U.S. Senate advances on healthcare, with dramatic return by McCain

Sen. McCain, when you cast your vote, remember there are thousands of people with your diagnosis who, if the Republicans get their way on this, would get NO health care. They'd plan their funerals and say their goodbyes.  

You, however, have access to the best medical care because you have the best health insurance, paid for by the U.S. taxpayers.  

Show real bravery by voting against the motion to proceed on this bill. There isn't going to be any retribution against you no matter what you do, so in the words of Mark Twain, you may as well "Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest."

Republicans have found it difficult to fulfill their campaign promises to repeal Obamacare, which enabled 20 million more Americans to get health insurance.

That's because the Republican leadership and the right-wing media sold a bunch of misinformation to their base. They intentionally wanted to keep support for Obamacare low so they intentionally mislead them. When it came time to actually tell them what repeal/replace will actually include, they were exposed. They had 7 years to prepare for this but blindly criticizing Obamacare was just too easy of a drug for their poll numbers.

And to make matters worse, they're still lying. Paul Ryan is selling a narrative that people will simply choose to not have healthcare, a flat out misrepresentation. Priebus went around playing word games with "cut" and "reduce increases", telling people that there are no cuts and also saying that seniors should expect no change in coverage, which is astonishingly dishonest.

Polls show Obamacare is now far more popular than the Republican alternatives.

Once BS filter was taken off the GOP narrative, support for Obamacare took a huge jump. Now the only people who support the GOP plan are ones who profit from it or ones who don't know things like medicare cuts being included. Nearly everyone hates this thing, even people who will come here and defend it.

 vote, remember there are thousands of people with your diagnosis who, if the Republicans get their way on this, would get NO health care.

Why should McCain care? As a politician and a member of the senate, he has the best healthcare insurance in America, and it costs him nothing. Oh, it costs the taxpayers a small fortune to keep their "public servants" insured, it has reached the point where the people serve the state.

Rest assured, republicans will not repeal Obamacare. They can rape the program for vast amounts of kickbacks, campaign contributions, and votes. In return the people end up with an expensive program with high deductibles, which costs the government more than it receives in premiums. America spends far, far more than the UK, Canada, or Japan on healthcare, yet it is not universal, and there are hundreds of thousands of Americans who still don't have insurance.

Obamacare is not free healthcare for the uninsured. It is absurdly expensive health care with sky high premiums and four-figure deductibles for self employed people (most of whom cannot afford it, and simply pay the penalty for not buying a policy). The poorer people get cheaper policies, but end up paying for their coverage indirectly by receiving less economic opportunities, as small businesses and middle class people cut back consumption to pay for Obamacare policies.

America needs one of two things, either a simple, inexpensive and easy to run single-payer system (which is not possible when politicians and contractors need taxpayer money to loot), or a completely private system without the market distortions caused by heavy state spending, which is impossible for the same reason.

Yesterday a large swath of posters said this would never happen. Well..... on to step 2.

I'd like to see some conversations around rationing care for older patients, liability caps for medical professionals, and a single-payer plan legally made part of the US Constitution. Without those 3 things, I don't see how we can afford plans similar to what other countries have.

Sadly, if you take away the commercial and legal aspects of US healthcare, all the rich doctors and lawyers who sue companies over medical malpractice will lobby hard against it. To them, health care is a business.

I know people with very serious condition who CHOSE not to have healthcare. A friend had heart bypass surgery and didn't have insurance. For him, post operation, insurance isn't affordable and he makes over $200K/yr. He decided to pay the Obamacare penalties rather that get insurance.

I get that a solution seems so simple to people outside the USA. Socialism is a dirty word here - at least for 50% of Americans. We do not trust our govt and just don't want them involved in anything as important as health care.

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

There is a problem, clearly, in that even middle-class people with a serious disease will likely go bankrupt today. It is better if they give away all their assets at the start so they can qualify for medicare by being indigent. It is a real thing: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/21/your-money/estate-planning/the-ethics-of-adjusting-your-assets-to-qualify-for-medicaid.html

Great! Now work on the great plan...

