects, but the thief (very political but they are politicians)

Democrats have spent enormous amounts of time during the Clinton and Obama years, in trying to craft such legislation, it's an enormous undertaking, and it has to move fast. Contrast that with Republicans, they don't really spend an enormous amount of time on any legislation so far...but when they do, it's to favor the health insurance giants and tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy. Which is not a partisan snipe, that's just the only thing they get really passionate about in their actual legislation.

Here is a quote from Bill Kristol who was heralded as the one to defeat healthcare reform in the Clinton years:


Who would have thought that Republicans would prefer to harm Democrats and the public, if it meant protecting their partisan rhetoric? Straight from the horses mouth.

A couple thoughts...

- It occurred to me that the Reps might try to destroy it or steal something good. The Dems would have to scream their plan so loud that that would be virtually impossible to do. Television ads, YouTube posts, newspaper ads, stuff so visible and readily accessible that anyone could easily bury it with facts if (read: when) some partisan hack from the other side tries to do that.

- To your quote: Most people say they hate the partisanship and they just want things done. (Then again, people say they hate Congress and then keep re-electing them. People say they hate negative campaigning, but that's what they respond to.) This would be somewhat novel in approach, but the current methods obviously aren't working for us. It doesn't help that, from outward appearances, the Dems seem to be sitting on their thumbs believing business as usual is their winning strategy.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

We will never get single payer. It is a political impossibility in this country. Everyone just needs to get that through their thick heads.

Another thing everyone needs to get through their thick heads is that there not a free market healthcare system in any developed nation on earth. Necessary healthcare is the biggest market failure in the entire world's economy. Half the country would never be able to buy health insurance in a true free market because no insurer would sell it to them. If you are overweight, out of shape, don't eat well, then to a health insurer you present the level of risk that an alcoholic with 5 DUI's presents to an auto insurer. They would never sell you a policy if they didn't have to. Moreover, the older you get, the higher the risk you would be to them.

That is just on the insurance side. Now look at the provider side. If you are involved in a traumatic accident or have a heart attack, you could spend tens of thousands of dollars if not hundreds of thousands of dollars before you are even conscious again. If you were to get cancer, you are looking at 30k or more a month in chemo alone. Its not like buying a car either, you don't just get to say well that is too expensive, I will go home without buying your product or service. The choice is buy their product or service or die a horrible death. They kind of got you there.

I know, I know, I know...but that is why you should only have catastrophic insurance plans (this is based on the nonsense that health insurance could ever work like any other form of insurance). OK sure, I am not against high deductible catastrophic insurance plans coupled with a HSA. They can make a lot of financial sense for those that are younger and healthy. However, they are not going to curb over all healthcare costs because its not the routine care that is that expensive anyway. It is the catastrophic and chronic disease care that makes up the majority of health spending. One major surgery will cost you more than a lifetime of routine care. A few days stay in a hospital will easily cost you more than a couple of lifetimes worth of routine care. Point being, with a catastrophic plan, you might have more of an incentive to shop around for routine and ancillary care, but the expensive stuff that is driving up healthcare costs would still be paid by an insurer just like it is now and thus policies would still be very expensive.

If the left would get it out of their heads that we will ever get a single payer system, and if the right would get this magical thinking about "getting the government out of healthcare" would fix everything out of their thick heads, both sides could actually come together and build a better system than we have now.

 

[Moderate Right]

ACA: Are the Dems blowing an opportunity?

Virtually the day it was signed the Reps have been calling for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare), at the very minimum, and replacement with something better, ideally. SEVEN YEARS went by, providing ample time to formulate something better. SEVEN YEARS!!! The Reps could have come up with a replacement or a fix and presented it to the people and used it as a campaign platform tool during that time.

But they didn't.

The Reps, it is now clear, did absolutely nothing but piss and moan and shout empty rhetoric. It is also clear that their big haul in last November's general election, where they scored both houses of Congress and the White House, was completely unexpected and unforeseen even by them. You could tell by their stammering and "deer in the headlights" looks when they realized they suddenly had to... <gasp!> ... do something.

