US politics 2016: I can see Russia from my White House

[IheartIheartTesla]

But not China.

Here's some depressing news from my home state:

Quote

Broken polling machines may have put vote counts in question in more than half of Detroit’s precincts and nearly one-third of surrounding Wayne County, possibly throwing the Michigan recount into chaos.

 

[SkynJay]

I saw the way to sneak through Garland and immediately had the same thought as Alteron(spelling?).

Dems declaring war like this would almost certainly lead to the GOP increasing the bench by two.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Yeah it sounds like a terrible idea, and it would give legitimacy to any outlandish stunts Republicans would try to pull. 

[The guy from the Vale]

Well, on the other hand, Republicans are already pulling outlandish stunts like not holding hearings for a candidate for almost a year, and they are getting electorally rewarded for that insanity.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

Well, on the other hand, Republicans are already pulling outlandish stunts like not holding hearings for a candidate for almost a year, and they are getting electorally rewarded for that insanity.

True, but it could always get worse, and I can live with Democrats having to suffer some nonsense if it preserves the filibuster. 

As far as being rewarded electorally, it is kind of disturbing that the people gave unilateral power to the party that's broken Washington when that was arguably the biggest complaint during this electoral cycle. 

[SkynJay]

1 hour ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

Well, on the other hand, Republicans are already pulling outlandish stunts like not holding hearings for a candidate for almost a year, and they are getting electorally rewarded for that insanity.

True, but the Dems have to deal with reality too.  

If it was me I would refuse to hold a vote on a nominee because the people of the United States deserve to have their justices picked by a president who actually can win the popular vote.  

What's another 4 years after all?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I think the filibuster for Judicial nominees is toast.  I'll be surprised if it remains standing after the new Congress and President are sworn into office.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 Member when Fake News used to be fun?

 

I member...

http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2014/02/25/weekend-updates/norm-macdonald.w750.h560.2x.jpg

 

 

 

[Commodore]

Quote

On January 3, 2017, Democrats will hold the majority in the Senate for a few minutes, until the newly-elected Senators are sworn in. Biden could convene the Senate in those few minutes and call for a vote. The majority could then suspend the rules and vote in Merrick Garland.

The 20th Amendment says the successor's term begins when the outgoing term ends, there is no gap when Dems would have the majority. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twentieth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Quote

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

 

[Rhom]

Changing the subject a bit... wanted to throw in a bit of a "How the fuck is this possible?" healthcare dilemma we find our family in.

Here's the situation for my family of four.  My step-daughter is covered under her dad's Tricare.  I own a business with just two other employees currently, my health insurance is a plan through Anthem that I have had for eight years.  (Pre-Obamacare)  I am grandfathered in under old plans, so its actually quite affordable in the scheme of things.  My wife works for a small company that does not provide insurance.  She and my son are on an individual plan also through Anthem.  She originally obtained it through Kentucky's online marketplace Kynect; but that was a damn bureaucratic disaster and she left the exchange to purchase a plan on the open market last year.

Renewal time is coming up and she has to choose a plan before December 15.  The only insurer offering policies in my county (and 52 others across the state) is Anthem.  ZERO OTHER INSURERS ARE SELLING POLICIES.  Furthermore, Anthem is no longer offering the PPO that she has always had before.  Her only option for purchasing healthcare as an individual is an HMO offered by Anthem.

She has been diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis since she was in third grade.  She has had her current rheumatologist for over ten years and is the first doctor in her life to really effectively manage the condition.  This doctor's practice does not participate in any HMO plans and upon asking last week, we were told today that they will not be adding any.

So we went from having multiple options in insurance companies with various types of plans to choose from, down to essentially one company for a third of the entire state.  So much for "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor..."

I have looked into the option of getting a group PPO established for my practice, but unfortunately the rules there require at least two non-related individuals being on the plan.  Both of my current staff are younger than 25 and have better health options through their parents' plans.

I know that this thread mainly bashes Republicans, but I will say that for me... the dismantling of the Affordable Care Act cannot come fast enough.

[Dr. Pepper]

14 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Changing the subject a bit... wanted to throw in a bit of a "How the fuck is this possible?" healthcare dilemma we find our family in.

Here's the situation for my family of four.  My step-daughter is covered under her dad's Tricare.  I own a business with just two other employees currently, my health insurance is a plan through Anthem that I have had for eight years.  (Pre-Obamacare)  I am grandfathered in under old plans, so its actually quite affordable in the scheme of things.  My wife works for a small company that does not provide insurance.  She and my son are on an individual plan also through Anthem.  She originally obtained it through Kentucky's online marketplace Kynect; but that was a damn bureaucratic disaster and she left the exchange to purchase a plan on the open market last year.

Renewal time is coming up and she has to choose a plan before December 15.  The only insurer offering policies in my county (and 52 others across the state) is Anthem.  ZERO OTHER INSURERS ARE SELLING POLICIES.  Furthermore, Anthem is no longer offering the PPO that she has always had before.  Her only option for purchasing healthcare as an individual is an HMO offered by Anthem.

