Healthcare Reform Thread II

[Drake Tungsten]

Very impressive response.

[Ramo]

It thought so. It succinctly addresses the convoluted reasoning I was responding to (as if the doc fix being originally included in the House bill is supposed to have some bearing on whether the SGR is fiction).

[Drake Tungsten]

I don't see what's so convoluted about saying that it's dishonest for Congress to use Medicare savings to make healthcare reform look fiscally responsible while ignoring Medicare expenditures that would make healthcare reform look fiscally irresponsible.

[Ramo]

Because those Medicare "expenditures" would happen regardless of whether reform is passed. If you're accounting for the cost of reform, it doesn't make sense to include stopping the SGR when stopping the SGR occurs under any scenario.

[Drake Tungsten]

Because those Medicare "expenditures" would happen regardless of whether reform is passed.

This is a reason why said expenditures should be accounted for, not why they shouldn't. The CBO scoring assumes that the doc fix won't be implemented, which even you admit is bull****. You rightfully call the SGR a "fiction", yet you're perfectly fine with the CBO treating this fiction as a reality when scoring the healthcare reform bill. Your argument makes no sense.

[Ramo]

Ending the fiction means adding a cost of $200 billion/10 years to whatever mechanism you use to end the fiction. You can attach it to the defense appropriations bill. That doesn't mean Afghanistan magically becomes $200 billion more expensive.

The fictional nature of the SGR is unrelated to the coverage expansions, the insurance exchanges, the excise tax, the payroll tax, the Medicare commision and pilot programs, Medicare Advantage reform, etc., etc., etc. The net cost of the components of reform are sum of the net costs of each individual component, not the sum plus $200 billion.

[Drake Tungsten]

You can attach it to the defense appropriations bill. That doesn't mean Afghanistan magically becomes $200 billion more expensive.

Yes, this is a quality analogy.

How stupid of me to hope that Congress would include all the costs of its healthcare proposals in its healthcare reform bill, particularly costs that were already included in the bill before the Dems in Congress decided an honest accounting of those costs wasn't making their healthcare bill look like a good idea.

[Ramo]

Ok, we're back to your convoluted argument. See above.

[Drake Tungsten]

You were a much less pathetic poster when Bush was in power. Seeing you shill for the Democrats like this is just sad...

[MrFun]

Hypocrisy knows no boundaries - some of same Democrats who are rationalizing the "deem and pass" method now, blasted some Republicans who wanted to do same thing for their agenda in the past.

[Drake Tungsten]

Obama also defended the importance of the filibuster while a Senator before blasting it as President. Who cares? All politicians are hypocrites.

[MrFun]

Hence my phrase, "hypocrisy knows no boundaries" (not exclusive to one party).


Wouldn't it better if our country had a third, VIABLE political party?

[Boris Godunov]

Hypocrisy knows no boundaries - some of same Democrats who are rationalizing the "deem and pass" method now, blasted some Republicans who wanted to do same thing for their agenda in the past.

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules. [Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 6/19/06]

"Deem and pass" is a common procedure used by both parties, it's constitutional (Even Eric Cantor admitted so today), so ANYONE complaining about it is just doing so for political purposes.

[MrFun]

I know, Boris. But even if it's commonly used, its justification is questionable.

[Hauldren Collider]

Deem and pass hasn't been used for a trillion dollar bill before. And it's not clear if it's constitutional or ever was. It's simply never been challenged.