Jump to content

US Politics: Kill (the) Bill


Kalbear

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Nothing is adding up right now which makes it really difficult to game out what's going on. 

I don't see it. This was a terrible piece of legislation that was going to piss off everybody, even the base down the road. I think even the dummies sussed this out. They might be too stupid to craft a decent bit of legislation, but they can recognize a toxic piece of shit when they smell one. I don't think anyone with half a brain would sign this. It was a career killer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's the benefit of taking every side of every issue. You can inevitably claim you were right no matter what.

I can see your point, but don't entirely agree. :)

 

On a serious note, I would be very surprised if Trump's spin on this isn't something along the lines of 'this is what I get for trying to compromise with the Democrats. Not going to make that mistake again.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Nothing is adding up right now which makes it really difficult to game out what's going on. The one thing I do feel confident in saying is that Ryan really did want this to pass. As for creating a wedge with the WH, I've been wondering who would benefit more if the bill failed? Would that make Congressional Republicans stronger or weaker? I really have no idea.

I think the thing that is missing is the explanation behind the urgency of the vote. 

A lot of people were confused why this  was being rushed through with so little vetting and analysis to the point where people today were going to be voting on a version of the bill that almost no one had read. As an example, a late change would have caused 7 million veterans to lose their credits for healthcare due to a mistake. Why are they going so fast on this?

Well, because of reconciliation. They can only do one reconciliation per fiscal year, and that deadline ends in June. In order to get that done they have to pass a bill in the House, get it through in the senate, and then pass that - which takes a lot of time. They really had to get this done even earlier this year in order for it to work, but this was basically about as late as they could do as they still have to deal with the budget ceiling this fiscal year.

And they want to do it this year, because next year they want to use reconciliation to pass their tax reform, and that's a far bigger priority for them. 

So basically it was now or never for repeal, and they wanted to at least have the option to say they tried. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I think the thing that is missing is the explanation behind the urgency of the vote. 

A lot of people were confused why this  was being rushed through with so little vetting and analysis to the point where people today were going to be voting on a version of the bill that almost no one had read. As an example, a late change would have caused 7 million veterans to lose their credits for healthcare due to a mistake. Why are they going so fast on this?

Well, because of reconciliation. They can only do one reconciliation per fiscal year, and that deadline ends in June. In order to get that done they have to pass a bill in the House, get it through in the senate, and then pass that - which takes a lot of time. They really had to get this done even earlier this year in order for it to work, but this was basically about as late as they could do as they still have to deal with the budget ceiling this fiscal year.

And they want to do it this year, because next year they want to use reconciliation to pass their tax reform, and that's a far bigger priority for them. 

So basically it was now or never for repeal, and they wanted to at least have the option to say they tried. 

10 years of cursing and gnashing of teeth. 10 weeks (?) of actually attempting to draw up viable legislation. Fucking Clownshoes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I think the thing that is missing is the explanation behind the urgency of the vote. 

A lot of people were confused why this  was being rushed through with so little vetting and analysis to the point where people today were going to be voting on a version of the bill that almost no one had read. As an example, a late change would have caused 7 million veterans to lose their credits for healthcare due to a mistake. Why are they going so fast on this?

Well, because of reconciliation. They can only do one reconciliation per fiscal year, and that deadline ends in June. In order to get that done they have to pass a bill in the House, get it through in the senate, and then pass that - which takes a lot of time. They really had to get this done even earlier this year in order for it to work, but this was basically about as late as they could do as they still have to deal with the budget ceiling this fiscal year.

And they want to do it this year, because next year they want to use reconciliation to pass their tax reform, and that's a far bigger priority for them. 

So basically it was now or never for repeal, and they wanted to at least have the option to say they tried. 

Why didn't they use the first reconciliation for trickle-down? Is it considered to be a steeper climb?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, James Arryn said:

Why didn't they use the first reconciliation for trickle-down? Is it considered to be a steeper climb?

Mostly because of their promises, I think. It also makes the next set of tax cuts a lot easier to do. 

Ryan basically had his plan of doing this first, then taxes second, and told Trump this was the only way to do it and you had to do the health stuff first. Ryan was lying, but Trump bought it (you can see this in some of his tweets and comments). The trickle down bullshit also is going to be a lot more complex than simply repealing certain things - or at least that's what people think. They haven't started working on those tax plans either, and they'll still need to figure out how to balance costs out. With the 'savings' from the health repeal they'd have more latitude. They won't have that now. 

