If you didn’t catch WBUR’s Bob Oakes’ interview with health care legislative veteran John McDonough this morning, highly recommended, especially if you like feeling angry and anxious. The bill would absolutely devastate the Massachusetts budget, and the Commonwealth’s , by depriving the state of $5 billion — and getting worse — $8.7B by 2027. That’s because a.) we have expensive health care, and b.) we expanded Medicaid. It is intended to be an atomic bomb to our budget, and the money goes to the states that did not expand Medicaid. Under Graham-Cassidy, it would not be necessary for states to spend that money on expanding coverage to those folks who can’t afford it. You know, because fairness.
It is, in short, a cruel and wantonly destructive legislative MOAB that will certainly lead to budget chaos, bankruptcies, early deaths, and vast unnecessary suffering. Naturally, as such, it has the support of almost all Republicans in the Senate — even as they openly and blatantly lie about its contents:
There’s a sense of powerlessness here in MA — after all, we have a completely Democratic congressional delegation. We’ve taken care of business! But we can encourage our out-of-state friends and relatives — in Maine, West Virginia, Arizona, Ohio, Alaska, Tennessee, etc — to call their Senators. Numbers are below.
I’ll have to pay an extra because I was born with asthma. Make America Great Again!
We can also make calls to targeted voters to patch them through to their U.S. Senator to stop Graham-Cassidy. Hubdialer details here.
This is Exhibit A for why we should NEVER EVER negotiate with Mr. Trump or the GOP.
This is happening because our leadership couldn’t resist the all-too-brief media splash of a photo-op with Mr. Trump, some headlines, and brief talk of how Mr. Trump had betrayed the GOP.
Oh, and by the way, THIS is a set of concrete overshoes that are a perfect fit for Mr. Baker’s re-election hopes. We need to:
1. Defeat this madness, again
2. TIE Mr. Baker to this. His party. His president. His industry.
THIS kind of nonsense is why I wonder how long this nation will remain “one nation, indivisible”.
These thugs are raping and pillaging us.
Obamacare was a negotiation with the Republicans. Few, if any, Democrats that this legislation is rooted in conservative politics and something that Republicans embraced to remedy our failing health care system.
We wanted single payer and/or a public option and they wanted private markets.
We got private markets. And we celebrated?
Obamacare, and for that matter, most of our party’s behavior during the Barack Obama administration, demonstrates the futility of attempting to negotiate, compromise, or in any way work with today’s GOP.
Government-sponsored single payer health care never even made it to Mr. Obama’s radar, and he caved on the public option before negotiations even began.
The ACA was just the first. On virtually EVERY issue that came up between 2008 and 2016, the stance of the GOP was a raised middle-finger.
As bad as Obamacare is, this is MUCH worse.
Negotiation with today’s GOP is utterly futile.
I hope it is time that Democrats stop their campaign message to working class citizens that reads: “as bad as we are, Republicans are worse”. It’s not selling.
Time for Democrats to get bold.
I’m commenting on a blog, not writing a “campaign message to working class citizens”.
Is it so hard for you to just agree that this is a terrible proposal?
Overall I think Baker has insulated himself pretty well from Trump, especially in the minds of average voters. If we try to make 2018 a referendum on Trump in terms of the Corner Office, we’ll be laughed at frankly.
Why do Democrats carry Republican water ?
AARP attacks Graham – Cassidy bill :
” Premium tax credits and cost – sharing reductions are critical financial protections for lower – middle – income Americans, including many older adults. The G – C bill eliminates these protections and weakens protections against age rating. It threatens to drastically increase premiums and out – of – pocket costs for older adults enrolled in health insurance Marketplace.”
I’m not asking Dems to carry GOP water. I’m asking Mass Dems to not make Baker out to be a Bay State Trump when the evidence does not support that.
Nobody is proposing to “make Baker out to be a Bay State Trump”.
This bill is about to ravage the health system that every Massachusetts resident depends on. This bill will make our budget deficits even more extreme. The impact of this bill will be felt, yet again, by our poorest residents. This bill will hit our minorities worst of all.
This is a GOP bill. It exemplifies the worst aspects of GOP lies.
Mr. Baker will presumably run as a candidate of the GOP. Please tell me again why you think we shouldn’t make his party affiliation an issue. Mr. Baker proudly cites his success with Harvard Pilgrim. Should we not mention that either?
Mr. Baker, like Mr. DeLeo, tells us that no tax increases are needed while our infrastructure crumbles from lack of maintenance. The G-C bill, if it becomes law, will compound that financial issues already plaguing the MBTA. Mr. Baker architected the change that burdened the MBTA with Big Dig debt.
So we have a state whose government funding is already hobbled by decisions Mr. Baker made or engineered. We face a MAJOR funding disaster caused by a GOP plan that aims an economic cannon directly at Massachusetts. Mr. Baker is running as a member of that party.
I don’t understand your reluctance to make Charlie Baker the local poster boy for the disaster that these thugs are bringing to each and every one of us.
His health insurance career is something to make an issue because he actually did something there. By contrast he has nothing to do with this latest federal legislation and has in fact come out against it. The other items from the state level you cite are also fair game. I just think fundamental fairness dictates that you don’t blame someone for something he did not do.
Nobody held a gun to Mr. Baker’s head and forced him to sign papers affiliating himself with the GOP.
Affiliations matter. There is a difference between Republicans and Democrats. I am a Democrat. Mr. Baker is a Republican.
