Trump is the Perfect Sore Loser

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Bill Huffman, Nov 7, 2020.

Loading...
  1. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member


    1.
    Issued an executive order requiring the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security,
    and Veterans Affairs to submit a joint plan to provide veterans access to access to mental health treatment as they transition to civilian life.
    2.
    VA employees are being held accountable for poor performance, with more than 4,000 VA employees removed, demoted, and suspended so far.
    Many Department of Veterans Affairs employees have been demoted, removed or suspended during the Trump era.
    Improved services to Veterans due to increased accountability.
    3.
    Veterans Choice Program Extension and Improvement Act, so military veterans can continue receiving health- Trumps MISSION Act
    care in the civilian sector when care is not easily accessible from a VA provider.
    In the wake of the Obama administration’s VA wait-time scandal, a frustrated Congress authorized a temporary program that allowed some veterans to see doctors outside VA.
    It was called the Veterans Choice Program.
    The program was limited to veterans who were waiting more than 30 days for an appointment, or those that lived more than 40 miles from a VA facility or faced similar travel burdens.

    Trumps MISSION Act, created the Veterans Community Care program which is permanent and more comprehensive than the Veterans Choice Program. It allows Veterans to elect to receive care at non-VA facilities when they aren’t close to a VA facility, have to wait too long for VA care, or when it’s in their best medical interest.That’s a critical difference. The MISSION Act signed by Trump put veterans at the center of their care for the first time in history, allowing them to elect to receive outside expertise when they need it and improving their health outcomes.
    MISSION Act actually works. The numbers show there was pent-up demand for community care among veterans that the MISSION Act unleashed. In the nearly 15 months since the MISSION Act took effect, more than 2.4 million veterans have benefited from more than 6.5 million referrals to community care.
    While the old Choice Program suffered from not having enough community care partners, under the MISSION Act,
    VA is working with 725,000 private health care providers to ensure veterans have this option in the real world, not just on paper.
    When former President Trump says he gave veterans “choice” he’s not referring to the Obama-era program that fell far short of its promise. He’s referring instead to the MISSION Act, which finally delivered veterans the real, permanent health care choice they have earned.
    I hope president Biden keeps this improved over his original program, as he is in reversal mode of many Trump previous orders.

    As to extremists, we are yet to see what Dem's extremists will do. How quick forgotten Seattle, Portland among others.
    You forget about radical terrorists on the left.
     
  2. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    So, I'm not military, and so I'm not a veteran. If this is a stupid question, just tell me.

    Why are there VA facilities at all? Why aren't vets who are eligible for continuing health care just provided with zero-deductible, zero-copay insurance and allowed to use whatever provide best meets their needs? My understanding is that that's how Tricare works, so why is that not available to vets as well?
     
  3. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    It most definitely is not a stupid question. The short answer to your question Steve is "history". Coming out of a war it is most efficient best to treat the wounded personnel as a group and use military personnel to do it. From there it grew because veterans is a large enough group to require a substantial administration to care for them. What is best is somewhat controversial but my understanding is that veterans (which I'm not one) generally like the system.
     
  4. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Good and valid question. People question validity of separate system and bureaucracy in our time.
    The growing system faces scrutiny as it became more bureaucratic, cumbersome and understaffed.
    My rational is that there were reasons for VA creation some 100+ (1865)years ago and the elevation in 1930 to the federal administration and later Regan in the 1980's elevated it to Cabinet status
    There was recognition that Veterans healthcare and the type of trauma, exposures to chemical such as Vietnam War veterans (failed) treatment of Agent Orange exposure, and other agents, psychological issues and national security required special approach.
    It made sense for the government to create and maintain a healthcare system specializing in war- and service-related injuries: battle wounds, amputations, spinal-cord damage, traumatic brain injury,
    and mental-health problems such as post-traumatic stress disorder.
    In the past when veterans returning from America's wars threatened to overwhelm the civilian health-care system, the VA was seen as a savior.
    Returning to your comments they are totally making sense to me, Yet there are those who still see benefits the both worlds. Contingency support to the Department of Homeland Security in national emergencies and disasters is one such need.
    I think Veterans Choice Program and Mission act are addressing both needs. Critics say VA has outlasted its usefulness and should be significantly downsized.
    VA argues that there is a potential for improper treatment in private health-care systems that are not subject to scrutiny by the federal inspector general as the VA is.
    Some argue that there are many reasons why it's better in the VA than it is outside yet health-care delivery failures at the VA raise questions.
    So today veterans have a choice and seems under Obama's VCP and Trumps Mission act access to 725,000 providers.
     
  5. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Being spoiled by the government-run single payer system, I marvel at the concept of people who are NOT eligible for the healthcare. Maybe just me (along with what appears to be the majority of Americans).
     
  6. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Everyone in the US is eligible for healthcare insurance. Even undocumented migrants have an option to purchase medical coverage.
    And in many cities public hospitals are not denying services.
    But there are many who can't afford it especially if a person has pre-existing conditions.
    ACA theoretically should protect people from being without medical coverage.
    Practically it needs improvement. I know people who were helped by ACA and who were let down by ACA.
     