Since then, their stated goal of replacing Obamacare has been an utter and abysmal failure. They can't even agree among themselves what should be done. Meanwhile, the ACA isn't necessarily popular, but it is becoming accepted as being "just how it is". That's dangerous for the Reps. The Dems, for their part, have indeed been playing petty politics and have gleefully watched the Reps twist in the wind and display their mind-boggling incompetency, which is to be expected in today's political environment, albeit somewhat irresponsible in it's own way. So, here we are at today, Saturday, August 5, 2017, roughly half a year into the new Administration and the new Congress. What now?

Should the Dems be working on fixes to Obamacare, or just let it go like the Reps did? It'd never pass with the Reps in charge, but that's not the point. Go back to what I said above about using a good plan as a public campaign platform tool. A marketing tool, if you will.

It is no secret that the ACA has flaws. Serious flaws. President Obama himself said publicly last year that unfortunately "affordable" wasn't one of the results of the Affordable Care Act. Costs to the people are still going sky-high with no end in sight. That's something that needs to be addressed and fixed, if fixing over replacement is what you believe to be the better path. That's just one example of areas of the ACA that needs to be addressed, but I'll leave it at that so this doesn't get too long. You get the point, the ACA needs work.

The 2018 Mid-term elections are just over a year away. Congress always see-saws back and forth as both parties constantly succeed at getting cocky and screwing up their own positions of power, so if it's not 2018 it will happen eventually that the Dems will be back in power.

Are the Dems blowing an opportunity? Enough time and amusement has passed watching the Reps flail away. I believe, if the Dem Party were smart, they'd start huddling and work out a plan that addresses the things about the ADA that need fixing and present it to the people publicly and use it as a campaign tool.

The Dems already know how they want to fix Obamacare. They want to increase subsidies and bill them to the taxpayer or just add it to the 20 trillion dollar national debt that we already owe. That IS their plan. Backup plan is to tax the rich more.

 

[upsideguy]

So, the problem with this idea is that the Base will not accept anything that isn't "Single Payer", and the electorate has zero interest in paying the taxes that would accompany Single Payer.

I'm not certain your statement is correct. Has there been any credible polling on the acceptance of a single payer system? Moreover, you could have a single payer without necessarily raising taxes. Single payer does not have to be entirely underwritten by the government. There is no reason that persons could not be required to buy-in to the medicare system by paying market value.

Moreover, I am waiting for the politician(s) on each of the aisle to start doing the right thing and not worrying about being primaried from the party extremes. The electorate will reward those that reach across the aisle and get stuff done. This trying to run the country from a minority position just will not work in the long run and continues to weaken our country as it goes on.

 

[radcen]

We will never get single payer. It is a political impossibility in this country. Everyone just needs to get that through their thick heads.

Another thing everyone needs to get through their thick heads is that there not a free market healthcare system in any developed nation on earth. Necessary healthcare is the biggest market failure in the entire world's economy. Half the country would never be able to buy health insurance in a true free market because no insurer would sell it to them. If you are overweight, out of shape, don't eat well, then to a health insurer you present the level of risk that an alcoholic with 5 DUI's presents to an auto insurer. They would never sell you a policy if they didn't have to. Moreover, the older you get, the higher the risk you would be to them.

That is just on the insurance side. Now look at the provider side. If you are involved in a traumatic accident or have a heart attack, you could spend tens of thousands of dollars if not hundreds of thousands of dollars before you are even conscious again. If you were to get cancer, you are looking at 30k or more a month in chemo alone. Its not like buying a car either, you don't just get to say well that is too expensive, I will go home without buying your product or service. The choice is buy their product or service or die a horrible death. They kind of got you there.

I know, I know, I know...but that is why you should only have catastrophic insurance plans (this is based on the nonsense that health insurance could ever work like any other form of insurance). OK sure, I am not against high deductible catastrophic insurance plans coupled with a HSA. They can make a lot of financial sense for those that are younger and healthy. However, they are not going to curb over all healthcare costs because its not the routine care that is that expensive anyway. It is the catastrophic and chronic disease care that makes up the majority of health spending. One major surgery will cost you more than a lifetime of routine care. A few days stay in a hospital will easily cost you more than a couple of lifetimes worth of routine care. Point being, with a catastrophic plan, you might have more of an incentive to shop around for routine and ancillary care, but the expensive stuff that is driving up healthcare costs would still be paid by an insurer just like it is now and thus policies would still be very expensive.

