Chamber of Commerce head to GOP: If you don’t pass amnesty this year, don’t bother running a candidate in 2016

posted at 8:01 pm on May 12, 2014 by Allahpundit

Politico claims he was joking but I’m not sure why. This guy’s only saying what the entire Republican leadership thinks.

Maybe the “joke” is that he’s pretending to care about the political implications of amnesty and the fate of the GOP when all he really wants is cheap labor.

“If the Republicans don’t do it, they shouldn’t bother to run a candidate in 2016,” Donohue joked at an event on infrastructure investment in D.C. “Think about that. Think about who the voters are. I just did that to get everybody’s attention.”…

“You think Congress can get immigration reform done this year, in an election year?” moderator Eamon Javers asked Donohue.

“Yes, yes,” Donohue replied.

National Association of Manufacturers President Jay Timmons said he also thought immigration reform could pass this year, perhaps in a lame-duck session.

I’ve been thinking they wouldn’t dare try something as sneaky as passing immigration reform during the lame-duck, but realistically there are only three “windows” left before the 2016 election. One is this summer, if Boehner decides (stupidly) that he can’t afford to let Obama out-pander the GOP on immigration yet again by “relaxing” U.S. deportation policy before the midterms. I think passing something this year is less likely than it used to be, though, now that ObamaCare isn’t quite the catastrophe for Dems that it looked to be back in October. If Boehner’s going to risk amnesty, he wants the party to be in a position of absolute strength so that even a small fall-off in turnout doesn’t cripple it on election day. Right now the party seems a bit weaker than it was a few months ago. That fall-off could cost the GOP a race or two if current conditions hold.

The second window is early next year after the new Congress is seated. Boehner might decide to start the session off with a big “achievement” on immigration, to get it done and get it out of the way knowing that grassroots righties will revolt short-term but that most will forgive and forget in the interest of beating Hillary once it’s time to vote in 2016. The window here is small, though — just a few months before Republican presidential candidates start declaring and the primary campaign begins, as GOP contenders won’t want to deal with the issue on the trail. Doing it next year also gives ammo to amnesty opponents to argue that the issue is simply too hot to touch in a presidential election cycle and will tear the party apart if it happens. And by 2015, Obama’s saber-rattling about granting an executive mass amnesty will be louder than ever. If the GOP’s serious about not trusting him to enforce the law, those threats will only hurt the cause in the House.

Which leaves us with the third window, the lame duck. There’ll be no worries then about Republicans staying home in the midterms to protest the new amnesty law, as there would be if Boehner passed something this summer, and having it done before the new Congress is seated would give GOP leaders a chance to start fresh in January with a new agenda to help conservatives move on. Just one problem: If Boehner’s serious about coming back as Speaker next year, the lame-duck would be the worst possible time to pass something. It’ll look cowardly to amnesty opponents since the lame-duck is a moment of minimal congressional accountability and it’ll be fresh in everyone’s minds when the vote for the new Speaker happens in January, galvanizing anti-Boehner forces. He’s probably done as Speaker if he decides to go ahead with this in November. Is he prepared to make that sacrifice?

Exit quotation from the man himself: “We’ve got a lot of good candidates out there, and yes, Jeb Bush is my friend, I think he’s make a great president. And I’ve been nudging him for some time.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

The is NO organization that is greater threat to the future of the United States than today’s U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Thomas Donohue is America’s #1 Welfare Queen.

bw222 on May 12, 2014 at 9:38 PM

you actually don’t know my position on immigration reform. libfreeordie on May 12, 2014 at 9:28 PM

Please do tell. I live 50 miles from Mexico.

How about you?

NY? Right?

What’s your position on my backyard?

wolly4321 on May 12, 2014 at 9:45 PM

Pass an amnesty bill as wonderful as Obamacare.

1% of the illegals will sign up and the rest will be fined taxed.

MichaelGabriel on May 12, 2014 at 9:48 PM

Conservatives and Tea Party to GOP, pass amnesty in any form, and don’t bother running a candidate in any election from 2015 on.

Conservatives and Tea Party to Chamber of Commerce, let’s see how you like it when we boycott every business that does business with YOU from here on out. Enjoy being broke and irrelevant.

Meople on May 12, 2014 at 10:02 PM

You don’t think Jeff Flake is owned wholesale? He is.

Tell me libfree,, what is your policy?

This isn’t a corporation. It’s not a single entity.

wolly4321 on May 12, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Hey Mr. Donohue,

Watch your back, buddy. If you drive the GOP to do immigration deform, you will be on not a few people’s hit lists.

PD Quig on May 12, 2014 at 10:02 PM

You realize which one of us is on the Chamber of Commerce’s team on this matter, right professor?
 
rogerb on May 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM

 
You actually don’t know my position on immigration reform.
 
libfreeordie on May 12, 2014 at 9:28 PM

 
Are you new around here?
 
Is it suddenly different than your previous “I support amnesty so long as the government implements wage controls for the glorious workers so that their capitalist masters are thwarted something labor something something global something” position?
 
You’re against particular legislation but not amnesty, correct?
 
Or is that the other libfreeordie?

rogerb on May 12, 2014 at 10:03 PM

I its own death warrant. the GOP leadership is dumb enough, and the might be, or stupid enough to allow the Chamber leading for them.
them by a ring in the nose to go down the road of caving on the immigration issue Donohue is right, the GOP will have signed its own death warrant.

Least the “Leadership” who is already out of touch with a large percent of the base will find themselves without enough rank and file members to get them elected Dog Catcher let along a member of congress. The leadership would do well to listen to the common voter rather than the Washington big shots or the Donohue’s if they want to remain members of congress. It is said that the Tea Party types make up over 40% of the GOP voters. Dump on them and the Dem’s will not only have the majority of the “New citizens” voting for them, the big government GOPers will not have over 40% of the base NOT voting for them. The progressive Dem’s will be in charge for a long long time!!!!

Rockman44 on May 12, 2014 at 10:07 PM

nservatives and Tea Party to GOP, pass amnesty in any form, and don’t bother running a candidate in any election from 2015 on. Conservatives and Tea Party to Chamber of Commerce, let’s see how you like it when we boycott every business that does business with YOU from here on out. Enjoy being broke and irrelevant. Meople on May 12, 2014 at 10:02 PM

That better happen fast enough to swing votes in about a few months.

