Graham-Cassidy gets stabbed in the back from purists and swamp critters alike
I'm a bit out of steam from my rants and phone blitzes during the last two attempts to repeal Obamacare. I am not a Lindsey Graham fan, but I must say I think his Graham-Cassidy bill is reasonable.
For those of you who don't know, this bill merely takes the money for Obamacare subsidies and block-grants it over to the states. Each state will be encouraged to design its own health care system. If they want Bernie-care in their state, they can go for it. But if they want more choices on the market, they can do that, too. Obviously, this will encourage competition and bring the prices down.
Just so you know, it's a lie that people with pre-existing conditions will be on their own if a state opts out of that requirement. For a state to do this, it would have to show that it has an alternative plan – for example, a funding pool – for those with pre-existing conditions.
So call your senators if you still have the energy, even though Susan Collins just announced that she's a "no vote," which I think makes the bill DOA.
The media are pinning it on her, but of course, we have the great Senator John McCain, whose claimed reason is "he wants more bi-partisanship." This is a reason? Did we have bipartisanship when they passed Obamacare? The way to get bipartisanship is to pass the Graham-Cassidy bill, and then you will get Democrat ideas on alternatives to Obamacare. And not a minute before. Beside, McCain was elected to do what's best for his state and best for his country – not to placate and play footsie with Democrats! By the way, this bill is supported by the governor of Arizona and gives Arizona additional money, likely as an incentive to get McCain to vote for it!
Then there's the problem of Rand Paul. Exactly what is his problem, anyway? I have never liked him. While he's not as bad as his father, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, apparently. His claimed reason is that it's not perfect. Yes, that's the reason! It's not a full repeal! But in many ways it is, because any state that doesn't want it doesn't have to have it so it would still be voter-driven at the state level. He is a purist making the perfect the enemy of the good.
You'd have to be an idiot to count on Susan Collins, so why blame her? She's the only Republican in the Senate who didn't even vote to repeal Obamacare. Rand Paul, on the other hand, by opposing this bill, is ensuring that the big hand of government Obamacare will remain the law of the land. And in fact, I think he is edging us closer to Bernie-care by doing so. What a traitor! You have to deal with the facts as they are, not as you wish them to be!
Then, of course, there's Lisa Murkowski from Alaska, who clearly wants to keep Obamacare in place. And for all you Ted Cruz supporters, at the last check, Cruz is also not supporting this bill...or at least not yet, claiming that the bill is moving in the right direction but doesn't provide enough waivers to those who want to escape Obamacare.
I think Mark Levin was right when he said these senators are just looking for any excuse not to vote for it.
But then I find out that Mark Levin is supporting Roy Moore, who is running against Luther Strange in Alabama. I don't know much about either of them, except that Roy Moore, who is, according to Mark Levin, more conservative, will not vote for the Graham-Cassidy bill if he's elected. That's enough to rule him out for me.
Reportedly, Luther Strange was said to support the bill. Not even elected yet, he's already backpedaling, saying he "likes the concept of the Graham-Cassidy bill, but he hasn't seen how it would affect Alabama, so he can't say for sure that he'd sign onto it." Yes, this is the problem. The purist versus the backpedaler.
I don't know about you, but I am so fed up. From my point of view, it's not just a problem in Alabama. The whole Republican voting problem on the Obamacare repeal is Moore-Strange!