If the left would get it out of their heads that we will ever get a single payer system, and if the right would get this magical thinking about "getting the government out of healthcare" would fix everything out of their thick heads, both sides could actually come together and build a better system than we have now.

Contrary to popular belief on the right, pre-Obamacare was NOT "free market". It was a heavily protectionist market... and still is, really... which is a big part of the problem. We haven't had anything resembling a true free market in healthcare in decades. Longer than most of us have been alive.

 

[radcen]

I'm not certain your statement is correct. Has there been any credible polling on the acceptance of a single payer system? Moreover, you could have a single payer without necessarily raising taxes. Single payer does not have to be entirely underwritten by the government. There is no reason that persons could not be required to buy-in to the medicare system by paying market value.

Moreover, I am waiting for the politician(s) on each of the aisle to start doing the right thing and not worrying about being primaried from the party extremes. The electorate will reward those that reach across the aisle and get stuff done. This trying to run the country from a minority position just will not work in the long run and continues to weaken our country as it goes on.

If we're going to do that, then why not raise taxes and make it "free" at the point of service? If nothing else it'd save me the hassle.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

So, the problem with this idea is that the Base will not accept anything that isn't "Single Payer", and the electorate has zero interest in paying the taxes that would accompany Single Payer.

The elephants in the room need to be recognized and removed. What makes the current system so impossible to "fix" is that there are powerful interests that profit greatly from it in its current form. You could see this at work when Medicare-D was formulated (by pharma lobbyists), and when Obama famously invited all of the 'stakeholders' in the current system to have a say on the makeup of the ACA.

If the leeches in the current system that add little or no value could be removed, the system could be reduced greatly in cost. This isn't going to happen with our lobbyist owned 2 party system.

 

[apdst]

Isn't there a bipartisan group working on fixing the ACA right now?

Bipartisan group floats ObamaCare fixes | TheHill

The hell of it is, if we could just infect the GOP with an ounce of pragmatism, the two sides could easily come together and fix the problems with it.

The people want it repealed, not fixed.

 

[radcen]

The elephants in the room need to be recognized and removed. What makes the current system so impossible to "fix" is that there are powerful interests that profit greatly from it in its current form. You could see this at work when Medicare-D was formulated (by pharma lobbyists), and when Obama famously invited all of the 'stakeholders' in the current system to have a say on the makeup of the ACA.

If the leeches in the current system that add little or no value could be removed, the system could be reduced greatly in cost. This isn't going to happen with our lobbyist owned 2 party system.

That's the protectionist market I talk about.

 

[apdst]

If we're going to do that, then why not raise taxes and make it "free" at the point of service? If nothing else it'd save me the hassle.

I pay too much taxes, already. That's what's wrong with that plan.

 

[Perotista]

ACA: Are the Dems blowing an opportunity?

Virtually the day it was signed the Reps have been calling for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare), at the very minimum, and replacement with something better, ideally. SEVEN YEARS went by, providing ample time to formulate something better. SEVEN YEARS!!! The Reps could have come up with a replacement or a fix and presented it to the people and used it as a campaign platform tool during that time.

But they didn't.

The Reps, it is now clear, did absolutely nothing but piss and moan and shout empty rhetoric. It is also clear that their big haul in last November's general election, where they scored both houses of Congress and the White House, was completely unexpected and unforeseen even by them. You could tell by their stammering and "deer in the headlights" looks when they realized they suddenly had to... <gasp!> ... do something.

Since then, their stated goal of replacing Obamacare has been an utter and abysmal failure. They can't even agree among themselves what should be done. Meanwhile, the ACA isn't necessarily popular, but it is becoming accepted as being "just how it is". That's dangerous for the Reps. The Dems, for their part, have indeed been playing petty politics and have gleefully watched the Reps twist in the wind and display their mind-boggling incompetency, which is to be expected in today's political environment, albeit somewhat irresponsible in it's own way. So, here we are at today, Saturday, August 5, 2017, roughly half a year into the new Administration and the new Congress. What now?