Dude,, the CoC bought them. The money is spent this cycle.

The bastards sold out.

wolly4321 on May 12, 2014 at 10:09 PM

Flee

Bmore on May 12, 2014 at 10:10 PM

wolly4321 on May 12, 2014 at 10:09 PM

The money may BE spent, but Amnesty isn’t passed yet. It may even already be a certainty, whatever.

The fact remains, the GOP does amnesty, and I’ll be first in the torch line to burn it down. It’ll be the last thing the GOP does as a relevant political party.

So hey, go for it Boehner, pass it next week if you want. See what happens in November.

Meople on May 12, 2014 at 10:21 PM

I’ll see y’all in the morning. I’m excited to hear what our new libfreeordie thinks about
illegal aliens
sorry
undocumented workers
wait…
immigrants. There we go.

rogerb on May 12, 2014 at 10:25 PM

“…merchants have no country. the mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains.”

- Jefferson

Che-dolf on May 12, 2014 at 10:48 PM

nservatives and Tea Party to GOP, pass amnesty in any form, and don’t bother running a candidate in any election from 2015 on. Conservatives and Tea Party to Chamber of Commerce, let’s see how you like it when we boycott every business that does business with YOU from here on out. Enjoy being broke and irrelevant. Meople on May 12, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Some of you know I own a small business or three ( one is more of a hobby).nI was asked recently to re-up on contributions as a member and important blah blah… by our local director.

I said no, and left the organization permanently. The directors jaw dropped when I said I no longer wanted to support a liberal organization. He said the local chapter wasn’t. I replied it’s all the same pocket, so spare me.

I’m done with them, and I’m not the only one.

Irritable Pundit on May 12, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Now a full Democrat John Bohner says he likes his new skirt Nancy Pelosi got for him for his first vote with other liberal Democrats to give all the illegals the right to vote.

News Buster.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on May 12, 2014 at 11:11 PM

Being an illegal immigrant must be great. The GOP wants your cheap labor and the Democrats want you dependent on government handouts. They’re going to split the difference.

gwelf on May 12, 2014 at 11:12 PM

Some of you know I own a small business or three ( one is more of a hobby).nI was asked recently to re-up on contributions as a member and important blah blah… by our local director.

I said no, and left the organization permanently. The directors jaw dropped when I said I no longer wanted to support a liberal organization. He said the local chapter wasn’t. I replied it’s all the same pocket, so spare me.

I’m done with them, and I’m not the only one.

Irritable Pundit on May 12, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Right on! We have to start playing hardball at a local level with these goons, sounds like you’re doing just that. The rest of us can do the same, with our voices and our wallets.

Find out who in your areas are Members of the CoC, talk to the business owners, tell them your problems with CoC. Many probably have no clue this is even going on. Educate them. If they refuse to dump it, talk from that point on with your wallet. Take your business elsewhere.

If enough pressure on the local chapters, the national goons WILL feel that pressure.

Meople on May 12, 2014 at 11:14 PM

We are witnessing the suicide of America over so-called “comprehensive immigration reform”. If the GOP moves in a direction that has a whiff of special treatment of illegals IT HAS TO BE BALANCED BY AN ABSOLUTE UNCONDITIONAL ESTABLISHMENT OF ENGLISH AS THE LANGUAGE OF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! Otherwise Spanish is SURE to be claimed by Hispanics as their CIVIL RIGHT!

We are playing with fire because Americans are being politically correct and have misplaced compassion and are AFRAID to stand up for our country, instead are ready to pander to ingratiate themselves to illegals and Hispanics, for their vote.

Make English official, NOW!

If you want a civil war in less than 20 years continue to be fuzzy about Spanish!

alamb on May 12, 2014 at 11:38 PM

Immigration reform. Because it worked so well for the Romans.

K. Hobbit on May 12, 2014 at 11:45 PM

I hate to break it to you guys, but it is done. Hate saying that. But the Chamber’s candidates are winning. They shouldn’t be, but they are. And the average Republican primary voter is going to look up and be shocked at what happens in December. And they won’t understand that that is what they voted for.

K. Hobbit on May 12, 2014 at 11:55 PM

So let me get this straight….the people who elect “our representatives” must be brushed aside in favor of the bottom line for businesses who can profit from cheap labor?

Mimzey on May 12, 2014 at 8:44 PM

I am seriously confused about why any businessman currently using illegal laborers thinks that providing amnesty for his currently-illegal employees will then produce cheap or cheaper labor.

Illegals are cheap precisely because they are illegal.

Once amnestied, businesses have to pay them minimum wage above the table, pay Social Security, pay Unemployment taxes, pay Health care taxes or whatever they are called by that time, and keep records. None of that is cheap! If the businessman keeps underpaying and mistreating the now-legal employees, they can complain and file charges legally, which they can’t do while they are illegal.

Do the businesses intend to just dump their amnestied-therefore-legal-and-expensive workers and twiddle their thumbs until the next wave of illegals crosses the border and finds their door?

What am I missing here?

AesopFan on May 13, 2014 at 12:04 AM

Immigration reform. Because it worked so well for the Romans.

K. Hobbit on May 12, 2014 at 11:45 PM

LOL

AesopFan on May 13, 2014 at 12:09 AM

I hate to break it to you guys, but it is done. Hate saying that. But the Chamber’s candidates are winning. They shouldn’t be, but they are. And the average Republican primary voter is going to look up and be shocked at what happens in December. And they won’t understand that that is what they voted for.

K. Hobbit on May 12, 2014 at 11:55 PM

Which goes back to my point, that amnesty will be the last thing the GOP does as a relevant political party. Because of their insistence on doing this, I am now a one-issue voter. Amnesty.

The GOPe thinks there is in-fighting now? Wait until they do Amnesty. I have my torch all fueled up and ready to go. I’ll be first in line to burn the GOP to the ground when they do this.

