Trump may sign new executive order on health care soon

[NewCreation435]

Trump may soon sign new executive order on health care soon. He said

"I'll probably be signing a very major executive order where people can go out, cross state lines, do lots of things and buy their own health care, and that will be probably signed next week," he told reporters Wednesday. "It's being finished now. It's going to cover a lot of territory and a lot of people. Millions of people."

The whole article is here
http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/27/news/economy/trump-executive-order-health-care/index.html

Do you think this will help?

 

[Confessional Lutheran]

Trump may soon sign new executive order on health care soon. He said

"I'll probably be signing a very major executive order where people can go out, cross state lines, do lots of things and buy their own health care, and that will be probably signed next week," he told reporters Wednesday. "It's being finished now. It's going to cover a lot of territory and a lot of people. Millions of people."

The whole article is here
http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/27/news/economy/trump-executive-order-health-care/index.html

Do you think this will help?

It'll certainly contribute to the chaos that Trump's EOs have fostered so far. " Executive Order," " Royal Command," what's the difference? These issues need to be decided by Congress!

 

[tango]

It'll certainly contribute to the chaos that Trump's EOs have fostered so far. " Executive Order," " Royal Command," what's the difference? These issues need to be decided by Congress!

The trouble is the ACA is more or less a disaster in many ways, except for a large group of people for whom it's more or less a life saver. Having seen premiums more than double in the course of little over 4 years while deductibles have also gone through the roof, it's hard to see what part of the "affordable" care act is supposed to be, you know, affordable.

Of course replacing it is politically all but impossible since the Democrats seem wedded to the idea that it must stay in full while the Republicans seem wedded to the idea that it must be gone even if there's nothing to replace it. In the meantime it looks like it's the low paid and the self employed who suffer the most.

 

[Imalive]

Trump may soon sign new executive order on health care soon. He said

"I'll probably be signing a very major executive order where people can go out, cross state lines, do lots of things and buy their own health care, and that will be probably signed next week," he told reporters Wednesday. "It's being finished now. It's going to cover a lot of territory and a lot of people. Millions of people."

The whole article is here
http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/27/news/economy/trump-executive-order-health-care/index.html

Do you think this will help?

Isnt that gonna get insane expensive for the sick and poor?
Now I know why those health preachers are so rich in America.

 

[Imalive]

When the revival breaks out all those money wolves will go bankrupt. Bye healthcare giants! We dont need you anymore! Bye health and wealth teachers! We dont need you anymore either!

 

[NewCreation435]

Isnt that gonna get insane expensive for the sick and poor?
Now I know why those health preachers are so rich in America.

There is a lot I don't understand about this including if Trump's proposed actions are legal, but that doesn't seem to have stopped him before. But, I wonder how if you buy a policy out of state will you find a doctor who is in network? maybe it wouldn't be so much of a problem for the larger insurance companies but it seems it would for the smaller ones

 

[MoreCoffee]

Does Donald know how to sign things?

:smirk:

 

[Albion]

It'll certainly contribute to the chaos that Trump's EOs have fostered so far. " Executive Order," " Royal Command," what's the difference? These issues need to be decided by Congress!

I don't see any reason to believe that chaos will follow this executive order. But on the bigger point, it is in the nature of political doings that if one party does the unthinkable and succeeds at it, the other will fight fire with fire when given the chance.

Obama governed by executive order, and now people who didn't object to that are saying Trump cannot do the same thing and talk as though they are shocked to think he might. Think again.

 

[Confessional Lutheran]

I don't see any reason to believe that chaos will follow this executive order. But on the bigger point, it is in the nature of political doings that if one party does the unthinkable and succeeds at it, the other will fight fire with fire when given the chance.

Obama governed by executive order, and now people who didn't object to that are saying Trump cannot do the same thing and talk as though they are shocked to think he might. Think again.

I didn't appreciate it when Obama did that, either. There's a right and a wrong way of doing things and the Constitution sets up how we are to be governed. It seems that politicians have been lying and ignoring precedent at least since Clinton and possibly all the way back to Carter. I know that that's simply the way things are, but one would think that there'd be a larger measure of accountability in government.

 

[Albion]

I didn't appreciate it when Obama did that, either. There's a right and a wrong way of doing things and the Constitution sets up how we are to be governed.

On the other hand, Obama claimed that his executive orders were legal and those actions weren't stuck down or seriously challenged, so why would anyone simply assume that it wouldn't be legal for President Trump to do the same thing?

 

[NewCreation435]

Does Donald know how to sign things?

:smirk:

Unfortunately, he does. He thinks he is a king

 

[Josiah]

I agree that Trump COULD pursue that path of an executive order (it's an increasingly popular executive option). But I'm philosophically opposed to this path.... and whenever a president does it (Republican or Democrat) I tend to see it as a failure of that president; he could not lead or work with the system - and thus has only this option available.