Should the Dems be working on fixes to Obamacare, or just let it go like the Reps did? It'd never pass with the Reps in charge, but that's not the point. Go back to what I said above about using a good plan as a public campaign platform tool. A marketing tool, if you will.

It is no secret that the ACA has flaws. Serious flaws. President Obama himself said publicly last year that unfortunately "affordable" wasn't one of the results of the Affordable Care Act. Costs to the people are still going sky-high with no end in sight. That's something that needs to be addressed and fixed, if fixing over replacement is what you believe to be the better path. That's just one example of areas of the ACA that needs to be addressed, but I'll leave it at that so this doesn't get too long. You get the point, the ACA needs work.

The 2018 Mid-term elections are just over a year away. Congress always see-saws back and forth as both parties constantly succeed at getting cocky and screwing up their own positions of power, so if it's not 2018 it will happen eventually that the Dems will be back in power.

Are the Dems blowing an opportunity? Enough time and amusement has passed watching the Reps flail away. I believe, if the Dem Party were smart, they'd start huddling and work out a plan that addresses the things about the ADA that need fixing and present it to the people publicly and use it as a campaign tool.

It took the Republicans, the AHCA or repeal and replace or repeal only. All worst for America as a whole than the ACA or Obamacare to make the ACA popular or what at the moment seem acceptable. The ACA finished 2016 with 40% of Americans in favor, 49% opposed. Then came the Republican versions, versions with an s. Today 47% favor the ACA, 42% oppose.

Should we look closer at the ACA numbers. 32% of all Americans say it has been a success, 34% a failure. 20% neither a success or failure with 12% still sitting on the fence. What about independents? Those who do not have a stake in or an ax to grind for or against the ACA, no political party to influence them. Independents view the ACA, 26% success, 31% failure with the rest falling into the neither a success or failure or sitting on the fence.

Even if a slight majority of Americans want to keep the ACA over the AHCA or any other shenanigans of the GOP, a plurality still thinks the ACA is a failure over a success. I would wager this time next year that there were be more people against the ACA than for much like 2016 if the GOP completely drops healthcare.

The Democrats can huddle all they want, there is a good possibility they can regain the House next year. But not the senate and Trump will still be president unless some unforeseen event happens. Then it would be Pence, someone whose character, persona and personality is much more suited for the presidency. There will be no chances at all to fix anything within the ACA at least until 2021.

 

[radcen]

It took the Republicans, the AHCA or repeal and replace or repeal only. All worst for America as a whole than the ACA or Obamacare to make the ACA popular or what at the moment seem acceptable. The ACA finished 2016 with 40% of Americans in favor, 49% opposed. Then came the Republican versions, versions with an s. Today 47% favor the ACA, 42% oppose.

Should we look closer at the ACA numbers. 32% of all Americans say it has been a success, 34% a failure. 20% neither a success or failure with 12% still sitting on the fence. What about independents? Those who do not have a stake in or an ax to grind for or against the ACA, no political party to influence them. Independents view the ACA, 26% success, 31% failure with the rest falling into the neither a success or failure or sitting on the fence.

Even if a slight majority of Americans want to keep the ACA over the AHCA or any other shenanigans of the GOP, a plurality still thinks the ACA is a failure over a success. I would wager this time next year that there were be more people against the ACA than for much like 2016 if the GOP completely drops healthcare.

The Democrats can huddle all they want, there is a good possibility they can regain the House next year. But not the senate and Trump will still be president unless some unforeseen event happens. Then it would be Pence, someone whose character, persona and personality is much more suited for the presidency. There will be no chances at all to fix anything within the ACA at least until 2021.

It seems the Rep's plans were so bad that some people started thinking the ACA wasn't so bad after all.

 

[upsideguy]

If we're going to do that, then why not raise taxes and make it "free" at the point of service? If nothing else it'd save me the hassle.

I was arguing with someone that said single payer meant you had to raise taxes by showing how you do not need to raise taxes..... so, taking issue with my example with "why not raise taxes"... well, oy vey!

 

[Mach]

It doesn't help that, from outward appearances, the Dems seem to be sitting on their thumbs believing business as usual is their winning strategy.