  7. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Whereas one might also marvel at the shortcomings of the alternative. My fiancee is from B.C. and when I complained that I'd have to wait three whole days to see an orthopedist (my shoulder's been bugging me) she said in Canada since my issue isn't life-threatening it would potentially have taken months to see a specialist.

    Either way, that's not what my question was about.
     
  8. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Yes. The improvement is in the great Trump healthcare plan, coming in 2 weeks since 2016. It's one of the reason we have a 51-page discussion on what a loser Donald Trump is.

    You are absolutely right here, BTW; Biden ran and won on, specifically, improving the ACA. Bernie's M4A is theoretically a good plan, but since he can't and wouldn't be able to enact it, it helps precisely no one (well, except Bernie and his crowd as a kind of shibboleth).
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2021
  9. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    You have a good employer plan, right? My wife has heck pain and migraines that were controlled well by a chiropractor. Both our top-flight benefit plans covered that (along with bunch of other stuff). Here, we'll have to pay out of pocket. So yeah, drawbacks on both sides, but only in one you can even conceive a person being "ineligible for healthcare". Or, you know, insulin prices lower than someone's entire SSI check.

    But, yeah, you pose a valid question. And the answer is the same as why we can't just all have M4A, or working immigration system. No political will for true reforms, no matter how much sense they make.
     
  10. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Indeed a lot of politics involved, with Trump plan that you so critical of, I remember pre Trump mess of ACA what it was, the huge sky rocket deductible and make believe one had coverage.
    Trump indeed improved it by a lot. We can argue about it but I remember Insulin that you mentioned, people before Trump took office had 1000's of $$$ spent of it.
    There was a window of opportunity when GOP had majority in both houses. But it was missed - shows Republicans non use of power.
    Time wasted on fake impeachments and other bs.
    It took time before house republicans started moving /working in 2017.
    But now its in the past. We concentrate on the future, with huge crisis related to Covid 19, and now the mutations Covid 20 and 21 if we can call it this way.
    The tread about Trump is false as he was a good president with many achievements. He would have had greater success if both sides cooperated but instead this was two opposing forces but Dem's and establishment did well вставляя палки в колеса.
    As to Biden plans, lets see. I will be glad if he is successful, we all want good health system.
     
  11. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    The problem is that what one person thinks is common sense another thinks is patent nonsense. (Not even talking about you and me, btw, just the general case.) Political will in the absence of broad consensus isn't courageous, it's unrepresentative. That's why if there's to be public policy it should be as decentralized as possible, as it makes broad consensus easier to reach.

    It's also insurance against the damage one person at the top can do. If having the wrong person as president can destroy the country, the root problem is less with the person and more with the presidency.
     
  12. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Well, call me radical, but I believe this whole notion of "one nation" is a thing, and most of it can broadly agree on the "illness and death bad" platform. I know it goes against your deeply held quazi-religious beliefs, so we'll have to agree to disagree here. Gotta give it to you though, at least you Libertarians are not inconsistent (with the prominent exception of Rand Paul).
     
  13. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Reality check: Trump did not need Dem support to unveil his "far superior" healthcare plan. He didn't even have to get elected. Here's Biden's:
    Plan to Protect and Build on Obamacare | Joe Biden

    For that matter, here's Biden's tax returns (and I believe more are available; no reason to search for them):
    Joe Biden's Tax Returns and Financial Disclosures | Joe Biden

    Trump didn't manage to do as much. So, yes, Lerner, your guy is and will be known to history as a sore one-term loser - nothing more. Get a grip of this reality.
     
  14. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    The funny thing is that decentralization is one of the things that Canada does better than the U.S. And it's hardly anarchic to suggest things that can be done locally should be, or that other things should be done provincially, saving the federal level for those things only it can do. It brings political power closer to the people it affects, giving them more say and making it easier to hold policymakers accountable to them. Opposing that on the basis of some sense of "nationalism" sounds more like the quasi-religious position to me.

    By the way, Rand Paul is not a libertarian, much less one with a capital L. And that's not just me saying that, so does Rand Paul. To be frank, I see him as nothing more than a conservative Republican who occasionally panders to his father's base of too-loyal donors.
     
  15. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Applying to healthcare, what this in practice mean is what Canada has is sort of a "Medicaid for all", provincially-run under broad federal guidelines. I can live with that, and it's still quite a bit of "public policy". Besides, you know by now that I'm far from holding up Canada as this ideal society. I didn't get that belief even after working as a federal government employee (great pay and bennies though, thanks PIPSC union!). If even THEY can get some things more right than the US (eg., healthcare, immigration, and pandemic response), you have some catchin' up to do.

    Yes, no argument here; the guy is not any kind of libertarian. More of an illustration of the kind of pests "Conservative Republican" politicians are.
     
    SteveFoerster likes this.

Share This Page