I think you could drop the “what this bill does.”
Now wait.
If Murkowski votes to remove ACA, Alaska gets to keep ACA. Alaska is safe and the rest of the country is screwed.
If Murkowski votes to keep ACA, Alaska gets to keep ACA. Alaska is safe and the rest of the country gets to keep ACA too.
Ummm…She would do this why? Make friends in congress? Take the blame when millions lose their insurance? What?
Koch money.
Could you explain that a little bit?
This link provided earlier in this thread by jsgoddess explains.
Ah thanks. All for one and all for me.
I’ll never understand the mindset of someone that has billions, thinks they need more.
Not to worry! Once we all lose health care and the ultra-rich get their $1.5 TRILLION tax cut, the economy will skyrocket and hundred dollar bills will float down to us all, along with pixie dust, which we can use to FLY. I can’t wait!
I’ve got my Skittle-shitting unicorn all picked out. :rolleyes:
I get the feeling this version will pass. They’re going to rig this fucking thing so badly that no matter how badly people in Trump country get fucked, Alaska and Arizona and a handful of other states in flyover country will get the government goodies that they senators in these states would be out of their minds NOT to sign it. Again, all of you who sat out elections all these years, all of you independents, all you Trumpists, Bernie Bros, and whatever…you voted for this shit. Enjoy the recession that will happen within the next 6-9 months. It’ll be hard, and lengthy. Think of it as the big congressional cosmic cock that fucks you in the ass - along with tens of millions of other your fellow countrymen.
As for Murkowski:
Option #1) She votes for the bill, gets in good with McConnell and the POTUS, gets to tell her constituents just how hard she is fighting for them, gets plum committee assignments and more pork to make her constituents even happier and reestablishes her Republican bona fides without having to actually change anything in her state
Option #2) She votes against the bill, continues to piss off her party, gets blamed by the party for any rising health care costs in her state, and gets primaried at election time (and didn’t she actually get primaried the last time and have to run as a write-in candidate?) and gets basically the exact same deal for her state.
Gee, I wonder which option she’ll take.
True, but she was quoted in June as saying:
(Towards the bottom of the article)
It strikes me that the idea is to pass this stinker of a bill, to satisfy their donors, and then blame the states when the whole thing goes tits-up within a year or two. Win-win!
I’m not sure how worried she is about a primary, though. She’s not up again until 2022, and she’s now won two terms in a row while having a lot of (maybe even most) Republicans vote for someone else. (2010 was her write-in campaign. In 2016, she was the Republican nominee, but the guy who beat her in the 2010 primary ran as a Libertarian and got 29% of the vote.)
Medicaid directors from all 50 states are against Graham-Cassidy.
The letter argues, among other things, that few states can have their systems ready by 2020.
No kidding.
Now, just remember - the directors from ALL fifty states! Arkansas agreeing with California, Texas with New York…mass hysteria!
PDF link to the NAMD’s letter.
She ran as a write in for a state-wide election and SHE WON. That’s a big deal. She is safe.
Okay, I saw it again on a discussion on CNN last night.
Somebody claimed that the reason for the push for Graham-Cassidy is because the Congresscritters went back home over the break and heard from all their constituents that they hadn’t done what they promised – repeal Obamacare.
again, I am confused. As I said before, I recall all the news stories about those returning Congressfolks being besieged by their people about NOT repealing Obamacare, but the media sure didn’t show me any videos of voters angrily berating their reps for not succeeding in repealing it.
So I gotta ask again – has the media been remiss in not covering this? Or did they all do it on the quiet, through e-mails and phone calls (but they could have done that while their reps were still in Washington, right?), or did they all go up to their rep’s offices at home and complain, or was this a case of a few big donors (or a really few BIG donors*) complaining?
Or is this a Talking Point that the Republicans are pushing as a reason, regardless of what happened?
Or is it something else?
*The Kochs have reportedly said that they’re withholding their $400 million for the 2018 elections until ACA is repealed and they see some action on tax reform.
There it is. They don’t give a flying fuck about their constituents.
Called Ted Cruz’s office, again, this morning. Someone answered!
"Yes, I am calling, again, to ask the Senator not to kill me. I would have thought that my vote to have the Senator not kill me was settled in July… with the Senator voting to kill me… but he is trying it again. One would think that in America, one’s representatives would not cause active harm to their constituents, but here we are.
I also want to mention that you are working for a man who inspires people to call him up and ask not to be killed… and he votes to kill them anyway. What does this say about you?"
Usually left as a VM, but glad I got through.
No, dipshit, not all of us independents. Why is that even included.
Because independents have been enabling Republicans and their destructive policies for years, with their weak-dick “Both sides do it, so I’m just an independent” chickenshit opinions.