Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Liberty is the ability to make whatever decision you want... plus the responsibility to live with the consequences.
Liberals construct their trap by removing the second part first. They pass laws mandating that hospitals treat people whether the people can pay for it or not (i.e. whether they have insurance or not).
Then responsible people complain that THEIR insurance premiums... and hospital costs... are going up even though they did nothing to increase those costs. And so the liberals say, "Well, we'll fix that problem."
And they then remove the first part of "liberty" second... by passing more laws, requiring everybody to have insurance.
See how it works?
Welcome to "the new normal" of Obama's America.
Why are you quoting yourself?
I have yet to have you or anyone show me the Republican plan that will cover everyone, and pay for it.
Republicans don't have a plan to implement big-government liberalism???
I'm shocked, shocked. T'row da bums out!!!
(These disgruntled liberal fanatics are a real hoot sometimes! )
BS, The Republican God, Reagan, signed this into law.
He just didn't pay for it.
Americans, by overwhelming majority don't want to see people turned away from the hospital from lack of pay. This leads us to a point where hospitals charge more to those with insurance, or needless procedures, which drive up insurance prices, which leads to over priced insurance and procedures.
Its what started the whole problem.
But since Americans won't see people die in the streets, we have to pay for it.
So again, what have Republicans offered to resolve Reagans problem?
A)Lift the anti competitive legislation that allows so many insurance companies to dominate one market.
B)Lift the mandates for what an insurance company has to provide allowing companies to provide policies that just cover catastrophic/emergency care.
C)Tort reform.
D)Administrative costs need to be addressed, every dollar we spend on medical care 1/4 of it goes to paper work.
This is a good start but they do very little to add free market reforms to healthcare. This country needs to create a level playing field for health insurers an providers to compete. We will find out that a portion of healthcare is subject to the market and a portion is not. Phamacies are currently competing with one another. I can call my local pharmacies and find out what a prescription will cost regardless of whether I have insurance. Would overall costs come down if there was more competition? What will stop the rapidly rising costs in health insurance premiums if competition is not added to the equation? We shop around for everything else in this country, why don't we shop around for healthcare services?
The Justices start hearing oral arguments next week for three days. Not since Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade has the SC done so. There are three areas to watch:
1) Can congress compel a private citizen to pay for health care?
2) Does the SC have jurisdiction over this case?
3) Does Congress have the right to control the commerce of health care.
It is predicted that the so called "individual mandate" will be struck down, that the jurisdiction is up in the air and that Congress does in fact have the right to control health care commerce.
If the SC rules that it does not have jurisdiction the law will continue to be placed into effect.
The SC has only once overturned a large social policy legislation enacted by Congress.
The New Deal.
It is predicted that if the SC accepts jurisdiction that the vote will be 5/4 in favor of finding it unconstitutional. However, there are several "wild cards".
BS, The Republican God, Reagan, signed this into law.
He just didn't pay for it.
Americans, by overwhelming majority don't want to see people turned away from the hospital from lack of pay. This leads us to a point where hospitals charge more to those with insurance, or needless procedures, which drive up insurance prices, which leads to over priced insurance and procedures.
Its what started the whole problem.
But since Americans won't see people die in the streets, we have to pay for it.
So again, what have Republicans offered to resolve Reagans problem?
You could stop lying just to get started.
Quote:
EMTALA was passed in 1986 as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA). Congress enacted these antidumping provisions in the Social Security Act because of its concern with an “increasing number of reports” that hospital emergency rooms were refusing to accept or treat individuals with emergency conditions if the individuals did not have insurance:
“. . . the Committee is most concerned that medically unstable patients are not being treated appropriately. There have been reports of situations where treatment was simply not provided. In numerous other situations, patients in an unstable condition have been transferred improperly, sometimes without the consent of the receiving hospital.
The Justices start hearing oral arguments next week for three days. Not since Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade has the SC done so. There are three areas to watch:
Quote:
It is predicted that the so called "individual mandate" will be struck down,
By whom?
In the lower courts two very conservative federal appellant judges Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman and 6th Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutto (Reagan and Bush appointees respectively) ruled the mandate to be constitutional.
Quote:
that the jurisdiction is up in the air and that Congress does in fact have the right to control health care commerce.
That isn't a question of jurisdiction, that issue is whether or not the Court can rule on a tax before it is collected.
Quote:
It is predicted that if the SC accepts jurisdiction that the vote will be 5/4 in favor of finding it unconstitutional. However, there are several "wild cards".
Again, by whom? There are all sorts of predictions, conjecture, and supposition about what the Court will or won't do. Let's wait at least until oral arguments begin before pretending to prognosticate what the Court will do.
A poll of academics, journalist and practicing attorneys who regularly cover the Supreme Court conducted by the American Bar Association journal found that 85% believe the Court will uphold the Affordable Care Act.
I was listening to two law professors on NPR who predicted the above. The NYTimes also has an interesting ed on this today
Bear in mind that Roberts has done the opposite of what he stated in his confirmation hearings. If he wants to write law and rule it unconstitutional he will do so. Citizens United....? it is pretty clear that he has intentions larger than life IMHO.
A poll of academics, journalist and practicing attorneys who regularly cover the Supreme Court conducted by the American Bar Association journal found that 85% believe the Court will uphold the Affordable Care Act.
Comprehensive. Thanks. The NPR profs felt that Roberts will not rule with the other justices and he will be joined by Kennedy in stating the law is unconstitutional. Note the prediction on page 32 is only 59%. In addition if the mandate is declared unconstitutional then the rest of the law should stand. If Roberts are wanting to rewrite history and respond to the smack down delivered at the state of the union they may shoot back at the POTUS.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
