NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label ayn rand. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ayn rand. Show all posts

09 July 2025

The Big Blasphemous Bill 2JUL25

 

DESCRIBES in plain language the reasons for this legislation and the kind of people who support it as well as the people who's political and religious philosophies influenced this project 2025 screed, like fascist fotze ayn rand. The bbb really is The Big Blasphemous Bill. From Sojourners

The Big Blasphemous Bill

2 JULY 2025

In Washington, a new piece of legislation glides forward on patriotic branding and moral ambition. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as it’s called, promises economic growth, national renewal, and family empowerment. But beneath the shimmering language of prosperity lies a troubling philosophy — one that recasts the U.S. citizen as a market participant above all else and reshapes public policy into a liturgy for the god of the economy. 

Several sections of the bill emphasize that a person’s economic output should be what determines their worth and the benefits they receive for living in the United States. Food assistance under SNAP is now contingent on proving one’s usefulness in the workforce, and access to Medicaid is framed as a reward for monthly productivity. Colleges are penalized based on their graduates’ loan repayment rates, reducing education to a measure of economic return, while student aid is calculated not by need but by the expected value of a student’s future earnings. Even newborns are cast as future market participants, with state-seeded “Trump Accounts” designed to train them in contribution and market value from infancy. These provisions redefine public goods not as a matter of justice or care, but as a transactional reward for economic performance.

The bill, which lawmakers are aiming to pass July 4, encodes a worldview that valorizes self-reliance, moralizes wealth, and reduces citizenship to a transaction. It assumes that human worth can be measured by productivity, that those who receive assistance should earn it through compliance, and that belonging in a national community must be demonstrated economically.

The ethical logic here has little to do with preserving democratic ideals and has more in common with the author and philosopher Ayn Rand. Her objectivist philosophy, long a current beneath American political discourse, rejects altruism, elevates individualism, and dismisses collective obligation.

The Big Beautiful Bill supports the idea of individual selfishness, where altruism is viewed as a weakness. This bill reflects that by stripping programs of compassion and replacing them with contracts of compliance.

While lawmakers claim to be championing the prosperity of all Americans, the primary beneficiaries of this bill would be owners of big businesses and the top echelons of our society. This bill, if passed, will deliver a few hundred dollars in tax relief to a family making $40,000, while families making $400,000 will see thousands in breaks. This is clear evidence that this “One Big Beautiful Bill” is far more generous to high earners than it is to everyday, working class Americans.

This legislation is emblematic of the Make America Great Again movement. Sold as an investment in the next generation, it functions as an ideological seed bank: Children who are American enough, documented enough, and tax-advantaged enough will grow up with a savings vehicle tailored for the state’s economic goals. This isn’t policy, it’s formation. These children aren’t being prepared for civic engagement. They’re being trained to compete.

What’s missing here is a deeper vision of human dignity. Not one grounded in merit or productivity, but one grounded in the simple truth that every human being has value before they produce a single thing. That our worth does not begin with a Social Security number. That our belonging is not determined by how well we perform economically.

In Fratelli Tutti, the late Pope Francis warned against these evils, as such an economic perspective perpetuates injustices, social exclusion, and environmental degradation. In other words, if economic performance is the priority, then the common good is not taken into account. Francis’ encyclical calls on the economic sector to be subordinated to the service of people. There needs to be a moral limit on the market so that everyone can live with dignity and have what they need. Christ tells us that consumerism can enslave us and leave us unfulfilled (Luke 12:15). Christ also warns against turning the market into a god — some things shouldn’t be for sale (Matthew 6:24; 16:26).

When we equate wealth with moral goodness, we turn money into an idol and overlook the grace at the heart of the gospel. Tying someone’s dignity or belonging to their economic production denies the radical welcome Jesus offers to all, especially the vulnerable. A society that sits on a foundation of competition and control, rewarding only the compliant and self-reliant, forgets the call to mercy, justice, and community (Micah 6:8).

