Sunday, April 23, 2017

Same As Trump's Contractors Get Paid

The check's in the mail.

On Sunday, however, Trump tweeted that Mexico would pay “eventually,” “at a later date” and “in some form” for his proposed wall. He did not specify a specific date or schedule for that payment, and did not say what kind of remuneration it would entail.

Ruining My Sunday

I use the socialist internet at my local library and have to drive 6 miles for it. I was going to skip out today and mow the lawn and whatnot. But no! Because of this story I was forced to come here and put up a post. Truth told, my arm never needs much twisting and I'm not staying on long.

A Kingsbury man had a unique proposal for Washington County Supervisors Friday — get rid of elections and political parties, and let God decide our leaders.

A teary-eyed Tony Cerro took the mic at Friday’s meeting to make his pitch to the county supervisors.
“We are in trouble,” Cerro told the board. “Our system is wrong.”

Cerro told the board he wanted to “get rid of political parties and elections, and turn back to God for guidance.”

Here's a surprise. He voted for Trump. Here's my comment.

I can't believe none of those supervisors asked any questions. I can think of quite a few.

He criticized the board for opening every meeting with a prayer, and then doing business “against God’s will right after.” He did not offer specific examples of what the county does that he feels goes against “God’s will.”

Yes, that would be one. I heard Cerro swapping 9/11 theories with Matt Funiciello on "Uncommon Sense." I do hope that show comes back on so maybe I can hear more about this. Maybe God will choose Matt for Congress in 2018. If he chose Trump he's got a sick sense of humor.

 “I want to go to Washington and explain to him the system I propose, but I’m afraid I would get arrested."

Where would we be if Jesus and Paul had been afraid of being arrested? Other than all being Jewish, I mean.

I can understand if they were all too dumbfounded to ask any questions. Good Lord, I gotta start going to these meetings. 

Saturday, April 22, 2017

It Could Have Been Worse

Yes, we could have had President Graham.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) said this week that he supported striking North Korea to stop it from developing the capability to reach the United States with a missile — even if that came at a huge cost for the region.

“It would be terrible, but the war would be over [in South Korea], it wouldn’t be here,” Graham said in an interview with NBC.

I guess the 28,000 US troops in Seoul don't count as "being here." Psychopath. 

Friday, April 21, 2017

New Healthcare Words

To me anyway.

There is a list of actions the administration must decide whether to take to keep the marketplaces humming, most of them through regulatory actions at the Health and Human Services Department or through the Internal Revenue Service.

The actions center on three programs: cost-sharing reductions, reinsurance and risk corridors. Cost-sharing refers to government subsidies to low-income Americans to help them pay for insurance. Trump threatened recently to let such subsidies lapse, but Democrats say they will shut down the government as part of the spending negotiations next week if the president follows through.

Incredibly I hadn't come across reinsurance and risk corridors before. 

Reinsurance and risk corridors are two programs set up under the ACA to redistribute funds from insurers with healthier enrollees to insurers with sicker, more expensive customers.

New day, learn something new. I wonder if Trump knows anything about them. What am I saying?

Lawrence Kudlow Back on the Hooch and Blow

That's all I can figure anyway.

Once the House passes the Republican health-care bill, it could become law very quickly, Larry Kudlow said on Thursday.

According to sources, Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows has "been in discussion and successfully negotiating" with Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine, and they have been agreeing on a number of issues, Kudlow reported.

"So for the first time, as this person reported to me, if the House can get a vote next week or soon after, the Senate may jam it right through fast. It won't take weeks and weeks and weeks," the senior CNBC contributor said on "Closing Bell."

And then you've got Trump thinking Congress is going to get the healthcare bill passed along with the budget next week and he's going to get his tax reform package introduced. That will be a slightly faster pace than the first 91 days have been moving at.

Yes, I do feel bad making fun of an addict except ones that are smarmy dicks.

Strange Bedfellows at the Washington Post

It's a weird day when Eugene Robinson and Jen Rubin seem to have worked together to produce columns.