To your last point, may be. Dems may also be looking across the isle and seeing the walking catastrophe of epic proportions: aka team-Trump, and the do-nothing Republican congress, and figure that while they aren't the prettiest girl in the world, they are without a doubt the prettiest girl in the room. Even while sitting on their thumbs.

Maybe they are rationalizing it that way to get out of work, I know I do that sometimes.
(que: I feel pretty, Oh, so pretty,)

It seems the Rep's plans were so bad that some people started thinking the ACA wasn't so bad after all.

Good point.
It's those situations where the right-wing propaganda gets diminished when people have to actually make a real choice about real legislation, and they realize for just a moment, some of them, what makes the most sense.

 

[Phys251]

So, the problem with this idea is that the Base will not accept anything that isn't "Single Payer", and the electorate has zero interest in paying the taxes that would accompany Single Payer.

I wouldn't say that the entire base wants single-payer, and we certainly don't all want it right now. But there is a loud minority of Americans who do.

 

[Phys251]

ACA: Are the Dems blowing an opportunity?

Virtually the day it was signed the Reps have been calling for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare), at the very minimum, and replacement with something better, ideally. SEVEN YEARS went by, providing ample time to formulate something better. SEVEN YEARS!!! The Reps could have come up with a replacement or a fix and presented it to the people and used it as a campaign platform tool during that time.

But they didn't.

The Reps, it is now clear, did absolutely nothing but piss and moan and shout empty rhetoric. It is also clear that their big haul in last November's general election, where they scored both houses of Congress and the White House, was completely unexpected and unforeseen even by them. You could tell by their stammering and "deer in the headlights" looks when they realized they suddenly had to... <gasp!> ... do something.

Since then, their stated goal of replacing Obamacare has been an utter and abysmal failure. They can't even agree among themselves what should be done. Meanwhile, the ACA isn't necessarily popular, but it is becoming accepted as being "just how it is". That's dangerous for the Reps. The Dems, for their part, have indeed been playing petty politics and have gleefully watched the Reps twist in the wind and display their mind-boggling incompetency, which is to be expected in today's political environment, albeit somewhat irresponsible in it's own way. So, here we are at today, Saturday, August 5, 2017, roughly half a year into the new Administration and the new Congress. What now?

Should the Dems be working on fixes to Obamacare, or just let it go like the Reps did? It'd never pass with the Reps in charge, but that's not the point. Go back to what I said above about using a good plan as a public campaign platform tool. A marketing tool, if you will.

It is no secret that the ACA has flaws. Serious flaws. President Obama himself said publicly last year that unfortunately "affordable" wasn't one of the results of the Affordable Care Act. Costs to the people are still going sky-high with no end in sight. That's something that needs to be addressed and fixed, if fixing over replacement is what you believe to be the better path. That's just one example of areas of the ACA that needs to be addressed, but I'll leave it at that so this doesn't get too long. You get the point, the ACA needs work.

The 2018 Mid-term elections are just over a year away. Congress always see-saws back and forth as both parties constantly succeed at getting cocky and screwing up their own positions of power, so if it's not 2018 it will happen eventually that the Dems will be back in power.

Are the Dems blowing an opportunity? Enough time and amusement has passed watching the Reps flail away. I believe, if the Dem Party were smart, they'd start huddling and work out a plan that addresses the things about the ADA that need fixing and present it to the people publicly and use it as a campaign tool.

Exactly what are the Democrats supposed to do in the short run other than loudly complain? The Republicans control Congress and the White House. Whatever happens in the next year-and-a-half is on the Republicans.

 

[radcen]

Exactly what are the Democrats supposed to do in the short run other than loudly complain? The Republicans control Congress and the White House. Whatever happens in the next year-and-a-half is on the Republicans.

You missed the part about it being for future elections. Be ready, not blindsided like the Reps were this time.

 

[Phys251]

You missed the part about it being for future elections. Be ready, not blindsided like the Reps were this time.

So you are talking about the Dems' and their political platforms for future elections, not what they should pass in Congress right now, correct?

 

[cpwill]

I wouldn't say that the entire base wants single-payer, and we certainly don't all want it right now. But there is a loud minority of Americans who do.

And they will punish Democrats for saying anything else.

Which is why, when Single Payer was put up for a vote, Democrats voted Present.