Schumer: I told Trump that ObamaCare repeal was 'off the table'

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill




BY JESSE BYRNES - 10/07/17 10:04 AM EDT

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Saturday he told President Trump that Democrats would be open to stabilizing the health-care system, but that another push to repeal and replace ObamaCare was "off the table."

"The president wanted to make another run at repeal and replace and I told the president that's off the table," Schumer said in a statement on his call with Trump on Friday, news of which the president confirmed in a tweet.

"If he wants to work together to improve the existing health care system, we Democrats are open to his suggestions. A good place to start might be the Alexander-Murray negotiations that would stabilize the system and lower costs," Schumer added.

A Democratic aide told The Hill in an email Saturday, "Particularly after the birth control decision yesterday, the administration has to stop sabotaging the law before anything real can happen."

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/354363-schumer-i-told-trump-obamacare-repeal-was-off-the-table

[Bayard]

1. I can't believe

tRump would go along with looking like he's conceding.

He's still chopping off a little at a time.

[lark]

5. He's a total loon.

No sane person would think that Dems had any motivation or will to work with kill the poor drumpf. He has zilch to offer them, but he's too ignorant to know that. He thought they'd go for the "win" without having anything wining at all in what he was offerring. He thinks everyone is as selfish as he and his party and thought Schumer would jump at a chance to to do this. Such profound stupidity, and lack of knowledge or caring about anything other than himself is astounding. Putin must be so proud, his investment is paying off bigly.

[Wounded Bear]

2. Trump should start by ending his actions to undermine the system...

"Do no harm" sounds like a good starting point.

Stop breaking the law by not supporting the law of the land.

[Wounded Bear]

3. Schumer should say: "I don't negotiate bad politics with morons."

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Trump is there to destroy the federal goverment

Democrats have no common ground with Trump

[MyOwnPeace]

6. The Dems need to say,

"Do something FOR the people, not destroy their programs!"

What a horse's ASS Trump is!

[CousinIT]

7. But Obamacare SABOTAGE isn't. n/t

[LA Green]

8. Why are we ok with ACA?

ObamaCare is horrendous for so many of us in the middle class as well as small businesses. Why are Democrats now embracing it and defending it? I understand 45's plans are crap, but why aren't we pushing for Universal Coverage? Why are we acting like the 8 years of President Obama's presidency, we didn't accomplish anything regarding healthcare except to pay off lobbyists with the ACA debacle is ok? Complacency is why the middle class folks continue to get the shaft.

[murielm99]

10. The ACA has never been perfect.

It was negotiated after a difficult period and much research. If all the states expand Medicaid, it will work.

It needs tweaking and improvement. Thinking that we are going to get universal coverage (which does not need to be capitalized) is pie in the sky thinking. We can barely hang onto what we have.

Look at Canada's system, its history, how it works. That is the best model for us.

You say Universal Coverage (sic). Others come in here and gripe about Medicare for all, single payer. Do any of you really know what you want? Have you given any thought into how difficult it has been just to get the ACA and keep it? It is a program in its infancy. Give it time.

[LA Green]

11. This is why

we can't have nice things. Too many people want to roll over and play dead. The only people the ACA helped were lobbyists.

[murielm99]

12. Prove it.

And why then was the ACA working, providing so many previously uninsured people with coverage? Why is it so popular? The ACA has problems when red state governors will not expand Medicaid, when repubbies continually undermine it.

I answered you honestly. And you reply with snark about nice things and with sweeping statements about lobbyists.

LA Green? Did you vote for the Democratic nominee, Green?

[LA Green]

17. Popular?

The governor where I live is a Dem. ACA still isn't working for most middle class families here.It's basically extortion. High deductibles and no real coverage. Medicaid was in place before ACA for the poor. All the ACA did to the middle class was put a strain on us financially with no real coverage.
I was not trying to be snark. I'm just really sensitive about the current state of medical coverage.
My vote is none of your concern.

[standingtall]

21. Why you keep ignoring the fact that medicaid was expanded under the ACA

in states where governors allowed it usually democratic governors. Therefore more people got medicaid through the ACA. Your vote is of our concern here. This sites members support democratic candidates not the green party. Talk about helping the middle class the green party has never passed a single piece of legislation to help a single middle class person or poor person ever. You keep asking questions you really should know the answer too unless you've been under a rock the last several years. Either you live in some bubble and you really think the ACA hasn't helped anybody or you know it has and are trying to cause strife.

[LA Green]

23. Green Party?

I'm not a member of the Green Party.
We did not need the ACA to expand Medicaid. We could have simply expanded Medicaid. Medicaid is of no use to the middle class. We aren't eligible for coverage under Medicaid. Or, should we as Progressives only be concerned with healthcare of the poor? Are middle class families not worthy of affordable coverage?
Although you continue to be contentious and accusatory, I'm truly trying to understand how the ACA has helped everyday families who are working hard to make a living.