The market is not God. But this bill, with all its promise and polish, flirts with that blasphemy. It elevates market logic to moral logic. It treats tax brackets as indicators of virtue. It excludes the vulnerable in the name of order. It forgets that a just society does not begin by sorting the deserving from the undeserving, but by recognizing that all of us, in some way, fall short and are still worthy of care and consideration.

For citizens, there is an invitation here to consider not just what policies we support, but what they reveal about who we are becoming. Are we building a future where the dignity of each person is honored, regardless of their output? Or are we building a future where only the strong and the profitable thrive?

This isn’t about Left or Right. It’s about what we worship. And the warning is clear: When the economy becomes our god, we begin to sacrifice people on its altar.

We can choose another way. We can protect the vulnerable, honor the incarcerated, welcome the stranger, and trust that our shared life is richer when no one is left out. That kind of politics would be truly beautiful. It remains out of reach not because it has been tried and found difficult, but because it is difficult and so remains untried.

30 April 2018

Paul Ryan fires House chaplain, reportedly for being way too Christian & House chaplain forced out by Ryan 26APR18


THE main question I have is where is the outrage, the accusations against the drumpf/trump-pence administration and the republican party of waging war on Christianity, especially from the "religious" right wing? paul ryan's hypocritical action in firing House Chaplain Patrick Conroy is a perfect example of a Christian being persecuted for living his faith. And yet, silence from the "religious" supporters of drumpf/trump-pence and the republican party. From DailyKos and The Hill.....
Paul Ryan fires House chaplain, reportedly for being way too Christian


"Devout" Catholic Speaker Paul Ryan has apparently fired House Chaplain Patrick Conroy, whose resignation explicitly says Ryan forced him out.
"As you have requested, I hereby offer my resignation as the 60th Chaplain of the United States House of Representatives." the April 15 letter to Ryan, obtained by The Hill, states. […]
The thinking among Democrats is that Ryan pushed Conroy out "because Republicans thought he was aligned with Democrats," according to a senior Democratic aide familiar with the discussion.
Conroy has served as chaplain since 2011, where he has been what he's supposed to be. A Christian. Like in the prayer he gave back in November on the first day of the mark-up of the tax scam bill and gently nudged members to think about the meek.
"May all Members be mindful that the institutions and structures of our great Nation guarantee the opportunities that have allowed some to achieve great success, while others continue to struggle," Conroy said at the time. "May their efforts these days guarantee that there are not winners and losers under new tax laws, but benefits balanced and shared by all Americans."
So apparently Conroy was too aligned with Democrats. Maybe because Jesus would be aligned with the Democrats. That's how much of a sociopath Paul Ryan is.

House chaplain forced out by Ryan

BY MELANIE ZANONA AND MIKE LILLIS - 

House Chaplain Patrick Conroy’s sudden resignation has sparked a furor on Capitol Hill, with sources in both parties saying he was pushed out by Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Conroy’s own resignation announcement stated that it was done at Ryan’s request.
“As you have requested, I hereby offer my resignation as the 60th Chaplain of the United States House of Representatives,” the April 15 letter to Ryan, obtained by The Hill, states.
Through his office, Conroy, who has served as chaplain since 2011, declined to comment on Thursday. His resignation is effective May 24.
Four different sources — two from each party — say Conroy was told that he must retire or that he would be dismissed.
The message from Ryan was delivered by his chief of staff, Jonathan Burks.
The issue has riled House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who broached the episode during the Democrats’ whip meeting in the Capitol Thursday morning. 
A bipartisan group of lawmakers are planning to send a letter to Ryan requesting additional information regarding Conroy’s dismissal; the group is currently circulating the letter among colleagues to collect more signatures.
The thinking among Democrats is that Ryan pushed Conroy out “because Republicans thought he was aligned with Democrats,” according to a senior Democratic aide familiar with the discussion.
House chaplains, who offer an opening prayer each day the House is in session, are supposed to be nonpartisan.
It’s unclear exactly what if any political dispute, however, led to the chaplain’s dismissal.
A Democratic lawmaker said that the Speaker took issue with a prayer on the House floor that could have been perceived as being critical of the GOP tax-cut bill.
On Nov. 6 — the first day of the markup on the GOP's tax bill — Conroy in a prayer urged lawmakers to ensure the legislation did not exacerbate the nation's gaping class disparities.
"May all Members be mindful that the institutions and structures of our great Nation guarantee the opportunities that have allowed some to achieve great success, while others continue to struggle," Conroy said at the time. "May their efforts these days guarantee that there are not winners and losers under new tax laws, but benefits balanced and shared by all Americans."
 
