The only thing that would make sense about caving right now

[misanthrope]

with the kind of "no deal" deal to end the shutdown that is being circulated is something unseemly. Politicians are more in the grasp of monied interests now than they have ever been, thanks to Citizens United. Could the powerful benefactors of Democrats have grown so nervous by the winds of change afoot since Tuesday that they want to quell them? Could they have called in markers or used pressure to convince Democrats into this self-destructive course?

[orangecrush]

1. Winner winner chicken dinner

With double chicken

[FHRRK]

6. With unlimited desert

Have to add, Baldwin and Durbin are a surprise.

[LuvLoogie]

10. Not surprised at Durbin at all.

Not at all.

[still-prayin4rain]

2. Oh, for sure. The donors are being inconvenienced with flights being canceled.

[EnergizedLib]

5. But the constituents are being inconvenienced

We’re not too amused. We may hate MAGA with a burning passion, but we are disgusted/angered/hurt, etc.

[still-prayin4rain]

8. Yes true, but mere constituents are secondary citizens to donors.

The wealthy have won both sides of the government.

[vapor2]

11. 100% and so sad that GREED prevails

[IbogaProject]

20. Grocery, Big Agg, and food processors

Some part of that $2 billion a week was going to be lost to spoiled food, and a net loss of spending in other areas when people shifted spending from elsewhere to eat.

[Arazi]

3. Durbin is fucking retiring. He isn't beholden to anyone

[Bettie]

4. Which industries benefit

most from this?

A quick check of who gets donations from those industries could be enlightening.

[tritsofme]

18. Federal workers with late mortgage and credit card payments along with SNAP recipients will benefit most.

[misanthrope]

21. I think their gains would pale compared to the gains of insurance companies

Just a hunch.

[tritsofme]

22. Health insurance companies stand to lose huge money if the subsides don't get renewed.

But regardless there are millions of federal workers sleeping better tonight knowing they will soon be able to make their late mortgage and credit card payments.

[misanthrope]

25. It isn't just premiums

It is care denied that increases profit margins for insurance.

[tritsofme]

31. Certainly a component, but on net the loss of subsidies is a huge loss to the entire model.

They will be left with an older and sicker risk pool, while they lose the healthy low utilization customers who they could just collect premiums on.

[EdmondDantes_]

24. That makes no sense if you understand how the subsidies work

Under the enhanced ACA subsidies, a person's premium that they had to pay were capped at no more than 8.5% of a person's income, and the rest was picked up by the government. Without those premiums, that burden gets pushed to the individual. The money going to the insurance company stays the same for the people who have a plan. But the presumption is that because some percentage of people won't be able to afford the new premiums they will drop their insurance. That means the insurance company gets no income from them. And because that's likely to be those who have lower healthcare costs and insurance companies are required to spend at least 80% on patient care, when the healthier people drop out, that results in higher per member costs. There's no good case that insurance companies would want to bribe politicians to cut the subsidies. It not only doesn't get them more money, it almost certainly would cost them money.

Insurance is expensive because healthcare is expensive and obviously we have a fairly inelastic need for it. I can cancel Netflix, but I can't cancel my medicine. If you have a job, do you know what your company pays each month into your insurance? My employer pays 3-4 times as much as my share of the premium. One weakness of the ACA is that individuals don't have anyone picking up that share and that my premium is pre-tax so it reduces my tax bill. With the enhanced subsidies, the government was picking up the share, but in an inefficient manner because it's a relatively small portion of the population and skews sicker than those with employer coverage. Our medical costs in this country aren't sustainable, with or without the ACA subsidies. But just like making student loans more widely accessible meant colleges had no incentive to cut down on expenses and people taking out the loans didn't understand the full cost with interest until it was too late and now college is becoming very hard to afford, we're doing similar things with hiding the cost of insurance whether through subsidies or employers picking up 70+% of the cost. Yes in the short term we still need those things, but the problem needs to be addressed at the root cause because if you don't stop the metaphorical bleeding, a bandaid isn't going to save the patient.

[Jack Valentino]

30. of course if the patient can't afford to buy food because their SNAP is being cut off,

they probably were on medicaid anyway----

and the discussion about health insurance premiums becomes totally irrelevant
if they are starving....

The Republicans might have a 'valid point' if they are opposed to
giving subsidies to people with incomes which are 5 or 6 or more times higher than my SS is---

(but of course that is hypocritical bullshit when they cut off the poor
so that they can give tax cuts to millionaires...)

I'm 'on schedule' to lose SNAP benefits because of the BBB work requirements,
although I'm not sure exactly when--- and have thus been stocking up on canned food,
particularly peanut butter and grape jelly--- among other things---
but I have much sympathy for families who haven't been able to do so---
and they all needed for this 'shutdown' to END....


The best antidote to these problems is a 'blue tsunami'
retaking both houses of congress and the White House in 2028

[H2O Man]

7. You nailed it.

Recommended.

[FoxNewsSucks]

9. That's a sensible, logical and obvious explanation.

For this and many (WAY too many) other cave-ins to billionaires and the republicon party they completely own.

[johnnyfins]

12. ONE WORD.

EPSTEIN.

Don't underestimate the contents of these files or the lengths that certain persons(in both parties) will go to to ensure that they stay unreleased.

[valleyrogue]

13. It's ridiculous because people are forgetting about the House.

The Senate can do whatever it wants, but unless the House returns for business, NOTHING is going to happen.

[BajaDoll]

14. I may be wrong but

because this agreement is modified from the bill sent over by the House it now has to be re-voted on in the House and that would entail bringing the House back to order and will give us a chance to swear in our rep. Plus I am not sure this will even pass with the nut jobs in the House. So maybe we are playing 3d chess and getting our Epstein vote and maybe sending this bill to die in the House. Correct me if I am understanding this wrong.

[still-prayin4rain]

15. Yes only good that can come from this is an Epstein vote in the house

[BlueKota]

17. I think it probably will be sent back to the House,

but I am guessing since their lord and master seems to be on board with it, the rest of the Magats will fall in line and vote yes.

[Emile]

16. My dad always said, "follow the money"

[spanone]

19. K&R

[Sparkly]

23. Just people who aren't worried about future votes

and for some reason want to ease people's pain, which eases Republicans' path to making the pain even worse.

--> It NEVER works to appease TERRORISTS.

[yaesu]

26. They just served shit sandwiches at the senate picnic and we all have to take a bite. nt

[Cirsium]

27. Yes

Could the powerful benefactors of Democrats have grown so nervous by the winds of change afoot since Tuesday that they want to quell them?

Yes.

[unblock]

28. Stock market has an off week and suddenly there's a deal?

And the futures market is up now.

Hmmmm....

[yourout]

29. There are corporate Dems that are essentially Republican operatives

Stealth Republicans as it were that are there to protect against any progressive legislation.
There are a fair number that would rather lose to a Republican than see a progressive in power.