Read her thread, and then read this post of mine from nearly a year ago about the Catch-22 "solution" which the state of Louisiana has come up with as a contingency plan in the event the #ACA is indeed struck down by the Trump/GOP lawsuit: 2/ acasignups.net/19/11/14/louis…
Louisiana has a Democratic Governor but is solidly GOP otherwise...including their Attorney General, @JeffLandry, who's also one of the *plaintiffs* in the #TexasFoldEm lawsuit to strike down the #ACA completely. 3/
Landry *himself* pushed through a state law which would, believe it or not, replicate most of the #ACA's protections for those with pre-existing conditions, including Guaranteed Issue, Community Rating, Essential Health Benefits, No Annual/Lifetime Limits, etc etc. 4/
On the surface, this sounds pretty amazing...as well as being one hell of a head-scratcher. Hell, the legislative text literally *references* the ACA language in some places! 5/
So far it sounds like Landry's bill (which passed nearly unanimously) would basically replicate the ACA at the state level (which also raises the question of why he signed onto the lawsuit in the first place). So what's the catch? Well... 6/
That's right: @JeffLandry's "ACA Jr." law would ONLY go into effect IF THE FEDERAL FUNDING provided by the ACA were to keep flowing *or* if the state of Louisiana were to somehow come up with the subsidy money on their own.
How much money? For LA, around $385 million/yr. 7/
Actually, it'd be a lot more than that if the state wanted to keep Medicaid expansion in place as well: Around $2.6 BILLION would be needed per year for that, or nearly $3 billion/year total (the @urbaninstitute pegs it at more like $3.6 billion: 8/ acasignups.net/19/12/19/texas…
LA's *entire* annual budget is ~$30 billion/yr, so they'd have to raise taxes by ~12% just to replace the federal revenue they currently receive from the feds. Alternately, the Supreme Court would have to strike down *only* the pre-existing condtion portion of the ACA. 9/
Here's where @JeffLandry's law gets especially cynical: Instead of actually addressing where the hell the state would come up with the missing $385M (or $3.0B)/year needed to make the law go into effect, the law dumps that little task onto the state insurance commissioner. 10/
I haven't followed up on the "task force" since last year, but I'd guess it hasn't become any easier to find additional funding in the states budget, seeing how Louisiana has the 4th highest number of #COVID19 cases & 5th highest COVID mortality rate. docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…
If Landry is so gung-ho about keeping protections for coverage of pre-existing conditions, to the point he spearheaded a bill which LITERALLY COPIES the ACA's protections, why is he calling for the ACA to be struck down in the first place? I can think of two reasons:
First, because helping take down "Obamacare" would certainly look good on his Republican Primary resume if he decides to run for Governor or Senate in red Louisiana the future.
Second, because doing so would, as noted above, give a MASSIVE TAX CUT to the wealthy.
Where do you think that $3 - $3.6 billion in federal funding Louisiana gets for #ACA subsidies & Medicaid expansion comes from today? acasignups.net/19/11/19/there…
THAT'S what this is about. THIS is why the GOP is *STILL* full speed ahead on tearing down the ACA *in the middle of a pandemic*: They hate anything Obama accomplished, and they want even MORE tax cuts for the wealthy.
You have to watch the clip itself to get the full effect, but here's the transcript. Remember, this guy is referring to a law which provides affordable healthcare coverage to over 20 million low/moderate-income Americans & protections for everyone else:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Just received the strangest voter intimidation/harassment call I've ever gotten.
Guy from Lakeland, Florida calls me up, starts asking about the election. I assume it's a standard phone banker. I explain I've already voted so he can move on to someone else. 1/
Instead, he starts asking *me* for info about Biden & Harris. He's supposedly "undecided" and wants to know why he should vote for Biden v. Trump.
I ask how he got my number (again, assuming it's part of a phone banking database), he says that my number was "on the internet". 2/
At this point I know for sure something's up. I probe him a bit further--he claims he "just googled it" and my number came up because I'm "the chair of the Democrat Party".
I'm the chair of a *local* Democratic *club* (and even then, my phone number isn't on our website). 3/
1. DON'T MISS THE DEADLINE!
In most states you have until 12/15 to #GetCovered, but 9 states + DC have longer deadlines to sign up (though your coverage may start later).
2. MAKE SURE YOU ENROLL IN AN ACTUAL ACA PLAN!
There's lots of scam sites out there, plus sites which are legal but still mix ACA plans with junk plans. Stick to either the official ACA exchange sites *or* to authorized partner sites which *only* sell fully ACA-compliant plans.
📣 UPDATE: @JohnJamesMI *again* tries explaining his position on healthcare policy and it...doesn't go well. Again (see updates at bottom): acasignups.net/20/10/29/updat…
James seems to have finally realized that "tort reform" has nothing to do with mandating coverage of pre-existing conditions, anyway. He's still touting "selling across state lines", "association plans" and "patient-centered, market-based" solutions, however.
A new bullet is to criticize the fact that several carriers have dropped out of the Michigan #ACA exchange. That's true, but he doesn't mention the REASONS they did so: acasignups.net/17/09/15/michi…
Dear @AOC: For someone who prides herself on being able to empathize with the poor & downtrodden, this statement is incredibly tone deaf and tunnel-visioned.
Yes, there are serious flaws w/the #ACA which need to be addressed...but it's a MASSIVE improvement over the pre-ACA era.
To be clear: You voted for #HR1425 this summer (essentially ACA 2.0), for which I applaud you.
But think about what you just said: You think it failed *in general* because it didn't work *for you and your immediate circle of co-workers*.
That doesn't mean it failed for others.
The ACA vastly improved life for tens of millions of people.
It failed to improve life for other people, apparently including yourself. Fair enough. But making a blanket "it failed" statement because you don't feel it helped YOU specifically? Think about that stance a moment.
Since @ggreenwald is getting some buzz today after resigning from The Intercept, here's the time that he tried to claim that my story about being harassed and attacked by Bernie Bros somehow meant that I was *defending* Bernie Bros: theintercept.com/2016/01/31/the…
Here's the post that Greenwald was referring to. @paulkrugman referenced it in a piece about the Bros, and I added an update noting that I didn't like the *label* "Bros" simply because it suggested that *all* his supporters were dudes. acasignups.net/20/10/29/updat…
My objection was purely a semantic one. It had nothing to do with defending the BEHAVIOR of certain die-hard Bernie supporters, which was reprehensible...just the specific label. I would've been fine with "Berniacs" or whatever. Since then, however, I stopped caring about that.
Standing outside the clerks office with a first-time voter! She’s taking advantage of Michigan’s Proposal 3 which allows her to register and vote absentee all at once just 4 days before Election Day! #VOTE
Bloomfield Township, MI early vote turnout: Around 22,000 have voted absentee so far out of around 37,000 registered voters. cc: @ElectProject
Correction: 18,000 turned in so far out of 22,000 sent out. Still nearly 50% so far!