Meople on May 13, 2014 at 12:23 AM

What’s the point of running a Republican candidate for president if they do an amnesty before 2016? What would be the use of having a Republican president after amnesty passes? Would he be tougher on illegals post amnesty than a Democrat president? How would that sell? The COC head would then say “Republicans shouldn’t even bother running a candidate in 2020 if they insist on going after our new ( post amnesty ) immigrants.”

Buddahpundit on May 13, 2014 at 12:26 AM

Who is this “chamber of commerce” you speak of?

Talking of irrelevancies, Congress has the summer vacay first, next, the panic of elections, then, pretending to have an effect on the next presidential race. There is just no time left to spend on their favorite pastime of passing unpopular legislation.

Let turtle-face McConnell and sunscreen-Boehner play their amnesty whistles, we are not listening.

virgo on May 13, 2014 at 12:39 AM

What’s the point of running a Republican candidate for president if they do an amnesty before 2016? What would be the use of having a Republican president after amnesty passes? Would he be tougher on illegals post amnesty than a Democrat president? How would that sell? The COC head would then say “Republicans shouldn’t even bother running a candidate in 2020 if they insist on going after our new ( post amnesty ) immigrants.”

Buddahpundit on May 13, 2014 at 12:26 AM

Of course they wouldn’t be tougher on it. If amnesty is done, the next President will be in full-time Santa Clause, pander-mode in a race to see which party can give out the most freebies to the 40 million new Socialist voters the (R)s just made citizens.

What exactly would be the difference between an (R) candidate for President and the (D) candidate if amnesty is done prior to 2016? There will be no difference.

Amnesty will further cement ObamaCare as impossible to repeal or even reform. Because doing so would anger the new Socialist voters. So, if they do amnesty, America can kiss whatever hope of EVER repealing or even reforming it, bye-bye.

Americans can also kiss any hope of ever reigning in the welfare state if amnesty is done. Welfare will only get MUCH bigger, demanding much more share of the tax burden than ever before. This will mean the next President and the Congress regardless of party will have no choice but to jack taxes through the roof to pay for it all.

Amnesty isn’t going to just affect the electorate. It will negatively impact the entire country in a LOT of different ways.

And the voters, well, we’re going to place blame exactly where it should be. Right on the GOP. Because without them amnesty would be a dead issue right now.

Meople on May 13, 2014 at 12:45 AM

Guess it is time for the tea party to switch to the Democratic party so they can wield their awesome influence to stop this. Or maybe they could finally form the third party they keep threatening to and take them to Nader level.

Bradky on May 13, 2014 at 4:32 AM

And just as a reminder – if the Bush-Kennedy bill had passed when the opportunity was there it is likely that we wouldn’t have had four years of Pelosi, Obamacare might not have made it…..and the people who self identified would still have another 6 years to go before they could gain citizenship and register to vote.

Good job Vitter (they hysteric who ran campaign ads of Hispanic looking individuals partying in cars) and Union supporting Dem senators. You killed it, the GOP paid the price and it continues to split the party today….

Bradky on May 13, 2014 at 4:36 AM

Bring it on, boy.

I’d rather go down trying to save the country than capitulate and cooperate in its destruction. Maybe if we win we should investigate the CofC. There seems to be a precedent for involving the IRS here.

{+_+}

herself on May 13, 2014 at 5:35 AM

And just as a reminder – if the Bush-Kennedy bill had passed when the opportunity was there it is likely that we wouldn’t have had four years of Pelosi, Obamacare might not have made it…..and the people who self identified would still have another 6 years to go before they could gain citizenship and register to vote.

Bradky on May 13, 2014 at 4:36 AM

That is pure horse manure. All of it. What we would have already had by now was millions more Democrats.

You either know you are lying, or you are so dense you do not understand the ratchet strategy used by those aiming for our destruction. Each time they gain a victory, that becomes the new base from which to fight for the next round of destruction.

And Hispanics do not vote for the Democrats and against the GOP because of the amnesty issue. They vote that way for the government cheese. That’s a fact, Brad. Get your head out of your posterior.

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 5:50 AM

This was inevitable when Romney lost and the pollsters blamed it on his anti-amnesty policy.

fadetogray on May 12, 2014 at 8:55 PM

People need to stop perpetuating this lie. Romney was never anti-amnesty, he just ducked the issue until he forced to enunciate a position, which was absurd (“self-deportation”). Don’t doubt for one minute that the multimillionaire wouldn’t have jumped on board with his CoC buddies after the election.

Ted the Average on May 13, 2014 at 6:08 AM

None of that is cheap! If the businessman keeps underpaying and mistreating the now-legal employees, they can complain and file charges legally, which they can’t do while they are illegal.
 
Do the businesses intend to just dump their amnestied-therefore-legal-and-expensive workers and twiddle their thumbs until the next wave of illegals crosses the border and finds their door?
 
What am I missing here?
 
AesopFan on May 13, 2014 at 12:04 AM

 
+1. The same employers will still need (and can hire with few worries or repercussions) cheap employees.
 
Even with Glorious Wage Controls to protect The Labor of Men and Womyn against Evil Capital, the end result of amnesty is fewer legal jobs available to qualified applicants all around, and likely the exact same number of illegal aliens still working in the U.S.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 6:11 AM

Romney was never anti-amnesty, he just ducked the issue until he forced to enunciate a position, which was absurd (“self-deportation”).

Ted the Average on May 13, 2014 at 6:08 AM

That is just flat wrong. Romney’s stated strategy was and still is the only rational strategy for dealing with the problem in a politically possible way. Implement mandatory e-verify, crack down on illegal hiring and shut off the magnet. Without the attraction of jobs, most of the illegals would go back home. The rest could be dealt with in a few years. The problem would no longer be society altering.

You can question whether or not Romney would have actually carried through on his stated policy, but as of 11/06/2012 it was the only game left in town, and bashing the policy shows extreme ignorance of either the policy or what was politically possible (round ‘em all up was and is a total non-starter politically, no matter how reasonable you and I may think it is to round up invaders to send them home).

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 6:32 AM

One month before the election Romney promised amnesty in his 1st year.

Romney said he wanted to enact permanent immigration reform within his first year in office. Denver Post

Wigglesworth on May 13, 2014 at 7:59 AM

It wasn’t a joke. Donahue was deadly serious and he is only presenting in public what is being discussed with Republican leaders in private.

