Fox Lies About ACA Being 'Jammed Down Everyone's Throats' To Give GOP Cover On Trumpcare

up

Mitch McConnell has delayed a vote on Trumpcare, for now, while John McCain recovers from surgery, but it's still a full court press over on GOP-TV to get this thing passed.

The crew on the up-skirt couch wished McCain the best and were terribly upset with former senior advisor to President Obama, Dan Pfeiffer, for this Tweet:

HUNTSMAN: It's great advice. You know, it's something that they probably should have looked into eight years ago when they shoved Obamacare down everyone's throats. […]

Well the irony here though of this statement, of you should really take your time, get to know what is inside this bill, maybe get some bipartisan support before passing. The complete opposite by the way, of what the Democrats did back then.

MORRIS: I think it's short term memory loss.

There's someone suffering from memory loss here, but it's not the Democrats. As Laurel Raymond at Think Progress discussed last month, there was plenty of debate when the ACA was passed, regardless of what Nancy Pelosi said at the time about passing it to see what was in it, which is the talking point they were hammering in the clip above.

Senate Republicans are gearing up for a vote on their bid to repeal and replace Obamacare next week, though the bill itself — crafted in just a few months — is still being hidden behind closed doors. Republicans have refused to reveal the bill to Senate Democrats, the public, or even some members of their own party.

Because the bill is still secret, it’s not clear yet what its impact will be for the nation’s health care system, but reports indicate that it will be largely similar to the House version, which is estimated to result in 23 million losing their health insurance.

In addition to the secrecy, Republicans are ramming the bill through using a process called reconciliation, allowing them to avoid the threat of a filibuster. [...]


↓ Story continues below ↓

When it was Obamacare on the table, Hatch was a staunch proponent of bipartisanship, arguing in an open letter to Obama that “our nation expects us to solve this challenge in an open, honest and bipartisan manner.” He added that “the American people deserve an open and vigorous dialogue on this critical legislation and the use of this process would be a clear signal that Washington continues to ignore their voices.”

Obamacare did not pass through reconciliation. The major parts of the bill, including the individual mandate, the Medicaid expansion, the ban on discrimination against pre-existing conditions, the subsidies, and the taxes, passed in 2009 through regular order.
Later, the bill was adjusted via reconciliation, allowing Democrats to make changes to subsidy levels and taxes after they lost the supermajority that allowed them to pass the major legislation via the normal process.

But that doesn’t mean that the two processes are at all similar. Obamacare came together over two years, during which Congress held open, bipartisan hearings and consultations with experts in the health care industry, and President Obama and leading Democrats stumped across the country for the law.

When Obamacare was passed, the bill had been debated for 160 hours on the Senate floor, had been the subject of many committee meetings and markups (more than 50 of which were held in the Senate Finance Committee, with Hatch himself now chairs), and had incorporated 171 Republican amendments — although, granted, many of them were technical in nature.

Even still, while Obamacare was being debated, Congressional Republicans were extremely critical of the process, accusing Democrats of being secretive and rushing the bill through. And in 2010, it was the use of reconciliation on even parts of the bill that Hatch objected to — which was far less than using it to pass an entire bill, as his party aims to do now.

In right-wing world though, it's Obamacare that was "jammed down everyone's throats," and the only problem with the Republicans' so-called tax cut “health care” bill is the “narrative” -- not the fact that it's going to actually take health care away from millions of people and end up killing their constituents who won't get the medical treatment they need if they no longer have health insurance.

MORRIS: Republicans now are in a difficult position now and they admit that this narrative is not on their side. We're going to remove health care. We're going to try to change, your argument is, premiums are going up. Well, we haven't really even been hearing that narrative from them. We haven't been hearing them doing town hall meetings where they've been facing angry criticism from angry people in Kentucky and other places and saying you're going to take away my health care.

Is it enough for them to go to these town hall meetings and say “I know we're going to take away your health care, but your premiums are too expensive.

HUNTSMAN: You wonder which one's worse.

MORRIS: It's a hard line to (crosstalk)

HUNTSMAN: Getting the messaging right and promising people everything...

MORRIS: They don't have a message.

HUNTSMAN: …and then realizing that if you don't want health care you still have to pay for it anyway. And premiums are skyrocketing, so they promised all these things eight years ago, and you realize now it wasn't what you were expecting.

Now Republicans I think we've been saying can learn from that. Get your messaging right, but also, promise things to the American people that you can actually deliver on.

PIRO: The problem is that the Democrats then turn around and spin the Republicans' messaging and basically say “Oh, Republicans are going to kill you.” And that's a real tough message to walk back from.

HUNTSMAN: It's a lazy, easy message.

PIRO: Very lazy and easy. Right.

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.