[standingtall]

24. No we shouldn't only be concerned with healthcare for poor people,but you have to deal

with reality too. Republicans control the government and that's why universal healthcare at this point is nothing more than a fairy tale. If we let republicans repeal the ACA it will be at least a generation before we get another healthcare bill if ever. Republicans will not put a universal healthcare bill through because you ask them too. I wouldn't say the ACA is of no use to the middle class especially not middle class people with pre-existing conditions who can longer have coverage denied due to pre-existing conditions. They can longer have medicine or treatment denied because greedy insurance companies think they cost to much. Also it depends on how you define the middle class. Many of the lower middle class were expanded into the poverty rate for the sake of expanding medicaid to them.

[LA Green]

25. I understand

I accept your premise. I think we should stay vigilant and keep pressing forward.

[OldHippieChick]

13. Tell that to those of us w/ pre-existing illness.

Methinks you have not thought this thru.

[LA Green]

16. Pre-existing

So prior to ACA, those with pre-existing conditions received no treatment? Not being snarky, trying to understand.

[OldHippieChick]

29. Prior to the ACA you "might"

have been able to get treatment in an emergency. Otherwise you needed insurance or enough of a bank account to pay. If you had individual insurance, it usually didn't cover pre-existing. If you developed an illness prior to the ACA, your insurance company could and did drop you and you could not find a replacement unless you could afford $2500 per month or more. Are you starting to get the picture?

[LA Green]

32. Yes

Thank you.

[standingtall]

14. That's a lie

the ACA helped millions of people with pre-existing conditions including me and helped millions of low income people through medicaid expansion.

[LA Green]

18. Clarify please

Prior to the ACA, did you not receive medical treatment? I'm trying to understand.

[standingtall]

20. Prior to ACA I could be denied insurance coverage due

to pre-existing conditions.

[LA Green]

22. Coverage but not care, correct?

I understand that you are no w eligible for insurance coverage, but were you denied health care?

[OldHippieChick]

30. If you go to a hospital and seek treatment, the first thing they ask is about insurance.

There are charity hospitals, but not all hospitals or doctors are required to treat you if you cannot pay. So, yes, you could be denied care. For instance, if you have bone cancer in your legs, a charity hospital will amputate your legs (care) but if you have insurance you can get a bone transplant and chemo (better care). Hello?

[LA Green]

31. I understand

I'm trying to get an understanding and your answer helped. Thank you. And I am sympathetic to your situation.

[haele]

28. Prior to the ACA, the only Heath care some could receive was

Anything they could get OTC at the dollar store and the emergency room. Nothing for chronic conditions that we're treated under SCHIP or California Well Child until they turned 19.

Back between 2006 and 2010, I became aware of too many of my stepdaughter's friends and their family members made too much for MediCal, but didn't make enough to buy insurance at any cost. I knew at least a dozen people who had to declare bankruptcy due to an ER bill they couldn't pay. I also knew at least two 50-somethings unable to work due to what could have been treatable when they were employed if they hadn't been kicked off their employer's insurance because they reached the lifetime limits. Not to mention co-workers with family members who were kicked off the employer's plan.
The ACA kept my husband functional. He was within $150k of the $1milllion lifetime limit in 2009. We were at the point of making a horrific decision on how in the hell we could continue his treatment - which was costing between $80k and $150k a year without insurance. The only affordable option we had was to get a divorce, have him move out, and wait a year unmedicated, without treatment from his doctors, until he could apply for MediCal.

The ACA wasn't that great for the $60k to $120k wage earners who were relatively healthy. But it was a godsend for the chronically I'll and working middle class around the median income level.

It needs a fix-not a repeal and replace.

Haele

[LA Green]

33. I agree

Thank you

[murielm99]

15. Is this person a lobbyist?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029685121

[LA Green]

19. I agree that I'm not sure

what we truly need but the ACA is not it. At least not for the middle class.

[NJCher]

26. well, one little side benefit of ACA

is that the taxes to pay for those subsidies came from the top 2 per cent. I know several people who are getting 500 a month subsidies. It makes me feel good knowing that these dicks who have wrecked the economic system for the rest of us are having to pay for the subsidies.

This is, of course, why republicans are so adamant about repeal and replace. What they repeal and replace is really the tax subsidies.

But basically, you're right. It didn't work for me and I know many others for whom it fails, too.


Cher

[DoctorRobert]

9. Since Drumph is so married to repeal and replace

He could start a systematic process of repealing the ACA for people that are 55+ and children -26 and replace it with Medicare. Every year after he can decrease and increase, respectively, the repeal and replace 10 years until everyone is covered by Medicare. And there you have it. He achieved the repeal and replace of ACA that he promised his voters and we Dems won't be too mad about it. But NOOO!!! He is too damn ignorant to do something like that. For some reason, he seems to think that all his supporters want to go back to the crappy system we had before ACA. I wonder where he gets that impression from???

[DonCoquixote]

27. apparently we are realizing

That we need to define what is off the table, not them. Pelosi has done good since, but you know she regrets taking impeahcment off the table back when W. was a lot weaker.