This type of backroom policy making is influenced by one thing. The significant amount of money the Chamber of Commerce and their affiliates pump into the party. In that regard, it should scare every party member because it trumps their desires and aspirations.

This is ultimately about money winning over substance and it represents everything wrong with Washington. If you want to know why the party struggles amongst its members on issues where clearly intellectual, factual conclusions are ignored for utopian ideals- here is exhibit number one.

In this political environment, the Republican Party should be running away with races. We are mired in a historic economic funk, our freedoms are being diminished, our government is being used to punish the people, there are very few good jobs, people can’t afford to send kids to college or buy a home and the general malaise is palpable across a majority of the voting public.

Yet we struggle to win or can’t- why?

It is due to the foolish priorities set by current leadership in Washington that is not based on the desires or needs of everyday people. It is set by fools like Donahue that influence leadership with their money.

Until that stops, we will never be successful. Never.

Marcus Traianus on May 13, 2014 at 8:32 AM

“If the Republicans don’t do it, they shouldn’t bother to run a candidate in 2016,”

Ironically, the opposite is true.

cajunpatriot on May 13, 2014 at 8:45 AM

Lou Dobbs tried to tell us years ago about this, Donohue. Glad to now hear Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin going after him, as of late. More evidence that winning elections is way, way down on the list of priorities for the ruling gop elitists. They’d rather lose and maintain the status quo. Their moniker: off shore US jobs and maintaining a porous southern border and the flow of cheap illegal labor.

Darvin Dowdy on May 13, 2014 at 8:51 AM

The GOP passes “immigration reform” AKA AMNESTY on a large scale, they don’t need to bother and run ANYONE for ANYTHING in 2016.

GarandFan on May 13, 2014 at 8:55 AM

I am going to start sepcifically looking for the Chamber Of Commerce seal on businesses and refusing to do business with them. And, yes, I will let them know why.

GWB on May 13, 2014 at 9:10 AM

If the senate turns over, we can have immigration security reform, will we be able force Obama to obey the laws? What if he won’t sign them? You need a veto proof majority.

There is plenty to do without granting blanket amnesty, especially, those of us who DON’T employ illegal labor or marginalized legal immigrant labor want all the criminals out of here first. And if they are criminals, they can take their American born children back where they came from, and those children are True Americans they will revolutionize the third world with Jeffersonian ideals rather than Marxism.

Then secure the border.

Then allow some professional hiring from over seas, to fill in the gap. But this can’t go on, to compete our scientists need the free university education that the candidates we are looking for from abroad have had.

Reform math, science, and technology education so that OUR best and brightest can be our scientists, doctors, engineers, no matter WHAT race or gender they are. Use that wasted Pell Grant money, and divert it to qualified high school students only who have 30+ on the Math ACT. A return to reward for high school merit, will be a return to highly qualified American Born employees in math, science, health sciences, and technology. Obama was WRONG when he said “anyone can code,” Look at how HIS website turned out, hiring Michelle Obama’s Princeton friend, CEO at CGI to run it?

But we can’t do “Deals” with Obama. And we have the opportunity to plan right now. Instead of getting sour every time they plant these stories, and ask our Candidates about the illegal “Childurn,” we should blame Obama for releasing criminal aliens and all his other infractions. Our candidates need to be prepared with a new answer every time they do this. They will ask about all the media pet topics…the gay marriage, the abortion, the war on woman, do you really want to TAKE free birth control away????

I am praying for us all to hold our breath, collectively, and find a candidate to work for instead of sitting around whining…especially you men, the whining…it’s effeminate, I don’t need you on my team. Every week you are going to hear that your favorite republican wants to stab you in the back, because the media knows that makes you feel bad, and it works.

Fleuries on May 13, 2014 at 9:21 AM

It’s all about money. Country and individuals be damned. The major media outlets need to sell advertising on the spanish cable stations that we are paying for every month. Fast food restaurants need cheap labor even at $10.10 per hour. Big business also want cheap labor but high skilled at lower rates as well. They need to keep their market share and it suppresses small business and start ups. Government need more customers to justify their existence. Politicians want dependent voters. Real estate industry is drooling at the idea to market to young immigrants while the elderly are moved into government subsidized housing or elaborate retirement complexes that just depleted life savings. The Obama death tax resurrected in 2011 will not allow family wealth transfer.

Chaos will raise demand for government services. Economic consequences will raise prices, inflation and deplete savings further.

I see nothing good coming from this for our country, only for the greedy short sighted few.

Connecticut on May 13, 2014 at 9:32 AM

Ward Cleaver to the Chamber of Commerce: Go to hell.

Ward Cleaver on May 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM

People of Chamber of Commerce are greedy and foolish. They insist to end freedom and small government.

sohumm on May 13, 2014 at 10:06 AM

…. realistically there are only three “windows” left before the 2016 election

Do they honestly think that people like me are going to forgive and forget? What the GOP is doing right now is proving the socialists right when they say that it’s ‘wholly owned subsidiary of the Chamber of Commerce’. I’ll be damned if I’m ever going to forget it. I will stand aside and let the Democrats LOOT THEM down to the petty change in their pockets!

They think they’ve got us caught pretty neatly. As advocates of a Free Market, we can be counted on to fight their socialist enemies. Meanwhile back at the ranch, they’re manipulating the labor pool in order to keep their expenses down, playing both sides while the middle class is squeezed to death in between.

Nope. It is NOT going to work this time. If the Chamber of Commerce wants to flood this country with third-world socialists, I won’t lift a finger to stop them from getting the fleecing they’ve asked for.

Murf76 on May 13, 2014 at 10:10 AM

Way to ‘SNATCH DEFEAT FROM THE JAWS OF VICTORY’, Boehner!