Yesterday a large swath of posters said this would never happen. Well..... on to step 2.

Step 2 just finished, and once again, the Republicans have failed. Nine Republicans voted against it.

Looks like the posters from yesterday were correct after all.

Open debate means any Congressman, not just Republicans, can put to the floor any changes and amendments that they want put into the bill

Wanna replace Obamacare? Make a ___care that's more popular than Obamacare

@dmac Step 2 just finished, and once again, the Republicans have failed.

Republicans, and more specifically Mitch McConnell, the senator from Kentucky who gets richer each day by getting increasingly larger 'campaign donations' from health related industries and by having a wife who's also getting a huge federal salary like him, and of course the lead Republican Trump - and his family members.

The Americans who need health care coverage are of zero concern to the Republicans.

The Republican position on health care is inconsistent with their other beliefs. They claim that Obamacare is bad because people are forced to buy healthcare and that many people would choose not to buy a policy if they had the choice (Republicans say everyone should have this choice).

The same Republicans love to spend vast sums of money on defence. Everyone is forced to contribute, despite having the right to arm themselves (a right supported by Republicans). Why can't Americans opt out of paying for national defence, and choose to protect themselves? Why aren't the Republicans also pushing for this "freedom"? If people weren't forced to pay massive amounts to fund overseas bombing campaigns they would have plenty of money left to buy health insurance (if they wanted).

Why can't Americans opt out of paying for national defence, and choose to protect themselves?

Maybe because defense of the country is an explicit function of the federal government, while providing health care isn't.

Dom, forgotten your Schoolhouse Rock? "...provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare...."

Also, I don't see how invading Iraq particularly "provides for the common defense."

Senators with brain cancer voting against health care. That made me laugh.

Heh, so McCain had the chance to do the right thing and failed. Doubly abhorrent as he receives the finest tax payer subsidised care for cancer, while voting to remove cover from poor Americans....

Got the popcorn ready as I sit back to be amazed once again at the spectacle of US healthcare (or the lack of it)

As a non US citizen I will not presume to comment or pontificate on what should be done. I will however look in awe at the mess that is the US health system and then contemplate the many successful alternatives around the world as I enjoy the carnival as the US Gov twists its self in to a Gordian knot over the issue.

General welfare of the country is how the Supreme Court has ruled that clause, not for each individual.

The US Govt doesn't owe any individual long term health care. It does owe everyone the short-term protection of their life from all enemies. It is the difference between someone trying to knife you to death today vs you choosing to poison yourself with cigarettes for 30 yrs or be obese and have all the issues with that for 10-40 yrs.

The last 2 are your rights. The govt cannot force you to stop smoking and force a specific diet and exercise program. That would be found unconstitutional in a heart beat.

The intent of the "general welfare" statements is very clear: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed41.asp - it is only after 1937 and a threat against the supreme court by the "progressive" FDR that attempted expansion of the meaning.

The US Govt doesn't owe any individual long term health care. It does owe everyone the short-term protection of their life from all enemies.

yes, but it does seem that the insurance companies, the lobbiests and the congress are the enemies.

Dom, forgotten your Schoolhouse Rock? "...provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare...."

No, I didn't. But I do know that Schoolhouse Rock doesn't designate the duties and powers of the government.

Also, I don't see how invading Iraq particularly "provides for the common defense."

Also, I didn't say it did. The federal government does lots of things that aren't really their job. But that doesn't mean they should add more.

and then contemplate the many successful alternatives around the world

Will you contemplate all the people living with those alternatives that decide to come to the US to have their medical procedures done?

Maybe because defense of the country is an explicit function of the federal government, while providing health care isn't.

Then the question is: why aren't Republicans clamouring to change this? They claim to want small government when it comes to healthcare, so why not defence too? Maybe it's because they are hypocrites?