A senior GOP aide said Conroy’s exit “was not because of any particular prayer."
 
Ryan’s and Pelosi’s offices agree that Pelosi was told in advance that the chaplain was leaving.
AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Ryan, said it was Ryan’s decision, but declined to offer a reason for the move. She added that Pelosi and her office “were fully read in and did not object.”
"The speaker told Leader Pelosi that he would not move forward with the decision if she objected and she chose not to," Strong said. 
In a separate statement to media outlets late Thursday, Strong said, "The speaker consulted with the minority leader, but the decision was his. He remains grateful for Father Conroy’s service."
Pelosi’s office disputed that the Democrat did not object.
“Leader Pelosi was given advance notice by Speaker Ryan," said a Pelosi spokesman, but she “also made it clear to Speaker Ryan that she disagreed with this decision.”
A second Democratic aide said Conroy’s ouster was “largely driven by a speech on the tax bill that the Speaker didn't like.” But the source also offered a second reason.
“Some of the more conservative evangelical Republicans didn't like that the Father had invited a Muslim person to give the opening prayer,” the source said.
When Pelosi, who is Catholic, informed members of her whip team on Thursday morning that Conroy was pushed out against his will, it “shocked” the members, according to one lawmaker.
Catholic members on both sides of the aisle were furious to learn that Conroy’s retirement was not voluntary, according to multiple sources, including one Republican lawmaker and one Democratic member.
Ryan, who is also Catholic, has appointed Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.), an Air Force Reserve chaplain, as well as Reps. Mark Walker (R-N.C.) and Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), both former pastors, to lead the search effort to find a replacement.
Conroy’s arrival on Capitol Hill was also marked with some controversy. The Jesuit priest was nominated by former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) in May 2011, but Pelosi urged additional vetting of the pick after learning that Conroy was then working for a Catholic religious order — the Oregon Province of the Society of Jesus — that had agreed just months earlier to pay $166 million to victims of sexual abuse going back decades.
There was no evidence that Conroy was involved in the scandal, nor did Pelosi suggest that was the case. After further questioning, she endorsed his nomination.
– Juliegrace Brufke and Scott Wong contributed to this report, which was updated at 8:23 p.m. 

25 May 2017

AMERICAN DEFENDERS OF LIFE

JUST a reminder (NOT MY) vice-president mike pence is pro-birth NOT pro-life, there is a difference you hypocritical right wing religious extremist! BY  THE BY, ayn rand, the guiding light for rep fotze paul ryan r WI and his supporters like rep fotze barbara comstock r VA, hated Christianity. 

05 May 2017

The Truth About GOP Hero Ayn Rand, House Majority Leader Paul Ryan and the republican healthcare plan





































“The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” said Paul Ryan, the GOP's young budget star at a D.C. event honoring the author. On another occasion, he proclaimed, “Rand makes the best case for the morality of democratic capitalism.”

LET's get on thing straight. rep paul ryan's healthcare plan, the drumpf/trump-pence ryan healthcare plan, is not inspired by Christianity. If fact, drumpf/trump, pence and ryan, along with their supporters in congress (include rep barbara comstock r VA 10th district) who proclaim their own faith for political gain, are following the teaching of the famous undocumented immigrant ayn rand, a greedy, selfish, self-serving wench who in fact at the end of her life turned to the very social safety net programs she denounced and worked to end. Not only do they apply her teachings to their healthcare policies, they apply them to all the social safety net programs as well as to their plans for the EPA, public education, the NIH, the FDA, and government regulation of our food system, worker safety, transportation, in fact everything we, as Americans, expect of the American Social Contract and expect our government to do on behalf of the American people. ayn rand's philosophy goes way beyond grover norquist's desire to see a federal government so small it could "fit in a bathtub". ayn rand envisions a society as in 'Animal Farm', and sadly, the drumpf/trump-pence administration with their supporters in the republican controlled congress seem hell bent on doing all they can to change our Republics into a Third World theocratic plutocracy. It boggles one's mind that those who proclaim America as a Christian nation can blindly go along with this. Check out these videos below about ayn rand....
The Truth About GOP Hero Ayn Rand