Ladies first:

The GOP 2.0 version of the American Health Care Act has about as much appeal as the original AHCA, or maybe less. It’s still a big tax cut for the rich, a hit to pocketbooks of older and more rural voters, and less generous than what recipients had received under Obamacare. Would a moderate in a district Hillary Clinton carried overwhelmingly go for this? It’d be a high-risk proposition. Would a conservative who sees more regulation (the essential benefits) going back into the deal be thrilled? Probably not. Moreover, it’s clear the Senate would reject the bill, because moderates previously said they’d refuse to go along with a Medicaid rollback.

The list of people who would not like it is long: right-wing activists; Republicans in swing districts; every Democrat; Karen Handel (the GOP candidate in the Georgia 6th Congressional District runoff election), who’d have to take a position on a cruddy bill; doctors; hospitals; and the AARP.

That's the short list, I guess. Add to it the 20 million that are insured as a result of ACA. 

Robinson covers the new and unimproved health care bill so well:

Having failed miserably to win passage of an abomination of a bill -- the American Health Care Act -- Ryan and his minions are back with something even worse. A draft framework being circulated this week would pretend to keep the parts of Obamacare that people like, but allow the states to take these benefits away.

Republicans don’t talk much about the practical reason for moving urgently on health care, which is to set the stage for so-called tax reform: They want to take money now used to subsidize health care for low-income Americans and give it to the wealthy in the form of big tax cuts. 

Nominally, the “MacArthur Amendment” would retain the Essential Health Benefits standard imposed by the ACA, which requires insurance policies to cover eventualities such as hospitalization, maternity and emergency care -- basically, all the things you’d ever need health insurance for.

The amendment would also appear to maintain the ACA’s guarantees that everyone can buy health insurance, including those who have pre-existing conditions, and that parents can keep adult children on their policies until age 26. That all looks fine -- but it’s an illusion.

After specifying that these popular provisions will stay, the amendment then gives states the right to snatch them away. States would be able to obtain waivers exempting them from the Essential Health Benefits standards. They would also be able to obtain waivers from the pre-existing conditions requirement by creating a “high-risk pool” to provide coverage for those who are unwell.

There would no longer be a prohibition, however, against charging “high-risk” individuals more -- so much more, in fact, that they would potentially be priced out of the market. We would go back to the pre-ACA situation in which serious illness could mean losing a home or filing for bankruptcy.

Paul Ryan and Tom MacArthur are bigger scam artists than Trump himself.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

GOP Can't Quit Obamacare

I know which one Elise is.

Now, when it comes to Obamacare, there are generally two types of Republicans: ones who despise everything about it, and ones who understand nothing about it. The first group are libertarians who want to get rid of the law root-and-branch. They don't think the federal government should play any part in helping people get coverage, or telling insurers what that has to be. Instead, they'd like to go back to a world where the sick are mostly on their own, and insurance companies are mostly free to discriminate against them.

The second group are so-called moderates who oppose Obamacare entirely because of politics, not policy. Which is to say that they attack the unpopular parts of the law, like penalizing people for not getting insurance, at the same time that they support the popular parts, like banning insurance companies from discriminating against people with preexisting conditions. What they don't get, though, is that you can't have the latter without the former.

Actually, I lied. I have no idea which group she's in because she won't give an opinion or hold a town hall. The choices are between venal and stupid. I'll be charitable and assume that she's in the stupid group. 

That brings us to the GOP's real problem. It's that a lot of Republicans secretly kind of like Obamacare, or at least they like what it does. They don't want to get rid of the way it's covered sick people or expanded coverage or let kids stay on their parent's insurance until they're 26 years old. The only thing they do want to change — well, other than the name and the individual mandate — is the way that premiums and deductibles have continued to march ever higher. But that, whether they realize it or not, is actually an argument that Obamacare hasn't gone far enough. That we need bigger subsidies so people can buy better coverage that doesn't make them pay as much out-of-pocket.

Somehow I don't think Paul Ryan of the Freedom Caucus is going to go for that idea.