Friday, October 13, 2017

Trump Declares War on Obamacare: Today's News for October 13th

CNN:
President Donald Trump plans to end a key set of Obamacare subsidies that helped lower-income enrollees pay for health care, the White House said Thursday, a dramatic move that raises questions about the law's future.

The late-night announcement is part of Trump's aggressive push to dismantle aspects of his predecessor's signature health law after several failed attempts by Congress to repeal it earlier this year.

It also puts the spotlight back on Congress, where lawmakers in both parties have urged the administration to continue the payments to stabilize the Obamacare markets in the short term.

While senior congressional Republicans oppose the payments themselves -- they sued the Obama administration to stop them and have tried for years to repeal the underlying law altogether -- there's recognition of what ending them suddenly could do to the millions of Americans insured through the Obamacare exchanges.

Democrats have repeatedly pressed the administration for a longer term commitment that the payments would be made, but Trump has directed his advisers to keep them on a month-to-month basis, in part for negotiating leverage, according to sources with knowledge of the discussions.
Is Trump actually planning to end the subsidies? Or is this a bluff? Keeping "them on a month-to-month basis" sounds more like a negotiating ploy than an actual plan to end them.

On the other hand, nowhere in this article, or any of the other articles in other media sources covering this story, is there any indication that the subsidies are REQUIRED under the law. It seems the subsidies are allowed to be paid under the law, but they aren't required. That is an important distinction, which is the difference indicating Trump's action's legality.

By the way, before you listen to all the gloom and doom and massive numbers of people losing health insurance, consider this part of the story:
Obamacare enrollees eligible to receive premium subsidies, which are not affected by Trump's move, will continue to get discounted rates. But those who don't could see their costs skyrocket again next year.
The poor and low income will still have their health insurance subsidized.

But there is an important aspect to Obamacare which President Trump actually fixed Thursday:

Real Clear Politics:
The president signed an executive order "to promote healthcare choice and competition" Thursday morning at the White House.

It is said to expand access to "association health plans" – group plans written by trade associations, small businesses, and other groups. Such large group plans do not have to abide by all the requirements of individual plans under 'Obamacare.' The order also tasks administration officials to develop policies to increase competition in the health insurance industry.

..."We’re going to have great health care across state lines," Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity Wednesday night. "People can buy it. It will cost the government nothing."
If Trump has actually done this, and it has been one of the Right's health care wishes for many years, this will be huge. Sadly, it only applies to part of the health insurance market.

In other news...

Raw Story:
Gem Aimable, a 19-year-old Army National Guard private, was in uniform when a white man she cut off in traffic followed her multiple blocks to accost her. It was the first time someone had ever called her the n-word to her face in her 19 years, and after a friend shared her ordeal on Twitter, she soon went viral.

“[The man] told me to never forget that I am nothing but a n**ger and that us n**gers do not deserve to serve this very country and to take off my uniform and to kill myself,” Aimable wrote in her post on October 10.

In an interview with Raw Story, Aimable has spoken out about the incident, about those who believe protesting racism is unpatriotic, and about moving forward.

When the man first confronted her with the racial slur, Aimable said that her initial response was one of anger, and then of fear.

“I wanted to fight him. I wanted to make him take those words back,” she told Raw Story. “I also remembered that I am in uniform and I must conduct myself accordingly. Also, I, as an African American or a n**ger in his sense, I tend to be stereotyped as violent, so why fulfill their stereotypes?”

Though it was her first brush with such violent racism, Aimable said that living as an African American with the country’s current race relations has weighed heavy on her.

“With this uniform comes a lot of power and responsibilities,” she said. “There are moments were I wish I could join friends in protest. Instead, I write poetry on equality for all especially the LGBT community and poetry on racism.”
There is a lot in this story.

First, let's start with the fact, which the story makes, that she cut him off. So she caused a road rage incident. When people are angry, especially when dealing with complete strangers, they are likely to say things they would never say normally, strictly to hurt feelings. This is not a case of some random stranger walking up to her on the street and tossing racial slurs at her. This is a case of she did something wrong and earned the fury she received.

Second, does road rage merit racism? One can reasonably argue that racism should never be used in any situation. This guy crossed the line, even if he did have a valid reason to do it. Road rage doesn't validate pulling a gun and shooting someone, nor does it validate racist comments. She was wrong, but so was he.

Third, while this story does prove that racism exists, there is another aspect to consider: "It was the first time someone had ever called her the n-word to her face in her 19 years". 60 years ago, I doubt there was a 19 year old black person in America who could have made that statement. Contrary to the "America is racist" argument, it also needs to be admitted that things are much better than they were.

Finally, we have to give Aimable her props: Faced with overt and malicious racism, she quietly took it. Regardless of why, she defused the situation by not reacting to it. This situation could have had an ugly ending if she had reacted angrily to it. She was clearly the better person. If you ever need to understand why "turning the other cheek" is a valid strategy, look no further than this story.

No comments:

Post a Comment