I'm not going to get into "Trump bashing" (a fave sport these days) but the reality is: The president is a Republican and both houses are Republican and the court is pretty evenly divided. Not since 1929 have the Republicans have had such a position of power, not in 88 years. A Republican "agenda" should be easy to place on the table (especially since Republicans have been discussing all these matters - obsessively - for at least 25 years - talking about "The Republican Alternative"!) and easy to get it passed and into place. Republicans can't blame the Dems this time (nor the Press, IMO).... and Trump who claimed to be such a profound leader sure hasn't shown such (at all). If this continues much longer, I wonder if 2018 will be a Democrat landslide (and perhaps deserves to be). The Republicans are in what could be a "once-in-a-century" situation.... and they seem to be entirely blowing it. We'll see....

I think the health care situation is profoundly complex. As someone who believes in individuals being in control of their own lives (and health), I'm opposed to the "DMV Run Medical System" approach. I think the government is already way too involved. And I think health care is expensive in the USA because it's good.... and because Americans don't take enough responsibility for their own health (witness the obesity issue, for example).... we have to provide care for millions of people who are here illegally.... and because the whole insurance thing is a mess. I LOVE my health care, but I'm SHOCKED by how much my employer pays for it. How to solve all this..... I don't have a clue. I don't think it's simple or a simple "fix." But I think, "If we just let the DMV run it, all things will be solve" is stupid (although very much the liberal attitude). I'm not amazed that the Republicans struggle..... I am disappointed that they don't seem to have an alternative and if they do, can't seem to get it into law in spite of having more power than they have had in 88 years.



- Josiah


.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Unfortunately, he does. He thinks he is a king

Impeach him, everybody wants to ... except maybe the 30% of his rusted on supporters ... one suspects that they'd support him even after he started having pogroms against the Untermenschen of Mexico and Central America ...

 

[psalms 91]

Not sure that will happen but not sure it wont anymore, he is terrible but people got exactly what they voted for. He didnt all of a sudden change

 

[tango]

I don't see any reason to believe that chaos will follow this executive order. But on the bigger point, it is in the nature of political doings that if one party does the unthinkable and succeeds at it, the other will fight fire with fire when given the chance.

Obama governed by executive order, and now people who didn't object to that are saying Trump cannot do the same thing and talk as though they are shocked to think he might. Think again.

Am I right in thinking that something introduced by one president with an executive order can be nullified by a future president with nothing more than an executive order? If so it would mean much of what Obama did could be undone by Trump with no oversight. Of course it would also mean a future president could simply put it back again.

 

[Albion]

I agree that Trump COULD pursue that path of an executive order (it's an increasingly popular executive option). But I'm philosophically opposed to this path.... and whenever a president does it (Republican or Democrat) I tend to see it as a failure of that president; he could not lead or work with the system - and thus has only this option available.

I am not happy about the trend towards Executive Orders, either. However, I cannot fault him for doing it if its already been established--as it has--as a permissible action.

I'm not going to get into "Trump bashing" (a fave sport these days) but the reality is: The president is a Republican and both houses are Republican and the court is pretty evenly divided. Not since 1929 have the Republicans have had such a position of power, not in 88 years. A Republican "agenda" should be easy to place on the table (especially since Republicans have been discussing all these matters - obsessively - for at least 25 years - talking about "The Republican Alternative"!) and easy to get it passed and into place. Republicans can't blame the Dems this time (nor the Press, IMO).... and Trump who claimed to be such a profound leader sure hasn't shown such (at all). If this continues much longer, I wonder if 2018 will be a Democrat landslide (and perhaps deserves to be). The Republicans are in what could be a "once-in-a-century" situation.... and they seem to be entirely blowing it. We'll see....

Yes, we will see, and as I think on it, I am uncertain whether I think the Republicans will be hammered because of their failure to produce OR if the conversion of the Democratic Party into the Socialist Party of America will make the Republicans, divided as they are, seem like the only choice for the voters, like it or not. Could go either way IMO. But it's really the Republican leaders in the House and Senate who are the failures, not the President.

I think the health care situation is profoundly complex. As someone who believes in individuals being in control of their own lives (and health), I'm opposed to the "DMV Run Medical System" approach. I think the government is already way too involved. And I think health care is expensive in the USA because it's good.... and because Americans don't take enough responsibility for their own health (witness the obesity issue, for example).... we have to provide care for millions of people who are here illegally.... and because the whole insurance thing is a mess. I LOVE my health care, but I'm SHOCKED by how much my employer pays for it. How to solve all this..... I don't have a clue. I don't think it's simple or a simple "fix." But I think, "If we just let the DMV run it, all things will be solve" is stupid (although very much the liberal attitude). I'm not amazed that the Republicans struggle..... I am disappointed that they don't seem to have an alternative and if they do, can't seem to get it into law in spite of having more power than they have had in 88 years.