I am most certainly NOT blaming Mr. Baker for something he did not do. I am instead holding him responsible for the affiliation he chooses.
Mr. Baker is a Republican. He is running as a Republican. Republicans have been doing this shit for the last fifty years (since Richard Nixon). Republicans have been doing this garbage nationally, and they’ve been doing it locally.
Mr. Baker is a Republican. I am mystified that you find it fundamentally unfair that I emphasize that.
To me it fails the Golden Rule test. I wouldn’t want to be blamed for everything my party, my church, or any other organization I may belong to does, especially if I’ve made it clear I oppose the particular action being discussed, so I won’t do it to someone else. If you want to nail him for overall governing philosophy, fine, but it sounds like your standard is that once you join an organization you surrender your right to think for yourself.
I meant to tie Mr. Baker to this terrible bill, not Mr. Trump.
This bill takes BILLIONS of dollars away from, for example, working class families in Western MA who turned out in droves to “protect” themselves from a tiny increase in the state gasoline tax.
Mr. Baker says he opposes this bill. I think his opposition is at best opportunistic.
It’s Mr. Baker’s party, Mr. Baker’s industry, and Mr. Baker’s president. That makes it Mr. Baker’s bill, no matter what he says for the camera.
The GOP runs our government at the moment, and too many of our states, cities, and towns nationwide. The GOP holds the corner office in Boston.
The GOP is destroying millions of lives, nationwide and here at home. They continue to resurrect their efforts to destroy health care in America, time after time.
Mr. Baker’s affiliation with the GOP is no laughing matter.
He says he opposes it and he is not a member of Congress, so I’m not sure what else you want. I emphatically disagree with the notion that there is no way to disassociate yourself just because your partisan identifier is the same.
I want Charlie Baker to lose the election to Setti Warren. I want the national headlines to be “Popular GOP governor defeated after one term because of Obamacare repeal”.
I want to us to stop playing patty-cake with these liars and thugs.
Stop playing patty-cake with repuke liars and thugs. We all need to start playing HARDBALL, now !
That headline would be a pretty silly example of post hoc, ergo propter hoc. I want him to lose to Setti Warren too, but the voters aren’t going to buy that Baker had something to do with ACA repeal, nor should they.
I disagree with you.
You seem to be arguing that Mr. Baker’s GOP affiliation is irrelevant — both in reality and to the voters.
Most headline headline writers today don’t know Latin. The media is already looking for indicators of how events in Washington DC are being reflected in statewide races. Mr. Baker is currently viewed as a popular GOP governor in a deep blue state.
If Mr. Baker is defeated, I am confident that national media will be looking for “why”. I think this travesty is HUGELY unpopular with voters, nationwide and here in MA.
I think that connecting a hugely unpopular bill jammed through congress by the GOP to a governor running with an “R” after his name should be straightforward for the professionals who will run the Democratic campaign.
I think that Deval Patrick was eager to remind voters of Obamacare, and I think Massachusetts voters embraced that.
I think Massachusetts voters will hate Graham-Cassidy if it passes. I think Charlie Baker can and should be tarred with that brush.
So in your view, there is nothing Baker can do short of switching parties that can get him off the hook for legislation he not only has nothing to do with, but opposes? That is both unfair and frankly betrays a great misunderstanding of basic civics. If he were running for Congress you would have a case because then even if he opposed he would still likely cast his first vote for leadership who would advance that agenda. If he stood ready to sabotage to the state aspects of administering the ACA that would be fair game as well. Absent either of those conditions we need to remember that the state and federal governments are two different institutions. Voters should generally not be choosing Governors based on their opinions of federal policies except when a Governor has a direct role to play in the execution and application of those policies in which he gets to exercise discretion, and it is civicly irresponsible for us to encourage that political thinking.
There is a great deal that Charlie Baker can do short of switching parties if he truly opposes this. Have you been paying attention to the public events that Mr. McCain has been doing?
Charlie Baker could be doing FAR MORE to oppose this legislation.
I don’t need lectures from you about basic civics. I understand how our government works — and fails to work.
I suggest that I know just as much as you about what Massachusetts needs and does not need from our government and our candidates.
Of all the things that are broken about our current political environment, one of the things that is NOT broken is that the difference between we Democrats and the GOP is clear and stark. That difference is clear and stark at the national level, and it is clear and stark at the local level.
We are not talking about “federal policies”, we are talking about national political organizations. The GOP is a brand. It is a national brand and it is a local brand. It’s brand just like Amazon, Sears, GE, and BankAmerica are brands.
I hate to break this to you, but the behavior of the BankAmerica branch on your local corner is VERY CLOSELY tied to to the national BankAmerica organization.
The same is true for the GOP.
When you’re choosing a church, there is a difference between the UCC, the Southern Baptist convention, and the Mormons (never mind your neighborhood temple or Catholic Church).
While it’s true that each local congregation varies, it is also true that if you want an Episcopal Mass you go to an Episcopal church. If the national Southern Baptist Convention is promoting outrageous policies and politics, it is perfectly appropriate to march outside local Southern Baptist churches.
Charlie Baker is running as a Republican. I think that is central to the question of whether or not he should be elected to a second term.
You can knock him for his party affiliation all you want. He has after all proven himself a Republican on many issues, but not this one. I’d be very careful with religious analogies especially with certain denominations. Certainly in the UCC local churches have complete freedom to tell the National Setting where it can put its positions. Plus, the whole concept of protesting churches makes me cringe. Worship time is sacred and should be allowed to happen in peace.