Uploaded on Apr 18, 2011
A film adaptation of the 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand, opened this past Friday. The release of the film has coincided with a resurgence of popularity for Rand on the American Right. The trailer for Atlas Shrugged had its world premier at this year's CPAC conference, the Tea Party group FreedomWorks has rolled out a massive campaign to promote the film, and the story's opening line — "Who is John Galt" — has appeared on numerous signs at Tea Party rallies.

At the same time, some of the right's leading political and media lights have heaped praise upon Rand. The author of the Republicans' new budget plan to gut Medicare and Medicaid, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), has said Rand is the reason he entered politics. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) have both declared themselves devotees of her writing. Conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has his law clerks watch the film adaptation of Rand's book The Fountainhead. She's also received accolades from right-wing pundits Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, John Stossel, and Andrew Napolitano.

During her lifetime, Rand advocated "the virtue of selfishness," declared altruism to be "evil," opposed Medicare and all forms of government support for the middle-class and the poor, and condemned Christianity for advocating love and compassion for the less fortunate:

Rand also dismissed the feminist movement as a "false" and "phony" issue, said a female commander in chief would be "unspeakable," characterized Arabs as "almost totally primitive savages," and called government efforts to aid the handicapped and educate "subnormal children" an attempt to "bring everybody to the level of the handicapped."

As for the new Atlas Shrugged film, it made $1.7 million in its first three days in theaters, reasonable but unspectacular numbers for a limited release on 299 screens. But box-office watchers looking to see if the Tea Party represents a discrete market would have been disappointed. The movie grossed just $5,608 per theater over that time period, hardly a sign that groups were buying out theaters or that the movie was a pop culture phenomenon. By contrast, An Inconvenient Truth took in $70,333 per theater during its first five days on screens. That number fell to $17,615 per theater in its second week, but that number is still higher than Atlas Shrugged's more widely-available debut. And Atlas Shrugged's numbers look positively puny next to another culture-war adaptation of a popular book, Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, which raked in $125,185,971 over its first five days in theaters.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/18/t...







.

MORE ON THE WINNERS AND LOSERS UNDER THE HOUSE GOP HEALTH BILL 4MAI17

Trumpcare Nightmare: Just About Everyone With Health Care Is Going to Pay More, Get Less
The House GOP’s “winners” are:
• Tax cuts: Gives $600 billion in tax breaks, mostly to the rich and corporations;
• Millionaires: Get a $50,000 tax break each year from repeal of the ACA’s taxes on the rich. A total of $275 billion in tax cuts goes mostly to the richest 2%;
• 400 Richest Families: Each gets a tax cut of $7 million a year, on average;
• Insurance Companies: Get $145 billion in tax breaks over 10 years;
• Drug Companies: Get $25 billion in tax breaks over 10 years;
• Richest 2%: Get a $117 billion tax cut by eliminating a small Medicare tax on couples with incomes above $250,000 a year.
The “losers” are:
• Health Care Cuts: Takes health care away from 24 million Americans;
• Low-Income Americans: Loss of $275 billion in revenue from wealthy tax cuts plays a big role in 14 million low-income kids and seniors losing Medicaid coverage;
• Workers: 7 million will lose health care coverage from their employer;
• Older Americans: Health insurance companies could increase premiums by up to $13,000 for older Americans;
• Patients: No protections from huge drug price increases by pharmaceutical companies;
• Medicare beneficiaries: Loss of $117 billion in revenue from wealthy tax cut shortens Medicare’s ability to pay full benefits by three years.