Mid-Term Elections are months away, Democrats are under the proverbial ‘guillotine’ of being solely reponsible for the Constitution/law-violating, non-representative government, Socialistic power-move-based Obamacare AND for all the criminal/Un-Constitutional acts (not to mention 5 On-Going Scandal Investigations of Obama)…

And Boehner is ‘H#LL-BENT’ on making a vote on Amnesty for Illegals – ANOTHER move that would be completely a NON-Representative Act (as a majority of Americans want the border closed & process fixed so this never happens again) FIRST…and who insist there are SO MANY GOVERNMENT-MADE burdens and problems that need to be addressed to help AMERICANS FIRST….

WHILE Boehner and his fellow ‘Establishment’ Republican members, who do nort want to be held accountable and forced to actually represent wehat is best for AMERICA 1st by ANYONE, is waging a war against the very same TEA Party responsible for handing them the House….

Just FRIGGIN’ BRILLIANT, you moron! Good luck hanging on to the HOUSE let alone trying to win the SENATE after you have completely BETRAYED the truly Conservative values that people demand at this time and after chasing your hard-core GOP base away by proving that it continues to grow harder and harder to tell the difference between Liberals like Harry Reid and YOU and the rest of your Washington Establishment GOP, Boehner!

Pass Amnesty – help ILLEGALS 1st, putting them at the front of the line in front of American citizens (who are hurting right now) and the Constitutuion / Rule of Law…and the Republican Party is GOING DOWN!

easyt65 on May 13, 2014 at 10:10 AM

If you think the primary battles are hurting the party now just wait until they actually pass amnesty.

Wigglesworth on May 13, 2014 at 10:17 AM

Must be tough to be an African-American these days.

Imagine how nervous they must be when the realization comes that the politically correct crowd is showing them daily that they are no longer ‘most-favored minority’.

Move to the back of the bus with the white folks – time to make room at the front for the gays and illegals. Doubt it? Go ahead, African-Americans, tweet something controversial about either and see who the PC crowd comes out to defend or destroy…

Midas on May 13, 2014 at 10:18 AM

One month before the election Romney promised amnesty in his 1st year.

Romney said he wanted to enact permanent immigration reform within his first year in office. Denver Post

Wigglesworth on May 13, 2014 at 7:59 AM

No, he did not.

Immigration reform and amnesty are not the same thing. It just seems that way to the ignorant because the amnesty supporters have hijacked the term when what they really mean is amnesty, but amnesty is actually the furthest thing possible from real reform.

Real immigration reform is passing e-verify and visa tracking and beefing up enforcement (Romney’s stated plan for reforming our immigration system), not granting an amnesty to illegals and thereby inviting another even more massive wave of illegal invasion to form (something Romney opposed).

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 10:18 AM

I am an Asian bilingual. I would likely to mention that Asian communities in general are not in favor of the amnesty. Currently, there is some anti-Democratic Party sentiment going on as a result of the Affirmative Action, which is pushed by the Democrats. Many Asian communities are rallying against SCA5, a California version of the Affirmative Action.

In other words, we shouldn’t be surprised if the Asian vote swing back during this year’s midterm elections. Hopefully, it helps prove that an amnesty is not the only way to attract immigrant votes.

sohumm on May 13, 2014 at 10:20 AM

Way to ‘SNATCH DEFEAT FROM THE JAWS OF VICTORY’, Boehner!

Mid-Term Elections are months away, Democrats are under the proverbial ‘guillotine’ of being solely reponsible for the Constitution/law-violating, non-representative government, Socialistic power-move-based Obamacare AND for all the criminal/Un-Constitutional acts (not to mention 5 On-Going Scandal Investigations of Obama)…

easyt65 on May 13, 2014 at 10:10 AM

Why, it’s almost as though the CoC and GOP don’t *want* the Democrats to get hammered in the mid-terms, isn’t it? Seriously – if they *wanted* to help the Democrats in November and 2016, actively sought to undertake action that would *reduce* GOP voter turnout, would they do anything differently?

Midas on May 13, 2014 at 10:21 AM

Pass an amnesty bill and Donohue and Boner will singlehandedly put the RINO National Committee and the RINO Republican Party out of business as contenders for anything.

philoise65 on May 13, 2014 at 10:32 AM

If the Chamber gets Amnesty pastsed, then dissident conservatives should work with Democrats to pass a minimum wage hike and screw the Chamber over.

K. Hobbit on May 13, 2014 at 11:17 AM

What am I missing here?

AesopFan on May 13, 2014 at 12:04 AM

The amnesty will draw even more illegal workers, who will happily take those jobs. The amnestied workers will move up from those jobs to ones that currently pay minimum wage, displacing the workers in *those* jobs who are currently making a little more than minimum wage……

GWB on May 13, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Boehner might decide to start the session off with a big “achievement” on immigration, to get it done and get it out of the way knowing that grassroots righties will revolt short-term but that most will forgive and forget in the interest of beating Hillary once it’s time to vote in 2016.

Don’t count it. Four million who voted for McCain stayed home in 2012. Pass amnesty and it will be much, much worse than that.

TarheelBen on May 13, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Chamber of Commerce adopts Union tactics of coercion…unexpectedly

workingclass artist on May 13, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Boehner might decide to start the session off with a big “achievement” on immigration, to get it done and get it out of the way knowing that grassroots righties will revolt short-term but that most will forgive and forget in the interest of beating Hillary once it’s time to vote in 2016.

Don’t count it. Four million who voted for McCain stayed home in 2012. Pass amnesty and it will be much, much worse than that.

TarheelBen on May 13, 2014 at 11:23 AM

I think the liberals in both parties would be fine with that.

This is no longer a democrat vs. republican fight…It is a liberal vs. conservative fight – Gov. Rick Perry

workingclass artist on May 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM

You actually don’t know my position on immigration reform.

libfreeordie on May 12, 2014 at 9:28 PM

Are you new around here?

Is it suddenly different than your previous “I support amnesty so long as the government implements wage controls for the glorious workers so that their capitalist masters are thwarted something labor something something global something” position?

You’re against particular legislation but not amnesty, correct?

Or is that the other libfreeordie?

rogerb on May 12, 2014 at 10:03 PM

 

Having this year switched to a vegetable and protein diet this year, getting my fitness and body back with regular excercise I can say that those things matter more for health and well being than insurance. The whole approach we have is ridiculous.
 
libfreeordie on May 13, 2014 at 10:11 AM

 
I must’ve been pretty much dead on, so I guess this amnesty/pro-CoC thread is dead.
 
