SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
The Republicans, led by Speaker Paul Ryan, do not care that fewer people will be covered than are covered now. (Photo: Getty)
This Is Not a Healthcare Bill
It's a tax cut
Mar 14, 2017
Good morning, suckers.
Obviously, we'll have more to say about the political effects of the "scoring" of the Republican proposal to change the way that Americans obtain the peace of mind that comes with actually having health insurance. But the Congressional Budget Office--about which the president* is of two minds, and both of them ignorant--report that came out late Monday made a few things eminently clear.
"This bill is a tax cut in sheep's clothing, and the sheep's clothing doesn't even fit very well over the fangs."
1) This isn't a healthcare bill. It's really a tax cut.
2) This bill is not concerned with providing affordable health insurance to the most people. It is a designed to give a massive tax cut to the wealthiest Americans.
3) This bill has nothing to do with what people need when they get sick. They are a secondary consideration to the tax cut and, amazingly, to The Deficit, in direct contravention of the Blog's First Law of Economics: Fck The Deficit. People Got No jobs. People Got No Money. As a result of this, Medicaid also will be led to the slaughter pen.
You heard the drums beating all weekend. The Republicans do not care that fewer people will be covered than are covered now. Speaker Paul Ryan, the zombie-eyed granny starver from the state of Wisconsin, was quite plain that he's going to hang his vestigial humanity on the concept of "access," which is a bogus metric on many levels. (Right now, as I sit here, I have "access" to a Cabriolet. Don't have the money to buy it, though.) I just heard a conservative pundit on MSNBC say that coverage is "not a Republican priority" in the healthcare debate, which at least is honest.
And now that the numbers are out, it seems they have been very true to their words. There will be 14 million more uninsured Americans in 2018 and 24 million a decade from now. That's a lot of preventable illness and death right there. The "savings" in the CBO report rely on the notion that the government will save $30 million a year by throwing people off Medicaid. A lot of people are going to lose health insurance, and a lot of people are going to get sick and die who would have done neither if we'd just left everything passed in 2009 alone.
But that's not the point of this bill. This bill is a tax cut in sheep's clothing, and the sheep's clothing doesn't even fit very well over the fangs.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Esquire
Charles P. Pierce
Charles P. Pierce is a writer-at-large for Esquire and his work has appeared in the New York Times Magazine, the LA Times Magazine, the Nation, the Atlantic, Sports Illustrated and The Chicago Tribune, among others.
Good morning, suckers.
Obviously, we'll have more to say about the political effects of the "scoring" of the Republican proposal to change the way that Americans obtain the peace of mind that comes with actually having health insurance. But the Congressional Budget Office--about which the president* is of two minds, and both of them ignorant--report that came out late Monday made a few things eminently clear.
"This bill is a tax cut in sheep's clothing, and the sheep's clothing doesn't even fit very well over the fangs."
1) This isn't a healthcare bill. It's really a tax cut.
2) This bill is not concerned with providing affordable health insurance to the most people. It is a designed to give a massive tax cut to the wealthiest Americans.
3) This bill has nothing to do with what people need when they get sick. They are a secondary consideration to the tax cut and, amazingly, to The Deficit, in direct contravention of the Blog's First Law of Economics: Fck The Deficit. People Got No jobs. People Got No Money. As a result of this, Medicaid also will be led to the slaughter pen.
You heard the drums beating all weekend. The Republicans do not care that fewer people will be covered than are covered now. Speaker Paul Ryan, the zombie-eyed granny starver from the state of Wisconsin, was quite plain that he's going to hang his vestigial humanity on the concept of "access," which is a bogus metric on many levels. (Right now, as I sit here, I have "access" to a Cabriolet. Don't have the money to buy it, though.) I just heard a conservative pundit on MSNBC say that coverage is "not a Republican priority" in the healthcare debate, which at least is honest.
And now that the numbers are out, it seems they have been very true to their words. There will be 14 million more uninsured Americans in 2018 and 24 million a decade from now. That's a lot of preventable illness and death right there. The "savings" in the CBO report rely on the notion that the government will save $30 million a year by throwing people off Medicaid. A lot of people are going to lose health insurance, and a lot of people are going to get sick and die who would have done neither if we'd just left everything passed in 2009 alone.
But that's not the point of this bill. This bill is a tax cut in sheep's clothing, and the sheep's clothing doesn't even fit very well over the fangs.
Charles P. Pierce
Charles P. Pierce is a writer-at-large for Esquire and his work has appeared in the New York Times Magazine, the LA Times Magazine, the Nation, the Atlantic, Sports Illustrated and The Chicago Tribune, among others.
Good morning, suckers.
Obviously, we'll have more to say about the political effects of the "scoring" of the Republican proposal to change the way that Americans obtain the peace of mind that comes with actually having health insurance. But the Congressional Budget Office--about which the president* is of two minds, and both of them ignorant--report that came out late Monday made a few things eminently clear.
"This bill is a tax cut in sheep's clothing, and the sheep's clothing doesn't even fit very well over the fangs."
1) This isn't a healthcare bill. It's really a tax cut.
2) This bill is not concerned with providing affordable health insurance to the most people. It is a designed to give a massive tax cut to the wealthiest Americans.
3) This bill has nothing to do with what people need when they get sick. They are a secondary consideration to the tax cut and, amazingly, to The Deficit, in direct contravention of the Blog's First Law of Economics: Fck The Deficit. People Got No jobs. People Got No Money. As a result of this, Medicaid also will be led to the slaughter pen.
You heard the drums beating all weekend. The Republicans do not care that fewer people will be covered than are covered now. Speaker Paul Ryan, the zombie-eyed granny starver from the state of Wisconsin, was quite plain that he's going to hang his vestigial humanity on the concept of "access," which is a bogus metric on many levels. (Right now, as I sit here, I have "access" to a Cabriolet. Don't have the money to buy it, though.) I just heard a conservative pundit on MSNBC say that coverage is "not a Republican priority" in the healthcare debate, which at least is honest.
And now that the numbers are out, it seems they have been very true to their words. There will be 14 million more uninsured Americans in 2018 and 24 million a decade from now. That's a lot of preventable illness and death right there. The "savings" in the CBO report rely on the notion that the government will save $30 million a year by throwing people off Medicaid. A lot of people are going to lose health insurance, and a lot of people are going to get sick and die who would have done neither if we'd just left everything passed in 2009 alone.
But that's not the point of this bill. This bill is a tax cut in sheep's clothing, and the sheep's clothing doesn't even fit very well over the fangs.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.