Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Politics and World Leaders => Topic started by: countrychurch on March 04, 2017, 04:39:49 PM
-
Confusion on Repeal/Replace—Paul/Cruz/Lee: No Obamacare Lite...
[I posted this somewhere else but maybe it belongs here?]
I don't fully understand the repeal/replace process going on regarding Obamacare, although I understand more and more as time goes on. Maybe Congress could say the same thing?
I listen to Paul Ryan and he makes a lot of sense, & I start to understand better. Then along comes Rand Paul (R-KY) who, along with Cruz (R-TX) and Lee (R-UT) do not appreciate the way the Rs are essentially doing the same thing as O-care did: namely, “entitlements” (like healthcare tax credits).
I'm sure I am not the only one out there who is confused.
I never did understand the healthcare tax credit thing. It has never been explained on any of the news shows I’ve watched. I mean, no one ever explains exactly how that works!
The only thing I am not confused about is that we don't need any more entitlements, don't even need a lot of the ones we have, or at least they need a do-over. There is so much waste in gov spending. But for now, O-care is the #1 entitlement that should be gotten rid of.
Here's another thing I am not confused about:
Ted Cruz can be trusted
Lee is apparently trustworthy
Paul looks trustworthy, usually
But Paul Ryan seems trustworthy also..
Confusing! Maybe if everyone here posted what he or she knows about r and r, we could begin to put the puzzle pcs together
-
I was for the new healthcare bill but now after listening to Meadows and Rand Paul, I'm not, at least not enthusiastically.
If they say it is Obmacare LIte, who are we who are not in Congress to question them? These are the people who are true conservatives, who truly want to get rid of Ocare
what troubles me is what Meadows said, that in the very first line of this bill are the words.. .something about Ocare and then the word: AMEND comes immediately after!
No... absolutely NOT!
Why don't they just REPEAL and then worry later about what comes next?
-
Why would it be filibustered if the across-state-lines aspect were in the bill?
I sometimes think Congress doesn't exactly want us to know their rules
Ryan was explaining things today and it was interesting and i began to understand better. But it seemed like he was leaving out certain information.. seemed like a pc of the puzzle was missing.
Do they teach this kind of thing in college... poli-sci?
-
Here is more on the new healthcare bill, (same as the old healthcare bill ?) posted elsewhere
Finally—someone [Dana Loesch] speaks exactly what I have been thinking.. (addresses what I have been wondering about, etc) re this new healthcare bill.
I trust Dana L. b/c for one thing, she is a true conservative.. hey, just like Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan, Rand Paul and Mark Meadows (NC)!
who are (along w/ Marco Rubio and others) against the “new” healthcare plan,
which really does appear to be “Obamacare Lite”
Some Republicans in Congress are trying to shove this down our throats, saying such disingenuous things as (paraphrase) “It is this or Obamacare, those are the only 2 options.”
Gee... that sounds familiar, doesn't it? (limited options)
Why don't they just get rid of Obamacare outright, or as Trump suggested, let it fail on it's own, which I say has already happened.. then go from there, something I have been advocating (despite confusion about a few things) for a long time?
The tax credits in this plan go to the insurance companies! Oh right, we really need to give insurance companies more money and power, don't we? I don't have a problem with them earning a profit, even a considerable profit, but good grief...
I smell: lobbyists.. special interests... politicians...
I smell swamp
As Dana Loesch said, we the People are being “given the middle finger”!
I was right all along to trust Ted Cruz & Co, even while not always fully understanding (all that I now understand). Of course only God understands all, but I feel I have studied this issue more than most “everyday Americans”
I still wonder why it is that the new healthcare bill is filibuster-proof as is, yet if they were to add the across-state-lines aspect, that could be filibustered? Why is that? I feel we are not being told all the details. Frankly, I feel we are being lied to again, but I cannot prove it..
In any case, I do know one thing, after listening to Paul Ryan “explain” the new bill (explain what he wanted to explain, that is):
My first reaction was that he was (came across as) disingenuous at the end of the presentation, when he essentially said that we have no other options.
That was a serious red flag 2 me.. and presumably, I speak for many others.
As Tom Cotton said (paraphrase) Let's take the time to do it right
I thought “few options” was an Obamacare thing.. a Democrat thing, a liberal thing.. an un-American thing?
I say limited options is usually a scary thing
Get outa here with that