But hey, protein diets.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Fluke you all, you traitors of the land.

The obama goons released 38,000 illegal criminals.

Go to Hell, chamber, the D/Rs, all who’re for amnesty. I hope you burn in the 10th layer, the ninth being way too cold for all of you.

Schadenfreude on May 13, 2014 at 11:51 AM

That includes all the amnesty leaches of HA.

Schadenfreude on May 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM

There’s a fundamental math that conservatives don’t seem to get.

Every year the number of conservatives (who are almost entirely white, old, and christian) is shrinking.

Every year the number of minorities is growing.

At some point, probably soon, conservatives who reflexively drive away all minorities are simply not going to be worth coddling to the GOP. In other words you are making yourselves a losing proposition by driving up the opportunity cost of wooing you while nature depreciates the value of having you.

It doesn’t require a lot of analysis to see where this ends up for conservatives. So you can either modernize or become party-less and subsequently powerless.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Don’t count it. Four million who voted for McCain stayed home in 2012. Pass amnesty and it will be much, much worse than that.

TarheelBen on May 13, 2014 at 11:23 AM

No they didn’t. You guys got that number by comparing early results for 2012 to the final results for 2008.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 11:59 AM

So you can either modernize become progressive or become party-less and subsequently powerless.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

That’s what you really are saying.

Which pretty much makes having power pointless.

GWB on May 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM

There’s a fundamental math that conservatives don’t seem to get.
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

 
Close the thread. No one can top that.
 
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/07/insurers-80-90-of-obamacare-enrollees-are-paying-their-premiums-not-67-like-that-gop-committee-said/comment-page-4/#comment-8042322

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 12:13 PM

The history of the country has been one of being ruined by the ownership class who traded long term stewardship for short term gain.

We were too cheap and lazy to pick our own cotton, then tomatoes, and now bugs in computer code.

Each of these reasons is why in 2040 the demographics will flip.

If you want to blame someone, blame the white ownership class that’s always wanted these policies for hundreds of years.

uatu1878 on May 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM

This is why all the chamber of commerce and Kelly Ayotte emails are flagged to automatically go into my spam folder.

earlgrey on May 13, 2014 at 12:44 PM

The Chamber of Commerce is idiotic.

They think passing amnesty will make their cheap illegal labor no longer illegal.

News flash, it’s going to make it no longer cheap either. The ink won’t even be dry before you see the first lawsuits for back pay to make-whole from minimum wage and unpaid overtime.

Stupid Stupid Stupid!

CapnObvious on May 13, 2014 at 12:45 PM

Something with immigration, both in terms of border security and the legal status of those here, needs to be done as a matter of good policy, but the election implications are dumb.

This stuff has been analyzed: Hispanics are pretty much irrelevant in the Electoral College, the states in which they are most numerous are largely solidly in one party’s camp. The only exceptions I can think of are Nevada and Colorado – 15 electoral votes. I would add Florida, but the Cuban Americans there make the Hispanic vote there split to the point of irrelevancy.

The 2016 Election will swing on two factors: can the GOP get working class whites out to vote in a way that Bush succeeded in and Romney failed? Will black voters return to their high 80s support of Democrats (instead of mid-90s) and see their turnout decrease? If the answer to both of those questions is yes, the next president will have an R after his name.

LukeinNE on May 13, 2014 at 1:43 PM

There’s a fundamental math that conservatives don’t seem to get.

Every year the number of conservatives (who are almost entirely white, old, and christian) is shrinking.

Every year the number of minorities is growing.

At some point, probably soon, conservatives who reflexively drive away all minorities are simply not going to be worth coddling to the GOP. In other words you are making yourselves a losing proposition by driving up the opportunity cost of wooing you while nature depreciates the value of having you.

It doesn’t require a lot of analysis to see where this ends up for conservatives. So you can either modernize or become party-less and subsequently powerless.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

It has nothing whatsoever to do with race, jughead. Leave it a nitwit “liberal” to utterly miss the fact that he’s being robbed.

You’d think that even the professional pajama-boy with a hundred grand in school loans would be able to figure out that if you bring in millions of foreigners with cheaper degrees and willing to work for a whole lot less that he’d be the one getting screwed in the deal, but that’s a “liberal” for ya. Useful idiots, indeed. It’s not just the low-wage worker getting hosed here.

The only color involved in so-called “immigration reform” is green. It’s all about the cash.

Murf76 on May 13, 2014 at 2:27 PM

That’s what you really are saying.

Which pretty much makes having power pointless.

GWB on May 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM

I’m not, but if you choose to interpret it that way…

Do you really think ignoring the issue will make it go away?

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Close the thread. No one can top that.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/07/insurers-80-90-of-obamacare-enrollees-are-paying-their-premiums-not-67-like-that-gop-committee-said/comment-page-4/#comment-8042322

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 12:13 PM

On the one hand we have the mad math skillz of a random anonymous internet poster (i.e. you) on the other hand we have large rigorous surveys by KFF and Rand which point to much greater gains.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine which source is more credible.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

You’d think that even the professional pajama-boy with a hundred grand in school loans would be able to figure out that if you bring in millions of foreigners with cheaper degrees and willing to work for a whole lot less that he’d be the one getting screwed in the deal, but that’s a “liberal” for ya. Useful idiots, indeed. It’s not just the low-wage worker getting hosed here.

The only color involved in so-called “immigration reform” is green. It’s all about the cash.

Murf76 on May 13, 2014 at 2:27 PM

The problem with your argument is the immigrants are already here, it’s just they are working in the shadows without any protection under the law. You know why the immigrants work for slave wages? They don’t have a choice. Legalize them and suddenly they not only have a choice they have legal recourse to prevent it

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:54 PM

This stuff has been analyzed: Hispanics are pretty much irrelevant in the Electoral College, the states in which they are most numerous are largely solidly in one party’s camp. The only exceptions I can think of are Nevada and Colorado – 15 electoral votes. I would add Florida, but the Cuban Americans there make the Hispanic vote there split to the point of irrelevancy.

