Good eye. Selective language is a crucial propaganda tool.

This whole thing sucks. If he stuck to past statements and campaign rhetoric, Trumpcare would look a whole lot like single-payer. Instead we have this current nonsense. It's definitely a side-effect of the GOP accepting all factions under their big tent in opposition to Obama, the infighting is keeping them from getting anything done.

I notice the term 'Trumpcare', and would like to humbly suggest using the term 'Republicare' instead. Reply with 'more info' for reasons and more information. 'Stop', and I'll never reply to your comments or posts again. (I'm a bot)

more info

Trump is a disposable scapegoat / tank, and is much more temporary than the Republican Party. Passing AHCA requires the participation of the whole Party. Don't let Republicans blame the death and travesty on Trump!

Effect of AHCA on Americans

Wikipedia

I reccomend reading the full article, but here's some highlights.

• Visualization of AHCA's effect on wealth distribution, as of 2022
• Wealth transferred from below-$50k households to above-$50k households
• Number of Americans with health insurance: decrease by 23 million by 2026
• Social Security expenditures : $3 billion less by 2026, due to people dying sooner
• Medicaid expenditures : $77 million more by 2026, due to reduced access to birth control

Pros and Cons of AHCA

^{Copied from NeutralPolitics/comments/6iul3q//dj98qvv/ from March 2017. Not giving a clickable link here, to avoid bans on cross-subreddit links}

Pros

• Tax cuts on wealthy households. The bill eliminates the surtax on investment income for individuals making over $200k/year or couples making over $250k/year
• Expanded avenues to avoid taxes. The bill allows HSA contributions to be higher than they were under Obamacare, raising them to $5000 max a year. (cross referencing sec 121 with the linked statute).
• Eliminates individual mandate. The bill eliminates the individual mandate, which is a pro if you don't like the individual mandate.
• Fixes the issue around below poverty line people and the subsidies. Subsidies are available for people below the poverty line, fixing the issue that arose after NFIB v. Sebilius made the Medicaid expansion not be all 50 states.

Cons

• Tax cuts on wealthy households. This could be considered a con if you, like most Americans think upper income people pay too little in taxes.
• Massive cuts to Medicaid. The bill cuts Medicaid spending by more than the House plan, which the CBO scored as an $834 billion dollar cut. This cut includes the pre-Obamacare medicaid program, which covers among other things almost 2/3 of nursing home patients in the country. The bill also allows for a "flexibility program" (sec. 134) which would allow states to not necessarily cover pre-Obamacare medicaid beneficiaries. If you think the Medicaid program should be much less generous, then this could be considered a pro.
• Cuts to Obamacare subsidies The bill (Sec. 102(b)(1)(B)(i) reduces the benchmark plan for subsidies to a plan covering 58% of someone's expenses, as opposed to the current 70%. Additionally, subsidies are only available to people making less than 350% of the poverty line, down from the current 400%. Edit: did some back of the envelope math based on current silver versus bronze premiums. My best guess is this would reduce subsidies by $50-100 per month.
• Repeals cost sharing reduction program The bill repeals the cost sharing reduction program which provided extra benefits to people under 250% of the poverty line to reduce their deductibles and copayments. Combined with the much lower baseline for subsidies, low income people will probably be left with insurance that requires out of pocket costs they could not possibly afford.
• Allows states to eliminate essential health benefits. This allows states to eliminate the requirement that health insurance cover, well, anything. There might be state level coverage requirements in lieu of these - or there might not.
• Does not replace individual mandate with anything. The way this is structured could cause a death spiral because it allows people to wait until they're sick to buy coverage, with no restriction on pre-existing conditions and no penalty for waiting. That could cause a huge adverse selection problem where people sit out of the market, and only the sickest buy coverage, and insurers drop out. This has already been a problem in Obamacare because of the weak mandate. Eliminating it without a replacement, while also reducing subsidies (meaning fewer people would sign up because it's free or close to free to them) could destroy the entire individual health insurance market. Edit: An interesting article just published arguing that this will cause a death spiral.

Pressuring Media to use 'Republicare'

^{Copied from esist/comments/5zl7bk//dez81nu/ . Not giving a clickable link here, to avoid bans on cross-subreddit links}

[Republicans are] already trying to pin this on Trump. This is why it is important to call it Republicare. DON'T let them pass blame, and DON'T let them off the hook. [...] It's time to start contacting editors and imploring them to use the term Republicare. Example tweet, and a brief list of editors', correspondents' and authors' twitter handles: Call it #Republicare NOT #Trumpcare! We need the party to accept blame and not evade blame by pinning it all on one man.

• MSNBC Correspondents: @maddow, @Lawrence, @chrislhayes. These people have some control over the language they use on their own programs, and could reach a wide audience.
• Slate Chief Editor: @juliaturner
• Slate Authors currently using "Trumpcare": @jim_newell, @JHWeissmann, @jbouie
• Mashable Chief Editor: @gittrich
• Vox Chief Editor: @ezraklein
• CNN Chief Editor: @MeredithA
• CNN correspondents who might be receptive: @sallykohn, @andersoncooper
• MotherJones Chief Editor: @ClaraJeffery
• MotherJones authors currently using "Trumpcare": @H_Lev, @patcaldwell
• The Young Turks Chief Editor: @cenkuygur
• New York Times Chief Editor: @deanbaquet
• Washington Post Chief Editor: @PostBaron
• The Nation Chief Editor: @KatrinaNation

I know Twitter isn't the greatest platform in the world, but it's one of the most effective ways to communicate with these people. So tweet them. Force the Republican party to take ownership of their shitty ideological war against the working class.

