Dear Senator Flake,
Healthcare is a complex issue that requires bipartisan efforts. We cannot address the myriad of components in any single forum. No plan or system will be “perfect” for everyone.
Like most legislation, ACA consists of positives and negatives. Some people have benefitted from the law and others have not. If ACA remains the law of the land, several parts need substantial revision, some need elimination, others need minor adjustment, and new sections need inclusion.
If ACA is repealed, any replacement needs to address a substantial portion of the numerous issues concerning healthcare.
My question Sir, is if you know that this Graham-Cassidy bill could allow states to undermine protections for people with preexisting conditions, what should give you, me, and citizens of your state and this country confidence that these protections will not be undermined?
In your interview on MSNBC, you cited some logical reasons such as 1986 with welfare reform. You also state that in reality no governor or state legislature will deny protections even with waivers because of the political repercussions such an action would bring. Whether de jure or de facto such an implementation would be disastrous for the elected official in a logical and rational environment.
- Senator Flake, are we currently in such a logical environment?
- Sir, did you expect a President of the United States to take to social media and brand you as toxic?
- Would the Leader of the Free World feel it necessary to publicly refer to you as Flake Jeff Flake in a logical and rational political environment?
Great to see that Dr. Kelli Ward is running against Flake Jeff Flake, who is WEAK on borders, crime and a non-factor in Senate. He’s toxic!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 17, 2017
Sir, do you still believe in the statement you made on Twitter concerning the pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio?
I’m not asking or debating whether a pardon for the individual is warranted. I’m asking about the process by which the President undertook?
Senator Flake, in your book, you wrote that Republicans need to take the long view when it comes to issues like free trade. Shouldn’t the same apply to healthcare?
You wrote of the priority being to deny President Barack Obama instead of advancing a conservative policy agenda.
Can members of your party honestly say that supporting Graham-Cassidy is about promoting a conservative agenda when the so-called skinny repeal failed?
Or is a vote for Graham-Cassidy, regardless of what may or may not be in the bill, without CBO scoring, with limited discussion and debate, merely a vote because repeal has been GOP promise?
Is political party and reelection truly more important than the country?
Apparently, the President thinks so based upon his tweet this morning.
Rand Paul, or whoever votes against Hcare Bill, will forever (future political campaigns) be known as “the Republican who saved ObamaCare.”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 22, 2017
Sir, if there are reasons to believe that elected officials will, in fact, work for the best interests of all constituents, citizens, and country even if it means opposing their political base who is focused more upon the short term and not the long term, would you please enlighten this professor of history?
I never imagined seeing any White House rejecting the authority and validity of our own intelligence findings regarding Russia and labeling that as hoaxes created by the Democrats and perpetuated by the media.
Would a former US Senator from Arizona, Barry Goldwater, have argued the same?