I agree with most of that, but we also need to remember that they came into this year with only a 52-48 majority and we're talking as though they had a 60-40 majority. It takes only three malcontents or Senators with a longstanding grievance against the President to scotch anything that the Republicans put forth. Yes, they have a majority, but they don't have a working majority. And I do not remember any time in our history when one of the two major parties pledged, before the inauguration, to do all within their power to overthrow the government. But it happened this time.

 

[psalms 91]

I am not happy about the trend towards Executive Orders, either. However, I cannot fault him for doing it if its already been established--as it has--as a permissible action.


Yes, we will see, and as I think on it, I am uncertain whether I think the Republicans will be hammered because of their failure to produce OR if the conversion of the Democratic Party into the Socialist Party of America will make the Republicans, divided as they are, seem like the only choice for the voters, like it or not. Could go either way IMO. But it's really the Republican leaders in the House and Senate who are the failures, not the President.


I agree with most of that, but we also need to remember that they came into this year with only a 52-48 majority and we're talking as though they had a 60-40 majority. It takes only three malcontents or Senators with a longstanding grievance against the President to scotch anything that the Republicans put forth. Yes, they have a majority, but they don't have a working majority. And I do not remember any time in our history when one of the two major parties pledged, before the inauguration, to do all within their power to overthrow the government. But it happened this time.

Not a p[roblem, after Donalds shows and congress as well I am pretty sure that the Dems are going to do really well come elections

 

[Josiah]

Am I right in thinking that something introduced by one president with an executive order can be nullified by a future president with nothing more than an executive order? If so it would mean much of what Obama did could be undone by Trump with no oversight. Of course it would also mean a future president could simply put it back again.

I'm under the impression you are correct. However, I don't think Obamacare was by executive order, I think that was a vote of Congress. Maybe I'm wrong.

MY own (very lay) opinion is that the Republicans are making the identical mistake that the Dems did.... trying to solve the whole complex health care problem with a single HUGE (and very, very vague) bill of government control. IMO, it makes more sense for the Republicans to "tackle" issues one-at-a-time; start with what has solid bi-partisan support (and perhaps even continues some parts of Obamacare), and go from there. Split this up into chewable chunks. And put it all on the table rather than some HUGE bill that no one has read (if for no other reason than it doesn't actually exist in print). The Republicans making this all one quick "Repeal and Replace" has, IMO, created an impossibility and (ironically) duplicates how Obama handled this that the Republicans so criticized. But.... I'm not a politician and don't claim to know how things get done in Washington.

 

[NewCreation435]

Am I right in thinking that something introduced by one president with an executive order can be nullified by a future president with nothing more than an executive order? If so it would mean much of what Obama did could be undone by Trump with no oversight. Of course it would also mean a future president could simply put it back again.

Yes, in many cases that is what Trump has tried to do. Unfortunately, he can't get the Republicans in Congress to agree on a path forward with health care, so he's trying to go it alone. I won't what is going to happen when Republicans don't have a majority anymore and he's forced to work with Nancy and the Democrats. I could see that happening at the next mid term elections.

 

[tango]

I'm under the impression you are correct. However, I don't think Obamacare was by executive order, I think that was a vote of Congress. Maybe I'm wrong.

MY own (very lay) opinion is that the Republicans are making the identical mistake that the Dems did.... trying to solve the whole complex health care problem with a single HUGE (and very, very vague) bill of government control. IMO, it makes more sense for the Republicans to "tackle" issues one-at-a-time; start with what has solid bi-partisan support (and perhaps even continues some parts of Obamacare), and go from there. Split this up into chewable chunks. And put it all on the table rather than some HUGE bill that no one has read (if for no other reason than it doesn't actually exist in print). The Republicans making this all one quick "Repeal and Replace" has, IMO, created an impossibility and (ironically) duplicates how Obama handled this that the Republicans so criticized. But.... I'm not a politician and don't claim to know how things get done in Washington.

My understanding was that Obamacare was passed by Congress, who thought the plan was so good they exempted themselves from it.

As far as I can see most of the problem with the "health insurance" market is that most of it is nothing to do with insurance. By the very definition of insurance, pre-existing conditions must be excluded - anything less is akin to being allowed to buy fire insurance shortly after coming home to realise your house is now a pile of smoldering ash. Of course a major difference between health insurance and other forms of insurance is that in the health world a risk event takes much longer to process - if you crash your car then your insurance pays for the repairs and that's the end of it; if you are diagnosed with cancer the treatment is almost certainly going to extend far beyond the end of your insurance term, even though the risk event actually occurred during the term.

Where healthcare in general is concerned a system like the NHS in England is good in that it means you don't have to worry about being financially ruined by a major health event, but it falls down because of endless bureaucracy and inefficiency. The US system, in theory, can reward people who look after their health with lower premiums and offers more choice to patients, but falls down when people fall through the cracks and end up being bankrupted by health issues over which they had no control at all.