Essentially all their plans revolve around being able to do things with zero input or consideration from Democrats. That is their governing style, now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, you can't make tax cuts permanent under reconciliation unless you can claim they won't add to the deficit. That's why the Bush tax cuts were set to expire after ten years and Obama was able to let some of them die (after a two-year extension). The AHCA reductions in government spending were part of the shell game to make new cuts seem revenue-neutral. So that's an add-on benefit to this, although they'll probably still find some way to fudge the numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Why didn't they use the first reconciliation for trickle-down? Is it considered to be a steeper climb?

The Obamacare repeal had to be done first to make the tax cuts for the rich near permanent, once they are enacted. Tax cuts through reconciliation expire after ten years, just like the Bush tax cuts did. The revenue from the Obamacare repeal would make it so that the tax cuts would not expire and would take 60 Senate votes to remove, which the Dems may not have again for a very long time.

Well, I guess Paul Ryan is not a Randian superman. Looks like he needs to be put into the labor force so he can build some character.

 

Why Obamacare Defeated Trumpcare

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/why-obamacare-defeated-trumpcare.html


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/bannon-health-care-bill.html

Why Steve Bannon Might Be the Winner of the GOP’s Health-Care Civil War


Is Political Gravity Finally Sinking Donald Trump?

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/sullivan-is-political-gravity-finally-sinking-donald-trump.html


What’s Next for the GOP on Health Care? Apparently Nothing at All

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/what-next-for-gop-on-health-care-apparently-nothing-at-all.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Nothing is adding up right now which makes it really difficult to game out what's going on. The one thing I do feel confident in saying is that Ryan really did want this to pass. As for creating a wedge with the WH, I've been wondering who would benefit more if the bill failed? Would that make Congressional Republicans stronger or weaker? I really have no idea.

yeah.  shoudl be interesting to see how it plays out.

49 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Wouldn't you? I'd want one between myself and Ryan as well. 

Definitely. i think there is no question they are looking and that they have no real love for Trump.  The question is, is this part of that.

No idea really.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Brendan Moody said:

The numbers for the Freedom Caucus, whose opposition to the bill is what gave moderates the cover to oppose it and started the cascade that seems to have killed, it are even worse: I believe only three or four of 30-odd members were in Congress pre-2006. Their experience is in grandstanding obstructionism, not compromise-based governance. Ryan and Trump gave them big concessions on EHB; instead of agreeing they demanded the rest of what they wanted.

Democrats who foolishly believe that they should compromise with republicans on Gorsuch to get what democrats want in some nebulous and undefined future judicial goal should keep the bolded in the front of their minds. Republicans will behave EXACTLY the same over Gorsuch, compromise with them now and they will not agree, instead they will come back with greater and more severe demands encompassing what they want.

Compromising on Gorsuch does not guarantee the republicans will happily make a future compromise on ginsberg or kennedy's replacement, compromising on Gorsuch GUARANTEES republicans will demand replacement(s) even MORE conservative than Gorsuch for said replacements.

This is what they do to their own party, it is a total certainty they will do it to the opposition.

They are behaving very basic prisoner's dilemma here. one side compromising in the face of the other side's obstruction does not result in future mutually beneficial compromise.

The winning strategy in this instance of prisoner's dilemma is tit-for-tat. republicans obstructed on Garland. Democrats go tit-for-tat and obstruct on Gorsuch. Outcome, a Kennedy esque justice consensus pick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

The winning strategy in prisoner's delimma is tit-for-tat. republicans obstructed on Garland. Democrats go tit-for-tat and obstruct on Gorsuch. Outcome, a Kennedy esque justice consensus pick.

I agree. The norms around SC nominations were pissed on and destroyed already. Pretending they are still there is just an invitation for Republicans to steal another nomination. I don't think the Democrat party being weak right now is a good excuse either. Democrats tend to control more Senate seats. If that stops being the case, then we are screwed anyway long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Brendan Moody said:

Yeah, you can't make tax cuts permanent under reconciliation unless you can claim they won't add to the deficit. That's why the Bush tax cuts were set to expire after ten years and Obama was able to let them die. The AHCA reductions in government spending were part of the shell game to make new cuts seem revenue-neutral. So that's an add-on benefit to this, although they'll probably still find some way to fudge the numbers.

