Personally I don't think Trump has accomplished much during his first 100 days, I mean they couldn't even get Gorsuch passed with 60 votes.
Fox News 100 Days
NPR 100 Days
WP 100 Days WH Defensive
Fox News 100 Days
NPR 100 Days
WP 100 Days WH Defensive
25 comments:
He got Gorsuch through. The Republican Party isn't there to do things, it's there to prevent the doing of things by others. According to that standard, Trump is doing well. Quite honestly, Hillary wouldn't have done much more. I think that helps to explain Trump's relatively high poll numbers.
--Hiram
He has rolled back 25 Obama Executive Orders. That is a lot.
He has rolled back 25 Obama Executive Orders. That is a lot.
That helps to explain his relatively high approval numbers.
I saw a Fox News poll indicating that Republicans approved of Donald Trump's actions on health care. This was curious to me. First off, Mr. Trump pretty much dumped his campaign promises in this area. He didn't propose anything, and what he didcn't propose didn't make health care cheaper or widen coverage. Mr. Trump pretty much deferred to Congressional Republicans who crafted the plan he endorsed. Which didn't come to a vote, because Mr. Trump who assured us that he could accomplish miracles, couldn't even unify his own party on the matter. So Obamacare continues in contradiction to every promise every Republican in America has made. Given that context, how could one reasonably approve of Mr. Trump's health care policy? Given that Obamacare continues and will do so for the foreseeable future, why don't Democrats approve of Trump's handling of health care?
The answer, strangely enough, comes from Fox News. They did a series of interviews showing that liberals disapprove of Obamacare, when the question asked links it to Trump. What that shows is that when any question is asked, the question the interviwee actually hears is "Do you like Trump?" The substance of the question is largely irrelevant.
--Hiram
Good observation. I would point out that Trump pretty much stuck to "repeal and replace," requiring Congress to do the heavy lifting, but the cowards in the GOP refused to take on the eminently sensible notion of "repeal now, replace tomorrow" and tried to "fix" Obamacare. If that were possible, the Democrats would have brought forth a marvelous solution the first time around, rather than the pea soup and cream corn extravaganza they did. How to fix the Gordian knot of health care? Easy. Take an axe...
Because health care was only barely possible, it's not surprising that the outcome was less than marvelous. In a tweet this morning, Mr. Trump accuses Democrats of fighting to protect the role of insurance companies in health care policy. Actually, this isn't something we fought for, it's something other people fought for, and we were obliged to accept. What Mr. Trump now seems to be advocating is single payer, something that's anathema to his party.
The reason why we don't have universal health insurance in this country is because it was close to impossible to pass such a program within the rules of our politics. This lesson has been reinforced by the experience of the last hundred days. Let's be clear, I have no problem with what Mr. Trump advocated during the campaign. Like Trump, I want universal coverage. Like Trump, I want coverage of pre-existing conditions. Like Trump, I want premiums to be lower and quality to be higher. And to be fair, most Republicans agree with me on these things. So why don't they happen? Because we can't agree on specific legislation that would bring them about. Trump promised that he could use his dealmaking skills, to break through that impasse. We shall see.
--Hiram
For me, the central irony of the Trump administration, is that he is exploiting the greatest opportunity any president has ever been given in modern history. More than any president, Mr. Trump has been elected outside the traditional party structure. No president has ever owed less to the traditional players of presidential politics. No president has ever had a clearer mandate to disrupt the establishment party structure in Washington. Speaking in purely partisan terms, no president has ever been better positioned to really, really, put Democrats on the spot. We are hungry, ravenous even, for deals on so many issues. We are exactly in the position of so many folks in Trump's books who give him favorable deals because they are in a weaker position. But Trump so far hasn't made even the slightest attempt to take advantage of the enormous leverage he has. With all the strengths he has, with a laser like focus, he has chosen to negotiate from the place of his greatest weakness. In a nation crying out for independent leadership, leadership he was elected to provide, he has tied himself to Congressional politics, letting them design critical policies to which he signs on. And then he goes out and campaigns against Democrats, while pleading for our help.
Does any of this make sense?
--Hiram
I didn't expect Trump and the GOP to be so incompetent at passing legislation. I do realize they have a lot of time. I think they will get some kind of tax cut done but no Obamacare repeal.
