Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Proud liberal 80

(4,167 posts) Thu Sep 21, 2017, 12:34 PM Sep 2017

What is so different in this bill

That would make Murkowski say yes? She voted no on the three other bills and also voted no on the procedural process to bring the bills to the floor.

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What is so different in this bill (Original Post) Proud liberal 80 Sep 2017 OP

I recall a recent mention of some Alaskan pork in this bill... Orsino Sep 2017 #1

I bet it is the fact that the bill pushes the important decisions to the state. Right wingers Hoyt Sep 2017 #2

Orsino

(37,428 posts)

1. I recall a recent mention of some Alaskan pork in this bill...

Reply to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Thu Sep 21, 2017, 12:39 PM

Sep 2017

...that would have been put in there specifically to woo her.

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

2. I bet it is the fact that the bill pushes the important decisions to the state. Right wingers

Reply to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Thu Sep 21, 2017, 01:49 PM

Sep 2017

love to give the local GOPers the power to screw/kill people.

The actual bill probably isn't that gawd awful, it's what the GOPers can do with it at the state level that's the real issue. Some states -- like those that expanded Medicaid -- might well make it work for citizens, even if federal funding is reduced. Other states, will just used the reduced funding as an excuse to establish a cruddy health plan and put off any chance of Single Payer or a Public Option for decades.

Reply to this discussion