She has been diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis since she was in third grade.  She has had her current rheumatologist for over ten years and is the first doctor in her life to really effectively manage the condition.  This doctor's practice does not participate in any HMO plans and upon asking last week, we were told today that they will not be adding any.

So we went from having multiple options in insurance companies with various types of plans to choose from, down to essentially one company for a third of the entire state.  So much for "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor..."

I have looked into the option of getting a group PPO established for my practice, but unfortunately the rules there require at least two non-related individuals being on the plan.  Both of my current staff are younger than 25 and have better health options through their parents' plans.

I know that this thread mainly bashes Republicans, but I will say that for me... the dismantling of the Affordable Care Act cannot come fast enough.

Your wife has a pre-existing condition.  Dismantling the ACA means she'll have a much much harder time getting insurance than even now and it will probably be much more expensive.  

[Rhom]

Just now, Dr. Pepper said:

Your wife has a pre-existing condition.  Dismantling the ACA means she'll have a much much harder time getting insurance than even now and it will probably be much more expensive.  

Every possible replacement plan I have seen allows for continuity of coverage.  Basically, as long as you don't have any lapses in coverage you are fine.

Which is how it always was before the ACA.

[MerenthaClone]

15 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Every possible replacement plan I have seen allows for continuity of coverage.  Basically, as long as you don't have any lapses in coverage you are fine.

Which is how it always was before the ACA.

Hope you don't get dropped by your insurance company at any point, then.  

[Rhom]

2 minutes ago, MerenthaClone said:

Hope you don't get dropped by your insurance company at any point, then.  

There's always room for COBRA coverage.  Come on people.  Don't throw fictional boogeymen at a real problem.  My wife has been diagnosed for almost three and a half decades.  She has gone through multiple work coverages and individual coverages.   We know how that part works.

What we've never dealt with is having ZERO options.

[Mexal]

1 hour ago, Commodore said:

The 20th Amendment says the successor's term begins when the outgoing term ends, there is no gap when Dems would have the majority. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twentieth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

 

I think the point they were making is the term doesn't begin until they are sworn in. So there is a few minutes there while they're swearing people in that they could try to make it work. It'll never happen in a million years, just thought it was interesting.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

28 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I think the point they were making is the term doesn't begin until they are sworn in. So there is a few minutes there while they're swearing people in that they could try to make it work. It'll never happen in a million years, just thought it was interesting.

 

It's a shame that it won't happen. What better way would there be to start the Trump era than a brawl on the floor of the Senate?

(pictures McConnell and Schumer slap fighting)

[IamMe90]

44 minutes ago, Rhom said:

There's always room for COBRA coverage.  Come on people.  Don't throw fictional boogeymen at a real problem.  My wife has been diagnosed for almost three and a half decades.  She has gone through multiple work coverages and individual coverages.   We know how that part works.

What we've never dealt with is having ZERO options.

Lol 'cause COBRA coverage is so great. Maybe if you make > $75,000 it's tenable. For those of us who aren't, there's no way COBRA coverage is a viable option. 

[Rhom]

1 minute ago, IamMe90 said:

Lol 'cause COBRA coverage is so great. Maybe if you make > $75,000 it's tenable. For those of us who aren't, there's no way COBRA coverage is a viable option. 

Full disclosure, she does.  However, its never been meant to be a long term option.

The point of the entire discussion though is the complete lack of options that are being offered just six years into this thing.

[IamMe90]

2 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Full disclosure, she does.  However, its never been meant to be a long term option.

The point of the entire discussion though is the complete lack of options that are being offered just six years into this thing.

It's not even a temporary option for me and others, really.

As far as your situation, that sounds shitty, although it's hard for me to know exactly what wrong with her previous health plan through the exchange from your vague description.I have a preexisting condition (type 1 diabetes) which necessitates a lot of costly regular prescriptions, and I've just gotten off my mother's plan, as I turned 26 this year. I've gotten on a plan through the exchange with a $314 monthly premium and a $1,200 deductible with no prescription drug deductible, and while believe me, it's not by any stretch an ideal situation, it's certainly more affordable than COBRA. On the other hand, there's a good chance I wouldn't be able to find insurance period if they ACA weren't passed, because of my diabetes; I make too much money between my two part time jobs to qualify for Medicaid.

The ACA needs to be fixed, absolutely, but dismantled? If I weren't pretty much guaranteed to be landing a full time position at the law firm for which I currently work in half a year, I'd be terrified. Thankfully, I'll be able to stay on this plan for at least the six months' down time.                                                                                      

[Mexal]

14 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Full disclosure, she does.  However, its never been meant to be a long term option.

The point of the entire discussion though is the complete lack of options that are being offered just six years into this thing.

The issues with the ACA are long because an imperfect law was passed to get people health insurance. But instead of fixing the issue, Congress tried to repeal the entire law 55 times with no plan to replace. So yea, I get your point and agree with you that the lack of choice is a massive issue with the ACA right now and lots of people are being screwed by the ACA, especially small businesses. I think the blame lies less with ACA itself and more with Congress for ignoring them.