04 May 2017

Winners And Losers Under The House GOP Health Bill & GOP Passes Its Health Care Bill At Long Last, But Still A Long Way To Go & Trump 'Confident' About GOP Health Care Bill's Prospects In The Senate 4MAI17


THE repiglican healthcare plan has passed the US House in a close vote with no Democratic support. Now it moves to the US Senate with the knowledge it will be changed and have to go back to the house for another vote. Those with pre-existing conditions and on Medicaid are most at risk but it is a well established fact that is not a concern of the majority of the republicans in congress, those repiglicans who supported and or voted for this bill took care to  excluding themselves from their own legislation. From +NPR  

Winners And Losers Under The House GOP Health Bill

House Republicans have passed a bill to replace the Affordable Care Act. If it is signed into law, the American Health Care Act will affect access to health care for millions of people in the U.S.
The AHCA would shrink Medicaid coverage, undercut some protections for people with preexisting conditions and eliminate billions of dollars in taxes that currently help pay for the ACA. We've broken down how its provisions would change health coverage for nine key groups of people.

GOP Passes Its Health Care Bill At Long Last, But Still A Long Way To Go

Updated at 3:45 p.m. ET
Republicans finally got their health care bill.
After seven years of repeal-and-replace rhetoric against the Affordable Care Act, two presidential campaigns waged for and against it and a recent high-profile failure, House Republicans passed their bill.
The trouble is this bill is likely never to become law — at least in its current iteration.
Here's why: While the bill passed the House (narrowly) Thursday afternoon, it still has to go to the Senate. It's being done with a wink and a promise that the Senate will overhaul substantial portions of the bill.
"This thing is going to the United States Senate. It's going to change in my view in the United States Senate in some way," Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a deputy whip in the House, told NPR's Morning Edition. (He's one of the people in charge of making sure Republicans have the votes.) "Then we have to have a conference to work out the differences. If we can do that, then it has to still pass the House and the Senate again before it ever gets to the president. So at some point, you just have to move."
Sure, the Senate is controlled by Republicans, too, but they have an even slimmer majority there with equally fractious divisions. If they lose three votes, the bill goes down.
Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas has been doing a delicate dance on Medicaid expansion. His state took federal money to expand Medicaid, but he's called it a "welfare program" and said "able-bodied adults" shouldn't be on it.
After an angry town hall, he changed his tune, saying the House bill was "moving too fast; I didn't think it got it right." He also has indicated he's against it in its current form because, "I simply think that it's not going to work to bring down premiums for working Arkansans or working Americans around the country."
Other senators, like Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Rob Portman of Ohio and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, are in favor of repeal, but want something "stable" to replace it. They have indicated that affordability, coverage and rural access (like what the bill means for rural hospitals) are key.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is going to allow amendments. That means the bill will change. And if even a comma is inserted, it has to pass the House — again.
And that is inevitably going to bring back this whole game of whack-a-mole in the House.
Exhausted yet?
Wait, there's more. Because Democrats aren't going to sign onto something that guts the coverage mandates of the Affordable Care Act, Republicans can't get 60 votes to advance the legislation.
So in order to pass it, they're going to have to use the process known as reconciliation. That allows legislation to pass with just a majority (plus one). But there's a catch — it has to be tied to the budget.
Get ready to hear a whole lot more about the "Byrd Rule." What's that? The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget explains it this way:
"Although reconciliation bills are granted many privileges that are not available to most other legislation (see Reconciliation 101), they remain bound by several conditions. Some of these restrictions championed by former Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) and established in Section 313 of the Budget Act are jointly referred to as the 'Byrd Rule.' The Byrd Rule disallows 'extraneous matter' from being included in a reconciliation bill, extraneous matter being defined in three major categories of restrictions.
"First, reconciliation legislation must only involve budget-related changes and cannot include policies that have no fiscal impact, that have 'merely incidental' fiscal impacts, or that increase the deficit if the committee did not follow its reconciliation instructions (including proposals outside of a committee's proper jurisdiction—more on this below). Second, reconciliation bills cannot change Social Security spending or dedicated revenue, which are considered 'off-budget.' And finally, provisions in a reconciliation bill cannot increase the deficit in any fiscal year after the window of the reconciliation bill (usually ten years in the future) unless the costs outside the budget window are offset by other savings in the bill."