Reddit Opinion Poll

Reply to this comment with 'I prefer Trumpcare' or 'I prefer Republicare' (not case-sensitive) to indicate which term you prefer, and I'll record your opinion. Feel free to change your mind, indicate your new opinion and I will move your name to the new list - no names occur in both lists. To withdraw from the poll, simply delete your comment. Results as of Sun Jul 2 20:37:34 2017:

• Trumpcare : 13 (18.57%)
• Republicare : 57 (81.43%)

^{I'm a newborn bot. Suggestions are welcome by PM or comment replies. *I only comment if I didn't already reply to a parent comment, and I avoid certain subreddits where I'm not welcome. I will also never comment on any of your posts or comments if you reply to any of my comments with the text 'STOP'. I update my old messages with the latest version of this message.} source

Stop

Hm. It seems it's made to be anti-republican.

yup

Highly suspicious on who makes this garbage kind of bot. Even if it were a liberal group. Staining Trump's name with the healthcare bill in no way let's republicans "off the hook".

Just who is this bot working for? Either's either 1 of 2 options. A massively dumb leftist or a Trump PR trying to get his name off of it because he has already criticized the bill.

What's weird is all the places it has posted. Nearly everywhere including Trump pages.

I wonder why someone would want to take the heat off Trump when Obama was labeled with the healthcare during his time. Seems so fishy.

as it says in every single message, it reacts whenever someone mentions 'trumpcare'

Well no shit.

I don't think it's trying to take the heat off Trump, it's trying to prevent the heat being taken off of the Republican Party.

That makes no sense. Trump is the republican party.

But in two years time if it's called Trumpcare the Republicans can turn around and blame it all on him, taking the heat off them. The Party needs to burn for this, not just Trump.

I notice the term 'Trumpcare', and would like to humbly suggest using the term 'Republicare' instead. Reply with 'more info' for reasons and more information. 'Stop', and I'll never reply to your comments or posts again. (I'm a bot)

Trump is their guy whether they like it or not. Having Trump's name on it also gives repubs more incentive to actually get rid of it in the future.

Yes, but if the last year has shown anything it's how gullible and easily misled the public are. It makes perfect sense if you look at it that way, accountability for this is extremely important.

Trump will always be a stain on repubs. The only thing that will save them is calling healthcare repubicare

How will that save them?

Because if it's called Trumpcare people will hate Trump. If it's called republicare republicans won't care because they'll get the profit motivated healthcare bill they always wanted anyway.

You're saying Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan aren't also to blame?

They are the repub party too. As well as every single voter who don't have American's best interests at heart. Only greed and to keep us in neo-liberal hell.

Test.

Trumpcare is quite literally the absolute best heathcare in the history of heathcare plans and trust me I know healthcare. Trump IS the republican party. The best, most honest, most perfect political party maybe ever.

I notice the term 'Trumpcare', and would like to humbly suggest using the term 'Republicare' instead. Reply with 'more info' for reasons and more information. 'Stop', and I'll never reply to your comments or posts again. (I'm a bot)

To be fair, the "Trumpcare" name never made sense. I don't think that Donald Trump knows anything about healthcare policy, and this bill was written by Congressional Republicans.

I notice the term 'Trumpcare', and would like to humbly suggest using the term 'Republicare' instead. Reply with 'more info' for reasons and more information. 'Stop', and I'll never reply to your comments or posts again. (I'm a bot)

Stop

No way. Trump is the republican party and calling it Trumpcare gives them more incentive to get rid of it once Trump is done making them all look like jackasses.

Trump won the nomination ahead of elitist candidates Bush, Cruz and Rubio. He is a reluctant ally of Republicans at best.

Plenty of elephants are pissed about not being able to "keep illegal immigration legal" and they are risking losing the business crony dollars.

I mean, Obama did not write the entire ACA by hand, but no one stopped the Republicans from slapping his name on it.

That was because he was the target. The GOP already held the house and the senate, so why was there a need for them to make it a Democratic Party issue?

of course it's a bot, i'm not trying to hide that fact. it's mentioned in literally all the bot's messages

Should be more like Republicareless.

o no itz podesta firing back at us for investigation

A post about propaganda terms and you say Podesta lol

LOL I KNOW I GOTTA TURN MY BOT OFF RITE

Probably for the best. I noticed it stopped itself for me. Which I purposely didn't want it to do.

I notice the term 'Trumpcare', and would like to humbly suggest using the term 'Republicare' instead. Reply with 'more info' for reasons and more information. 'Stop', and I'll never reply to your comments or posts again. (I'm a bot)

Trump is their guy whether they like it or not. Having Trump's name on it also gives repubs more incentive to actually get rid of it in the future.

Yes, but if the last year has shown anything it's how gullible and easily misled the public are. It makes perfect sense if you look at it that way, accountability for this is extremely important.