Healthcare

“They’re for repeal, they have no replace”

JM Ashby
Written by JM Ashby

Trump says the Republican party will soon be the "party of health care," but the word "soon" is clearly open to interpretation.

Although the Trump regime is now supporting a legal effort to toss out the entire Affordable Care Act as soon as possible, Trump says Republicans won't vote on an unseen, mythical health care plan until 2021 at the earliest.

From NBC News:

President Donald Trump said in a string of Monday night tweets that Republicans won't be voting on a new health care plan until after the 2020 elections.

"The Republicans are developing a really great HealthCare Plan with far lower premiums (cost) & deductibles than ObamaCare," Trump tweeted. "In other words it will be far less expensive & much more usable than ObamaCare. Vote will be taken right after the Election when Republicans hold the Senate & win back the House." [...]

"President Trump confirmed he will hold Americans hostage through the 2020 election on health care," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at a press conference outside the Supreme Court.

"They have no health care plan," Schumer said. “It’s the same old song they've been singing. They’re for repeal, they have no replace.”

Snark aside, Trump's claim that Republicans will vote for a health care bill after the 2020 election is an admission that they can't do anything while Democrats control the House of Representatives.

With that in mind, it should appear more absurd than ever that the Trump regime is supporting efforts to toss out the Affordable Care Act before the 2020 election even arrives. Repealing Obamacare without a replacement ready to takes its place would be a goddamn disaster.

If Trump and the GOP want to make the next election all about health care, this is certainly one way to do that. And it's not going to be pretty for them. Making the next election a referendum on health care could guarantee that Democrats hold control of the House and possibly retake control of the Senate.

  • Christopher Foxx

    If Trump’s show anything, it’s that everything is always the opposite of what he claims. So, FTFY:

    “The Republicans are developing a really terrible HealthCare Plan with far higher premiums (cost) & deductibles than ObamaCare,” Trump tweeted. “In other words it will be far more expensive & much less usable than ObamaCare. No Vote will be taken right after the Election when Republicans lose the Senate & don’t win back the House.”

    Or, more likely, the negation is simply that “the Republicans are developing no HealthCare Plan…”

  • muselet

    Rs can get away with not having a plan because the conventional wisdom is that the GOP is the party of grown-ups. Never mind that it hasn’t been that since at least the 1960s, that’s what the Sabbath Gasbags (h/t Calvin Trillin) solemnly intone whenever the Ds forget their place.

    Besides which, for the Rs, coming up with a credible healthcare plan is far less important than erasing Barack Obama from history. Don’t bother them with trifling details like sick and dead people.

    –alopecia

    • Draxiar

      You couldn’t be more correct. Considering that The ACA is rooted in a Republican idea and President Obama thought it was a good plan it can only be about damaging Obama’s legacy. The plan that Republicans have now is only to remove…replacing it means nothing to them.

  • mnpollio

    Is it even possible to retake the Senate after all the gerrymandering? And with McConnell fast tracking conservative Trump-sympathetic judges – will there enough judges worth their salt to actually rule against the gerrymandering?

    • Badgerite

      Good question on the judges issue. In case you were still of the opinion that courts don’t matter.

      • Scopedog

        “In case you were still of the opinion that courts don’t matter.”

        Well, there were a number of folks on the idiot Left who were spouting that in 2016, that the Courts didn’t matter. Sadly, I don’t think they’ll change their tune by 2020–because I heard that same nonsense all the way back during the 2000 election.

        • Badgerite

          Amazing, really, because there a quite a few “separate but equal” decisions already most especially the Shelby County case that gutted the federal enforcement mechanisms of the Voting Rights Act and decisions that signed off on what are clearly laws meant to suppress the votes of minorities and urban centers. How much more “in your face” does it have to get?
          And we have not yet felt the real effects of the judges they are currently feeding into the system. Jesus. Don’t they teach civics anymore?

      • Christopher Foxx

        Was never of the opinion that the courts don’t matter. On the contrary, they are, and have always been, of paramount importance. It was painfully obvious during the 2016 election that whoever won was going to get to appoint at least two, and possibly as many of four Supreme Court justices.

        Presidents can screw things up for a decade, but the Court (and courts) can affect things for generations.

        The Republicans have known and acted on this for a long time. It’s a shame that so many on the left are so stupidly slow to figure it out.

        • Badgerite

          Couldn’t agree more. Thanks. Up vote. Up vote. Up vote.

    • Draxiar

      It’s totally possible to take the Senate because Senate seats being a statewide election not dependent on voting districts aren’t casualties of gerrymandering. House seats on the other hand very much are.