Remember, the greatest Tax policy victory of the last twenty years for Republicans was done by Obama/Biden making the country-destroying-Bush-tax-cuts permanent. A compromise democrats made: capitulation to the permanent victory of primary Republican goals in exchange for a temporary achievement of a tertiary Democrat goal (it was such a great and equal bargain!)

but democrats knew that republicans would never want to lower taxes further, that's why decided to give the republicans their total victory.

Oh whats that? once made permanent Republicans immediately began demanding additional tax cuts? oh my? who could have seen that coming? (answer: every single person on the planet that isn't a blinkered democrat living in the  DC bubble).

If we had let them all expire, we'd have almost no budget deficit, and the tax cuts they'd now be trying to pass would be similar to the levels of the country-destroying-bush-tax-cuts. Instead they're going to try and push beyond that disastrous floor. Again, shocker.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A large part of this failure -- there are many large and moving parts to the failure, of course -- is that this set of clowns sitting in D.C. have neither clues nor experience and haven't wanted to learn the system by which legislation gets written, passed and executed. This includes at the very highest level, the Oval Office.

After all these years of non-governing, only obstruction -- well, we have this problem in our state legislature as well. There are no seasoned vets who know the process and how to do things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Cautionary note: pussygate, giant wall, khans, etc. 

Trump's approval amongst Republicans hasn't moved much if at all during his term so far; Gallup has it exactly where it was at the end of January. I know that doesn't account for this latest gaffe, but my point is that Republicans don't seem to be reacting to Trump's administration with any real concern. 

Once you get people to ignore anything negative about you because the bad media/courts/system is out to get you, normal rules cease to apply. So don't be surprised if many Republican supporters buy that this is the Democrats fault or Bama's fault or Islamic Mexicans fault.

 

The echo chamber phenomenon is certainly in full effect now. However, I'd be very surprised if this doesn't cause a further slip in Trump's approval over the next days. This hits him on a new front, which is his strongman image. There's also the whole issue of him going up against the working class with the AHCA, which might only come into full effect now that the matter is settled for the time being. And the issue of going up against the Freedom Caucus, which, if you're a Breitbarter, is exactly what Trump should not do. Those two factors aside, I definitely think we'll see some further disapproval over Dear Leader failing at his first negotiation adventure.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, losing really hurts his image as the maverick coming into politics and being able to change up everything. A lot of his supporters didn't WANT him to change this, mind you, but losing puts a big chink in that armor.

I don't think it'll hurt him absurdly; he'll blame democrats and Ryan and claim this was his plan all along, and move on to things he cares about more like taxes and jobs and immigration. But for a lot of people it'll be hard to directly fight the idea that yesterday he was telling everyone to vote on it and how great it was - and today it failed to even come to a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Also, losing really hurts his image as the maverick coming into politics and being able to change up everything. A lot of his supporters didn't WANT him to change this, mind you, but losing puts a big chink in that armor.

I don't think it'll hurt him absurdly; he'll blame democrats and Ryan and claim this was his plan all along, and move on to things he cares about more like taxes and jobs and immigration. But for a lot of people it'll be hard to directly fight the idea that yesterday he was telling everyone to vote on it and how great it was - and today it failed to even come to a vote.

I mean Jesus, when even Drudge has a picture of the Hindenburg up front and "NEW HEALTH BILL FAILURE HUMILIATES TRUMP, CONGRESS" as a headline, you know you've disappointed some tinfoilers out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, denstorebog said:

I mean Jesus, when even Drudge has a picture of the Hindenburg up front and "NEW HEALTH BILL FAILURE HUMILIATES TRUMP, CONGRESS" as a headline, you know you've disappointed some tinfoilers out there.

We should remember that this is not politics as usual, though.

 

It's possible you're right, but I think it's premature to start speculating about the degree of fallout from this at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

We should remember that this is not politics as usual, though.

 

It's possible you're right, but I think it's premature to start speculating about the degree of fallout from this at this point.

Absolutely. I'm not speculating on the long-term implications, only the immediate reaction in the polls over the next few days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...