LukeinNE on May 13, 2014 at 1:43 PM

Obama won FL hispanics by 60-39%, that’s pretty significant. Non-cuban hispanics were not that far off (66-34).

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/11/07/latino-voters-in-the-2012-election/

If republicans want to write off colorado, florida, the entire southwest (eventually including Texas) I’m sure dems won’t complain.

I can post it again but if you take Reagan’s complete waffle stomp of Mondale and use those vote shares by race you find that set in 2012 Reagan doesn’t crush Mondale, just wins handily. By 2040 Reagan loses. We’re talking about a 525-13 EV rout being reversed. You expect many such match ups in the future?

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:06 PM

Reagan signed amnesty into law in the 1980s and less than a decade later California was lost.

The same will happen nationwide once a new law is passed.

InterestedObserver on May 13, 2014 at 4:09 PM

There’s a fundamental math that conservatives don’t seem to get.
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Close the thread. No one can top that.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/07/insurers-80-90-of-obamacare-enrollees-are-paying-their-premiums-not-67-like-that-gop-committee-said/comment-page-4/#comment-8042322
 
rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 12:13 PM

On the one hand we have the mad math skillz of a random anonymous internet poster (i.e. you) on the other hand we have large rigorous surveys by KFF and Rand which point to much greater gains.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine which source is more credible.
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

 
Yikes. It’s from Rand’s citation.
 
You’re not capable of running the numbers yourself, are you?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM

on the other hand we have large rigorous surveys by KFF and Rand which point to much greater gains.
 
I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine which source is more credible.
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

 
Since you cited it, go ahead and link to the surveys showing gains greater than 5 million in the previously uninsured.
 
We’ll wait.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:22 PM

BTW, Tlaloc, if you’re incapable of running the numbers yourself, you’re at the mercy of other people who you’ve decided are brighter than you are and who will tell you what you need to know to be safe and happy. You know, like preachers.
 
One would think you’d appreciate seeing someone do the math so that you can have a better understanding of the topic. Unless your faith isn’t capable of hearing other arguments, I guess.
 
I’ll check back in later and see if you’ve found a passage and verse.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:33 PM

Yikes. It’s from Rand’s citation.

You’re not capable of running the numbers yourself, are you?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Having watched you face plant over and over again in the attempt you can see why I’d rather leave it to professions…

…actually I guess you can’t.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:40 PM

Yikes. It’s from Rand’s citation.

You’re not capable of running the numbers yourself, are you?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Having watched you face plant over and over again in the attempt you can see why I’d rather leave it to professions…

…actually I guess you can’t.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:40 PM

 
And yet you can’t point out where. And that’s because you can’t do the math, isn’t it?
 
You’re reduced to hoping an insult will work against sources and data.
 
Regardless, go ahead and link to the surveys showing gains greater than 5 million in the previously uninsured.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:43 PM

Since you cited it, go ahead and link to the surveys showing gains greater than 5 million in the previously uninsured.

We’ll wait.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:22 PM

http://www.rand.org/blog/2014/04/survey-estimates-net-gain-of-9-3-million-american-adults.html

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:44 PM

BTW, Tlaloc, if you’re incapable of running the numbers yourself, you’re at the mercy of other people who you’ve decided are brighter than you are and who will tell you what you need to know to be safe and happy. You know, like preachers.

One would think you’d appreciate seeing someone do the math so that you can have a better understanding of the topic. Unless your faith isn’t capable of hearing other arguments, I guess.

I’ll check back in later and see if you’ve found a passage and verse.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:33 PM

This is typical of the anti-intellectual streak on the right of late. You insist that no matter how badly prepared you are to do the math yourself that you simply MUST be as smart as the experts in the field. So naturally when your numbers come out different it’s their fault.

It’s exactly the same as the poll unskewing in 2012. Fortunately reality has a way of butting in on your delusions of competence.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:47 PM

And yet you can’t point out where. And that’s because you can’t do the math, isn’t it?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:43 PM

I have pointed out where- your numbers fail to match reality. Beyond that I have no need to check your math- it’s wrong, clearly. Where it went wrong is something for you to figure out.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:49 PM

http://www.rand.org/blog/2014/04/survey-estimates-net-gain-of-9-3-million-american-adults.html

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 4:44 PM

We can also look at the Gallup survey which has the uninsured rate down to 13.4% from a high in 2013 of 18%. For an adult population of 240 million that’s a change of 11 million.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168821/uninsured-rate-drops.aspx

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:00 PM

You realize that’s the same data you linked the first time I showed you the math, right Tlaloc?
 

Fair enough. I guess we’ll stick with 61% were previously ensured prior to Obamacare, then.

Thanks.

rogerb on May 7, 2014 at 3:58 PM

You are reading too much into it. Had previous coverage does not mean covered at the time they got obamacare, it only means at *some* point in the past this person had insurance. It might have been decades ago.

Tlaloc on May 7, 2014 at 4:04 PM

I know you think the earth is only 6000 years old, but you really should read the data you link to.

rogerb on May 7, 2014 at 4:25 PM

 
Do you have any new information? All of what you’ve already posted has already been run.
 
5 million previously uninsured.
 
I know you didn’t realize there was a 37% margin of error, btw, but here’s the screen grab if you need it.
 
http://imgur.com/D6CibPi
 
You want so badly to believe your holy men that you’re at the point where you’re making casseroles and headed to the basement before choir practice.
 
Read and understand data for yourself, Tlaloc.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:02 PM

We can also look at the Gallup survey which has the uninsured rate down to 13.4% from a high in 2013 of 18%. For an adult population of 240 million that’s a change of 11 million.
 
http://www.gallup.com/poll/168821/uninsured-rate-drops.aspx
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:00 PM

 
Shame we’re discussing previously uninsured, isn’t it?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM

meanwhile CBO says 12 million:

http://www.businessinsider.com/cbo-obamacare-report-how-many-people-are-insured-2014-4
(link to original report on BI site)

In fact the only source I can find getting numbers like yours is this report:
http://hrms.urban.org/quicktakes/changeInUninsurance.html

however that report explicitly says they are underestimating:

These early estimates understate the full effects of the Affordable Care Act on the uninsured for two major reasons. First, the survey does not capture the enrollment surge that occurred at the end of the open enrollment period, because 80 percent of the responses to the March 2014 HRMS were provided by March 6, 2014. Second, these estimates do not reflect the effects of some important ACA provisions (such as the ability to keep dependents on health plans until age 26 and early state Medicaid expansions) that were implemented before 2013.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:06 PM

You realize that’s the same data you linked the first time I showed you the math, right Tlaloc?