The umpire of what qualifies under the Byrd Rule is the Senate parliamentarian. Her name is Elizabeth MacDonough. Politico wrote of her in 2015:
"[S]he may very well be the most powerful person in Washington in determining how far Republicans can go in trying to repeal Obamacare. As the Senate parliamentarian, MacDonough will make the decisions on which pieces of the law qualify to be repealed using a complicated budget procedure called reconciliation. Her decisions would allow Senate Republicans to vote to kill major provisions of the health care law under a simple 51-vote majority without giving Democrats a chance to filibuster."
MacDonough was appointed in 2012, and even though she's liked on Capitol Hill by both sides, past parliamentarians (known colloquially on the Hill as "parls") have come under fire because the majority party didn't like how they ruled. More from Politico:
"Republicans protested decisions by then-parliamentarian Alan Frumin in the 2010 health care reform fight, when Democrats used the budget fast-track tool to pass a small part of the Affordable Care Act. In 2001, Republicans fired Robert Dove as parliamentarian after he ruled against them on how many reconciliation bills could be used. That was actually his second stint in the job: Democrats had fired Dove when they took the majority in 1987."
Reconciliation — and what fits and doesn't fit into it — isn't the GOP's only complication. Their biggest one is the policy itself. It has a lot of shortcomings.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said of the last iteration of the House bill that it would save money but would leave some 24 million without insurance.
So the GOP bill would be less generous in terms of benefits and cover fewer. And the only reason it would save money is because the repeal bill would cut $880 billion from Medicaid.
That would break President Trump's promises of "insurance for everybody" and "no cuts to Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid."
The CBO won't get out an analysis of the bill before Republicans are planning to vote. Politically, that gives them a chance to wipe their brows and not have to defend something that could be difficult to defend.
It's morally questionable, though, to vote on something without knowing its cost or consequences. And what happens when the CBO score does come out — and they've already voted for it without the opportunity to make changes?
And there's the issue of the popular pre-existing conditions provision in Obamacare — that requires insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions.
Trump claimed as late as this week that this bill would guarantee people with pre-existing conditions would continue to be covered. But Republicans' attempts at doing that are very different than how Obamacare achieves it.
The GOP plan would essentially allow states to take sicker people out of the broader pool of people buying coverage and put them into a "high-risk pool." That, in theory, would bring down the cost of insurance for healthier people, but drive up the cost for the sick. Depending upon how much costs increase, that could shut some or many of the people who definitely need health care out of the insurance market.
High-risk pools haven't shown great results where they have been currently implemented. Part of the problem has been funding. That's why Trump picked up two more votes with a proposal for $8 billion more for those pools, but experts say that's not even likely enough.
The U.S. government already has very high-profile high-risk pools, Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare, health care for the elderly, is popular but expensive.
A big point of Obamacare was to not go down that potentially problematic funding lane. Healthier people might pay a little more, but if you got sick, it wouldn't bankrupt you.
So why the rush to get this through if it has all these holes and it may not be what eventually becomes law anyway? Politics. The House finally has a chance to tell its base it did something, it passed something to repeal-and-replace Obamacare.
The House goes on recess next week, and Republicans want to get this done and hand President Trump a win before then.
It's a huge relief for House Speaker Paul Ryan, who was feeling the heat of not being able to govern House Republicans.
It's a huge relief for Trump, who has been made to look ineffectual with no legislative wins to speak of in his first 100 days and little other major accomplishments in that time — despite Republicans being in charge of the White House, the House and Senate.
But remember, the GOP plan that failed previously had just a 17 percent approval rating. And, policywise, it hasn't changed all that much.
President Obama ran into a similar problem — health care is very difficult to message about but very easy to poke holes in. And Democrats lost control of the House in 2010 because of health care.
Now, the Affordable Care Act, Obama's signature legislative achievement, has had a resurgence in public opinion. Gallup found approval of the ACA at 55 percent this month, the first time it has ever reached a majority in the poll.
Trump says the GOP bill can't be compared to the ACA "because Obamacare is dead."
First of all, that's not true. The last CBO analysis of the ACA said it's not in a death spiral.
Second, anything that comes after Obamacare has to be compared to it.
What's that you say, health care and legislating are complicated? Yes, they are, and there's still a long way to go.