Laurie, I know the Republicans have proven incompetent on health care, because they cannot see past the petty politics of the issue and find the real solution. That is they need to repeal now, replace later. Obamacare was terrible legislation, based only on (questionably) good intentions. Unfortunately for the GOP, regardless of what they pass, they will be blamed for a "catastrophe" in health care, regardless of what actually happens, and if they do nothing, they will get blamed for the inevitable total collapse of Obamacare that rightly belongs entirely to Democrats.
And the problem with "universal care" is that it denies people the right to CHOOSE what care they want and need, and for people to CHOOSE to provide it. It is like having government tell farmers what to grow, and then telling people what to eat. It's crazy.
I did expect them to be incompetent, or at least unable to enact legislation. Republicans have to deal with a basic existential problem. As an anti-government party, they are committed to the idea that government can't work. Therefore, when in power, any effort to make government work is in conflict with their principles. In practice, this translates into a combination of doing nothing and blaming Democrats. Health care policy shows how this conflict works out in practice, where Republican policy is to leave the status quo in place and to blame Democrats for any problem. This makes sense within the Republican but outside the bubble not so much. Trump is now blaming Democrats for refusing to change health care policy, seemingly oblivious to the fact that we lost the election and aren't in charge anymore.
This is a stable status quo. As long as the bubble persists, as long as Fox News doesn't tell Republicans anything different, these contradictions can continue. But the bubble can burst. In the Bush years, the most visible examples of this were Hurricane Katrina, and the financial collapse. And both turned out to be politically advantageous to Democrats.
--Hiram
It is my sense of reality that Obamacare either already has or shortly will endure a massive failure, with millions of people unable to get or even afford actual health insurance. Republicans would like to not have that happen, but Democrats will insist that it is working great and actively thwart any attempt to solve the problem. People will suffer, but apparently that matters not to Democrats.
Jerry,
What do you think this massive failure will look like?
It will be interesting to see how far the GOP will go to make ACA fail and how many people they are willing to harm to do so?
I mean they have refused to help fix the minor glitches during the past 7 years... All so they can make ACA appear worse than it is. Politicians truly are some slimy people...
Laurie,
As Jerry notes, the GOP has the benefit of being able to sabotage, defund, etc ACA until it fails. If it gets bad enough, they may be able to get something passed.
Hiram,
The GOP and myself support a functioning government. We just believe that people and private businesses should do more, and government should do less than the Dems do. Remember how Dems love to boil frogs
The GOP and myself support a functioning government.
But they don't support a competent government, and that is their problem when something goes wrong.
--Hiram
Hiram, beyond a certain very limited size, there is no such thing as a competent government. All of our problems stem from the delusions of politicians to the contrary. Remember that high intelligence is not a prerequisite for high office.
What do I think ACA failure will look like? It will look exactly like what is already happening, only worse. Instead of 1/3 of US counties with one provider and 1/20 of them with zero, we will achieve a majority with no providers at all. Those who DO get Obamacare will find they cannot afford it, as the illegal insurance company bailouts stop and the required coverages bite deeper. Those now receiving the illegal subsidies on the federal exchange will find that the subsidies don't even cover the deductible, even if the law is NOT properly enforced. Purely and simply, if the law had been enforced as written, rather than propped up illegally by Obama executive action, it would have collapsed a year after it was written.
If the Republicans were really interested in crashing the system, all they would need to do is to enforce the law as written, but they do not want to do that. Democrats insist, on the other hand, that Republicans must NOT save the poor folks being harmed by the law, but that the harm must continue. Why? Is it because most of the people harmed were Trump voters? (fact)
Hiram,
The GOP supports a government more similar to back in 1960's. Perfectly competent but not large and over whelming.
Jerry,
I think we will need to agree to disagree.
John, that position is one taken by one unable to defend their position with facts and logic. I am not even certain what we might "agree to disagree" ABOUT. Is it that the ACA will collapse? I find that hard to believe, since it is obvious that the only thing holding it together is Democrat obstruction, illegal subsidies and happy talk. I still say Trump should simply revoke Congress' exemption from the Obamacare law, and watch it be repealed the following week.
Jerry,
You keep complaining about a system that most Americans now support.
It is likely that the GOP proposal will cause many poor, pre-existing condition folks and the elderly significant problems. This of course will not help the GOP stay in power...
