This month, the Justice Department threw a new twist into the debate when it urged a federal court to get rid of the ACA’s pre-existing conditions protections as part of a lawsuit filed by Texas and 19 other states alleging that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. Attempts by the Republican administration to undercut the ACA — even popular provisions like those protections — could leave some Republicans on the defensive.
“Rep. [Erik] Paulsen has long supported protections for individuals with pre-existing conditions, and he continues to do so,” a spokesman for Paulsen, the Republican representing Minnesota’s Third Congressional District, said in a statement. Paulsen declined an interview request.
Paulsen and his two fellow Minnesota Republicans in Congress voted more than once to repeal and replace the ACA. His DFL opponent, businessman Dean Phillips, is homing in on the issue in a suburban congressional district that went for Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.
“The Affordable Care Act is imperfect, but it can be much more successful by investing in it and fixing it,” Phillips said. Pointing to Paulsen’s votes to repeal it, Phillips said he was “disappointed in Erik Paulsen’s continuous efforts to undermine it ... without any thoughtful replacement.”
He added: “I do believe it’s the responsibility for thoughtful Republicans and Democrats to speak against the Justice Department’s actions to stop enforcing the pre-existing condition policy, because it hurts human beings.”
Everyone knows the Obamacare mess is inadequate. Move directly to single payer, let UnitedHealthcare twist in the wind, they deserve it. If the share price falls, those thinking the firm a good idea and a good investment may need to recalculate. So?
Same Strib item:
Emmer’s DFL challenger, Ian Todd, is advocating for a single-payer health care system. He said he was surprised to find even some conservative voters were open to his views. People know the current system isn’t working, he added.
“Do I think I’ll have most conservatives come over to my side? No, I don’t,” said Todd. “But there are a lot of people who do see things from my point of view that I wouldn’t have expected.”
He said he would talk about Emmer’s votes to repeal and replace the ACA during the campaign, but that “it’s less about what he’s done and more about what we can do” in the future.
Ian Todd is for real. The unfortunate demographics of CD6 - Bachmannistan - cut against him; but Tom Emmer has done little to merit staying in-office. Todd's voter outreach and sincerity about the real economic needs of regular people is a message that could prevail. It's a big uphill battle, but he stands for the way people should expect to be treated by the government they can vote out when it is unresponsive to reality.
The bit about preexisting condition coverage being at risk is laughable. Paulsen is out of tune, and so "beltway" he cannot see that sane voters can see where they might misstep in a pasture.
Fight phony issue mongering. Keep focused upon what's best, and not what politicians tell you to think, whether they be media owners or in office diversionaries.
Calling out a hoax of a politician: No bigger hoax than Debbie Wasserman Schultz. A reader forwarded an email solicitation for the one who poisoned the DNC well, for Hillary and Podesta lobbying and Goldman Sachs. Asking for money to advance her staying in office, she writes:
I have continually spoken out on the Trump/Ryan dangerous and cruel agenda. That’s why President Trump continually attacks me on Twitter.
Trump, his allies, and my opponents like to talk. They like to spew half-truths and partisan rhetoric. They think attacking me will make me back down.
Boy, are they wrong.
We took to the streets to protest cuts to women's health, to push for greater gun safety in our schools, and this month, to support the rights of the LGBTQ community. We're speaking out to protect Americans with pre-existing conditions, preserve Medicare and Social Security, and stop the inhumane and degrading treatment of immigrant children in this country.
These issues matter… to all of us. Together, we can fight back and make a difference.
Economic justice and health and welfare of the poor, for example, go unmentioned. And, lo, DWS can see cutting to the quick, pre-existing conditions. Yeah. Right in there with Paulsen. "Preserve" and not "fix?" Number one preservation goal for her and us; her seat in Congress.
Tax breaks given earlier after Trump took office to benefit the rich? No, the implication being not on Debbie's list because it is not important to us, in our minds.
Let's say "women's health" when freedom to have an abortion choice vs. forced to have unwanted children is one of the most fundamental human rights you can think of, so it is reduced to vanilla vague terminology. Why? Because her agenda is somebody's agenda, but is it yours.
Those with power don't care what music you prefer, just don't rock their boat one iota, or suffer for it with Debbie there to "help."
Abortion is not an economic fairness issue except for having to feed the kids being a stress test of willingness to conform and to not make waves.
LGBTQ as a focal issue means the people DWS really has as a constituency is the donors who care little where in private you put your mouth, as long as you show up for work on time and rent them your time on their terms, for their gain.
Medicare and Social Security as "our goals" under attack, so don't even think of Universal Single Payer and guaranteed income as answer to "How should the economy be structured." Syria, wartime budgets for the military when we are not under any external threat, don't look there, nothing to see there. The woman is a disgrace. Better than Paulsen? Likely.
So?
How is Debbie Wasserman Schultz really different in her policy perspective than Roy Moore? Other than it is hard to imagine her riding to the polling place on a horse. Ask yourself: Which of the three is most likely to advocate for a redistribution of wealth to help the world's people and the nation's people, Debbie, Roy, or the horse?