Trump 'Confident' About GOP Health Care Bill's Prospects In The Senate

Updated at 4:03 p.m. ET
The House voted Thursday to narrowly approve a Republican-drafted measure that would eliminate many of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act — the first step toward keeping one of President Trump's campaign pledges and a victory for GOP lawmakers who have long railed against Obamacare, as the ACA is commonly known. The vote was 217-213.
The measure moves to the Senate, where its fate is far from certain.
After passing the measure, House Republicans jumped on buses for a quick trip to an unusual victory lap event in the White House Rose Garden — given that the measure has a long way before it actually becomes law.
President Trump promised that premiums and deductibles will be coming down under the GOP plan and said that he feels "confident" the measure will make it through the Senate. "It's going to be an unbelievable victory when we get it through the Senate," he added. And Trump praised House Speaker Paul Ryan as "a genius," for engineering Thursday's legislative win.
Speaking after Trump in the Rose Garden, Ryan asserted the GOP bill was "the beginning of the end of Obamacare."


While Republicans praised the measure, Democrats had accused the GOP of ramming the bill through the House without fully understanding its provisions or its implications.
The bill included last-minute amendments designed to draw votes from the most conservative House Republicans in the House Freedom Caucus as well as from their more moderate counterparts.
The changes were necessary after the original bill was pulled from the floor in March when it became apparent it would not pass. And last week, GOP leaders considered bringing it back, but then decided not to risk another vote.
Republican members had their arms twisted by President Trump in phone calls and attended a last-minute pep rally Thursday morning, in which GOP House leaders reportedly told them it was "time to live or die by this day."
The measure, known as the American Health Care Act, was called "a monstrosity" by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who said centrist Republicans who voted for the bill will have "walked the plank from moderate to radical," adding, "you will glow in the dark" after voting for the bill.
The House voted on the bill without any knowledge of how many Americans will be affected, or the measure's price tag. That's because the Congressional Budget Office, the official scorekeeper, hasn't had a chance to analyze the amended bill. But the CBO estimated an earlier version of the measure would mean 24 million people could lose their insurance.
But we do know the bill would cut taxes imposed by the Affordable Care Act and slash funding for Medicaid, which was expanded under the ACA, by more than $800 billion. It would also allow states to seek waivers for many of the patient protections in Obamacare, including those provisions intended to help people with pre-existing conditions.
The measure does provide $8 billion for states to set up high-risk pools to cover those with pre-existing conditions who are unable to find affordable coverage on the open market. That last-minute addition was key to winning support from some House Republicans who were especially concerned about coverage for pre-existing conditions. But critics say it is woefully short of the amount of money actually necessary to guarantee affordable coverage.
An array of medical groups, led by the American Medical Association, had opposed the measure. In a statement Wednesday, AMA President Andrew Gurman said, "None of the legislative tweaks under consideration changes the serious harm to patients and the health care delivery system if AHCA passes. Proposed changes to the bill tinker at the edges without remedying the fundamental failing of the bill — that millions of Americans will lose their health insurance as a direct result of this proposal."
The retirees' group AARP also had opposed the GOP bill.
But Republicans pointed to the number of insurance companies who have pulled out of state-run exchanges, leaving consumers with few choices and rising prices for health insurance in many states. "This is a crisis," Ryan said as the bill was debated on the House floor prior to passage, "that is happening right now."
"A lot of us have waited seven years to cast this vote," Ryan added. "A lot of us are here because we promised this vote."
Whether the Senate will go along with the House measure is another story. Few Senate Republicans have expressed any interest in the House plan, and it's expected to be significantly altered when it reaches that chamber. And polls have shown the GOP measure to be extremely unpopular with voters, potentially placing at risk the political careers of lawmakers who back it.