The only people who truly dislike the ACA program are those who pay for most of the cost... (ie wealthy folks)
I have no complaints about the Affordable Care Act. But ask people what they think of "Obamacare" and you get a much different answer. Democrats have the population buffaloed, and they think that they will lose their health care if ACA is repealed. I call B as in B, S as in S. A tiny few will lose their health INSURANCE, whether it is repealed or allowed to collapse on its own. Something like 86% of people were happy with their health insurance before the "ACA" came along. That now 50% are happy isn't a big improvement.
Once again you want to worry about the tiny minority that can be accommodated without screwing up things for the vast majority. Heckuva poor way to solve a problem. How hard can it be. Obamacare is repealed for everybody that doesn't have it, but Congress has to have it until a replacement is passed. Done and nobody harmed.
Now don't confuse the questions. Above we were reviewing satisfaction with ACA. Below is how happy people are with their personal healthcare... Not much difference...
Some history from our friends at Gallup.
Are you generally satisfied or dissatisfied with the total cost you pay for your healthcare?
2016 Satisfied: 56% Dissatisfied: 42%
2007 Satisfied: 57% Dissatisfied: 39%
Overall, how would you rate the quality of healthcare you receive -- as excellent, good, only fair or poor?
2016 Excellent: 32% Good: 44% Fair: 17% Poor:5%
2007 Excellent: 33% Good: 50% Fair: 12% Poor:3%
Overall, how would you rate your healthcare coverage -- as excellent, good, only fair or poor?
2016 Excellent: 23% Good: 42% Fair: 23% Poor:10%
2007 Excellent: 25% Good: 45% Fair: 15% Poor:8%
Of course the mystery is what would the 2016 scores have been if ACA had not occurred? Of course there is no way of knowing.
To the degree these surveys have any validity at all it is as a "rolling" survey-- the same questions repeated over time-- and what they very clearly show is that everything about the ACA has gone in the wrong direction. That the differences are not larger simply says that the ACA has not fully destroyed the health insurance marketplace as intended, nor the US healthcare system as not intended but as was inevitable. The effects have been around the periphery-- a few million who lost the insurance they liked, and a few million who got insurance through Obamacare's Medicaid mandate (most of them) or through illegally subsidized policies on the federal exchange.
And we need to keep making the distinction between having health insurance and having health CARE. Obamacare was a health INSURANCE program and did not do one thing to increase the availability or quality of care (except to drive it down, as shown by the survey). If you take your car in for service, and it runs worse afterwards than it did before, do you take it back to that same shop, or wait for it to fall apart completely, or do you go someplace else and have it fixed properly?
Jerry,
I guess I see the data differently:
1. As I said we have no idea if things would have been much worse if ACA had not been passed. We know it probably would not have been much better. (ie cost were rising pre-ACA also) The "car" is 7 years older... So that "repair" may have little to do with today's sputtering.
2. The data clearly shows that no huge swings occurred due to ACA. Many of the results are within the survey error band.
Also, in a "must pay" to receive good preventive and urgent healthcare. Having good health insurance is closely related to good health care.
Once again, I have to suggest to you that you pay less attention to the "good intentions" (which must be presumed depending on your degree of belief in the altruism of our elected leaders) of legislation, and what the most likely effect of that legislation will be in the real world. Obamacare intended to increase competition, reduce cost, improve quality and expand "availability." You know as well as I do that would be impossible without radically altering the underlying system. Obamacare did nothing to increase competition and in fact stifled it by requiring expensive "minimum coverages," "must issue" and "pre-existing condition" rules . It created massive subsidies to insurance companies and insurance buyers alike, that inevitably created massive (total) cost increases, and raised premiums for almost everybody, on top of that. The working poor it was supposed to help have been priced out of the market. It did not add anything to the "supply" side of the health care market and in fact reduced it by doctors who refuse to work for the paltry payment schedule of Obamacare or Medicaid policies. There has been quite a growth in cash-only practices, or "co-ops." And there are still, what, 30 million people "uninsured"?
To put it simply, there is no way that a 2500-page bureaucratic nightmare can possibly make the right decisions for 300 million people, most of whom have already made the decisions that suit them. It cannot work; it's only a matter of how long it takes for the crackup to become intolerable, and how long the smarter-than-everybody Democrats keep trying to defend their stupidity.
Well at least we know where you stand regarding ACA...
I must ask what it is you are defending, and why? You seem a reasonable, logical sort. What about the ACA is worth keeping, that balances out all the pieces that are not?
See my answer here.
Post a Comment