Yeah I was hoping this time you’d actually read it.

Do you have any new information? All of what you’ve already posted has already been run.

Why would I need new information when the old so handily demolishes your position?

I know you didn’t realize there was a 37% margin of error, btw, but here’s the screen grab if you need it.

http://imgur.com/D6CibPi

You want so badly to believe your holy men that you’re at the point where you’re making casseroles and headed to the basement before choir practice.

And? Margin of error is just as likely to be high side as low and your 5 million is still outside the range of the MOE.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:08 PM

Shame we’re discussing previously uninsured, isn’t it?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM

Right, what would the drop in uninsured rate have to do with the uninsured…

…why that’s just crazy talk.

Is it too much to ask that you actually parse english correctly?

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:09 PM

And? Margin of error is just as likely to be high side as low and your 5 million is still outside the range of the MOE.
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:08 PM

 
I just thought you’d like to see it. Do you know why it’s so high?
 
Wait, you did realize that had nothing to do with math to reach the 5 million “previously uninsured”, right?
 
Ha. Just kidding.
 
How is that casserole?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Right, what would the drop in uninsured rate have to do with the uninsured…
 
…why that’s just crazy talk.
 
Is it too much to ask that you actually parse english correctly?
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:09 PM

 
Ha. Now you don’t even know what you’re debating.
 
Remember
 

61% were previously ensured prior to Obamacare, then.
Thanks.
 
rogerb on May 7, 2014 at 3:58 PM

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:12 PM

Politifact had a neat article on Medicaid enrollees, btw
 

The administration’s 6.3 million figure includes a lot of the “churn” in Medicaid that has nothing to do with the new law’s Medicaid expansion, as well as new sign-ups of people who were previously eligible for Medicaid — and thus were not granted “access to health care for the first time because of Medicaid expansion,” in Obama’s words.

The actual number is estimated to be between one-seventh and two-fifths of what Obama said it was. We rate the claim False.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/feb/25/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-medicaid-expansion-has-brought-h/

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:14 PM

I just thought you’d like to see it. Do you know why it’s so high?

Because it’s a survey.

Ha. Now you don’t even know what you’re debating.

I’m taking issue with you saying obamacare only reduced the number of uninsured by 5 million, as you keep claiming over and over. Whether you want to pretend we’re debating something else is of little interest to me.

If you’d like to abandon your previous position by claiming you meant something else all along feel free.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:22 PM

I just thought you’d like to see it. Do you know why it’s so high?

 
Because it’s a survey.
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:22 PM

 
O_o
 
Try the actual math-based reason. It’s a simple one sentence answer. Heck, you could probably google it.
 
Go ahead. We’ll wait.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:28 PM

O_o

Try the actual math-based reason. It’s a simple one sentence answer. Heck, you could probably google it.

Go ahead. We’ll wait.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Okay, wait right there.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:36 PM

You can always just go ahead and start calling me a racist if that would help, Tlaloc.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:37 PM

The problem with your argument is the immigrants are already here, it’s just they are working in the shadows without any protection under the law. You know why the immigrants work for slave wages? They don’t have a choice. Legalize them and suddenly they not only have a choice they have legal recourse to prevent it

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:54 PM

Nope. They will STILL work for less. You know why?… it’s because 7 or 8 bucks an hour sounds pretty good in the third-world crap-holes they come from, as is the standard of living. How naive can one be not to see that if the Chamber of Commerce wants it, it can’t be good for raising wages?

Murf76 on May 13, 2014 at 6:08 PM

You’re not capable of running the numbers yourself, are you?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Do you know why it’s so high?

Because it’s a survey.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:22 PM

O_o

Try the actual math-based reason. It’s a simple one sentence answer. Heck, you could probably google it.

Go ahead. We’ll wait.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Okay, wait right there.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:36 PM

 
My favorite part of the thread, btw.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 6:31 PM

meanwhile CBO says 12 million:
 
http://www.businessinsider.com/cbo-obamacare-report-how-many-people-are-insured-2014-4
(link to original report on BI site)
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:06 PM

 
BTW, for anyone playing along at home, that’s
 

“about 6 million people gained insurance from the exchanges and close to 7 million people benefitted from the Medicaid expansion”

 
per Tlaloc’s link.
 
61% had insurance previously, and 60% of the Medicaid recipients were eligible already and didn’t need Obamacare for coverage per politifact link above, so that’s
 
(6M * 39%) + (7M * 40%) = 2.34 + 2.8 = 5.14
 
5.14M previously uninsured that Obamacare covered
 

I’m taking issue with you saying obamacare only reduced the number of uninsured by 5 million, as you keep claiming over and over…
 
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:22 PM

 
5.14M previously uninsured covered by Obamacare per your link.

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 6:46 PM

Any other links you want to post, Tlaloc?

rogerb on May 13, 2014 at 6:47 PM

We can also look at the Gallup survey which has the uninsured rate down to 13.4% from a high in 2013 of 18%. For an adult population of 240 million that’s a change of 11 million.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168821/uninsured-rate-drops.aspx

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 5:00 PM

This is the obvious part you’re missing: WHY was the high of 18% in 2013? Shouldn’t it have been in 2010 when the ACA was passed?

Here’s an analogy:
Let’s say a very small town has 5 people unemployed in 2010, then the mayor does something amazingly stupid and it spikes up to 50 people unemployed by 2013.

In 2014 it settles a bit to 25 people unemployed. Would you believe the mayor trying to credit his dumbass idea from 2010 as the reason “25 previously unemployed people are now employed” as if that’s a good thing?

No, you’d have to be mathematically illiterate to believe that. Because you can’t count the people that were employed in 2010 among the “previously unemployed.”

CapnObvious on May 13, 2014 at 7:23 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3