think they've won a badge of honor. We should call their offices and thank them (the ones who voted NO because it's criminal, not because it doesn't fuck people over enough). Make them think they're heroes, not zeros like Trump will accuse them of being.

For those Senators who think it doesn't fuck people over enough, we should still call, pretend we're proud CONservatives, and tell them to "stand their ground".

We have to start playing as dirty as these bastards, every damned day.

1. Senator McCain voted to waive the Budget Act on a bill he "could. not. vote. for." just hours before.
2. Senator Capito voted to take Medicare away from thousands in her state. (Remember when she said she just couldn't do that West Virginians?)

The Nos on the Republican side: Senators Collins, Corker, Cotton, Graham, Heller, Lee, Moran, Murkowski, and Paul.

IBH: Cotton and Corker surprised me.
Murkowski and Collins were no votes
Heller is trying to have it both ways
Lee, Moran and Paul are jackasses
Graham likely voted no because it waived the 60 threshold

....that's why Paul has been against it from the beginning.

The Budget Act (Budget and Accounting Act of 1921) created the Bureau of the Budget now called the OMB. The act required the head of the GAO, to "investigate, at the seat of government or elsewhere, all matters in relation to the receipt, disbursement, and application of public funds, and shall make to the President ... and to Congress ... reports [and] recommendations looking to greater economy or efficiency in public expenditures"

of it.

I don't get it. I'll try to read up on that.

That's why it takes 60 votes

Just post their name and states and I can get the phone numbers and addresses. It doesn't matter how many or which states. I want to call the ones who will be most effective. Thanks!

Heller of NV is the one most likely to not vote for the various Repub plans of the maybes
Caputo of WV is a maybe. She talked a good line leading up to the vote, but fell in line
Murkowski and Collins won't vote for anything that the Republicans have put out there. Though maybe a call to the Alaska and Maine senators might help to keep them steady Nos
I don't know what to make of Graham SC. Only thing I can think of is, he refuses to waive the 60.
There are no wobbly Democrats. As long as the vote needs 60, the Republikkans won't be able to pass anything
Voting not to waive the 60, pretty much cinched that
It's the non-60 votes needed that Collins, Murkowski and Heller are needed

Essentially it is kind of a "states rights" approach, leaving a lot of decisions for states to individually make regarding how insurance is offered. Graham may be holding out for a vote on his amendment before falling into line on a later one if his fails.

Senate Parliamentarian Rules "AGE TAX" in Trumpcare violates Byrd Rule Requires 60 votes

Ok folks, Bernie Sanders is on this and he’s applying the pressure on Republicans.

Sanders has been a Senator for a long time, so he knows all the Senate rules. It’s great we have Sanders experience on our side, so we can tear apart Trumpcare with every Senate procedure available.

Senate Parliamentarian just ruled the "Age Tax" is subject to the Byrd Rule.

Big blow here for the Republicans Trumpcare wealth care plan for America.

The "Age Tax" basically charges older Americans 5 times more under Trumpcare, than what it charges younger individuals. This was a feature in their plan that the AARP was strongly against.

That’s a huge hole in Trumpcare that Republicans will have to overcome. Don't see how they do it, since it basically cripples the plan. This is not over. We must fight!

We can still kill this monstrosity, because Senate rules can cripple it so much it will never have enough votes to pass. Don't lose hope. Fight until the end!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/7/25/1683918/-Senate-Parliamentarian-Rules-Age-Tax-in-Trumpcare-violates-Byrd-Rule-Requires-60-Votes

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029373467

...a Senator for 37 years, and the Democratic Senate leader, Schumer, has been a Senator for 19 years.

It's the Parliamentarian who "knows the rules" and is "on this", thank you.

weeks ago:

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/337060-parliamentarian-threatens-deadly-blow-to-gop-healthcare-bill

and it was discussed in all the major papers

I am learning a lot about government very fast.

(including the (D) appointed as the temp replacement for Ted Kennedy after he passed away). When Scott Brown won the special election for Kennedy's seat in January 2010 and was sworn in February 2010, "part 2" had to be done by reconciliation that originated in the House ("Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act" ), which passed 56-43.

This is why repeal only would be worse, they would never replace it. The health care markets would collapse.

How can we do anything about that!? Even the reps can't do anything if McConnell does this all the time. They never did play fair and never will. We don't stand a chance with anything as far as legitimate legislature goes because of this. What are we and our reps supposed to do? Our hands are tied and our backs are against the wall and the Repubs know it.

Murkowski and Collins are definite Nos for anything that's put out
Heller is playing both sides with his votes (IMO)
I think Graham voted against waiving the Budget Act for that reason (not needing 60 votes if the Parliamentarian says it does)
Collins, Graham and Murkowski are 3.
Some have put forth that if pressured by the right in SC he would cave
I think he's in the same boat as Murkowski. The far right in SC tried that last time (as they did with Murkowski) and ultimately it came to zilch.

stripping the poor of their hope to live

With no health care and enough states' rights, we'll be back to
involuntary servitude at $4 an hour

A good portion of Americans are just a few paychecks away from being left high and dry. If someone loses their job that currently provides them with good health insurance, they will be screwed without the safety nets these people want to take away. It baffles me how so many can be so stupid to not realize that the average everyday person is not going to fair well if they get hit with a series of unfortunate events. Which isn't uncommon because they tend to snowball at times. We always hear stories about these situations.

And like you said, they also want to cut back wages and regulations to screw people over even more. So that means not only are they removing the safety nets, but they also want to make it harder for people to move up and stay up.

it will make trump very unhappy as well as most of the hardcore anti-obamacare ones. They have no replacement and finding out its hard to govern....