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.
So what happens if the exchanges are ruled unconstitutional, no one has been able to provide a credible answer. The issues that drove ACA don't just disappear. what next?
Maybe we break it down by state? I'm in Washington State and our exchange is doing fine. But I would not want people just moving here when they got sick. So I would say they have to live here five years before they qualify to participate. Something like that. I honestly do not want those that didn't support ACA to suddenly benefit once they got sick. They should live the results of their votes.
Maybe we break it down by state? I'm in Washington State and our exchange is doing fine. But I would not want people just moving here when they got sick. So I would say they have to live here five years before they qualify to participate. Something like that. I honestly do not want those that didn't support ACA to suddenly benefit once they got sick. They should live the results of their votes.
That is an issue, if the supreme courts shoot down the exchanges what about the 30+ states. Let them figure out their own problems which has not been successful how will that work out, maybe having indigent and poor showing up at emergency rooms is the way to go.
So what happens if the exchanges are ruled unconstitutional, no one has been able to provide a credible answer. The issues that drove ACA don't just disappear. what next?
ACA didnt fix ONE problem that caused the demand for ACA..
Maybe we break it down by state? I'm in Washington State and our exchange is doing fine. But I would not want people just moving here when they got sick. So I would say they have to live here five years before they qualify to participate. Something like that. I honestly do not want those that didn't support ACA to suddenly benefit once they got sick. They should live the results of their votes.
Perhaps those that favored it should have their premiums raised to "live the results of their votes" too.
Perhaps those that favored it should have their premiums raised to "live the results of their votes" too.
Our whole plan changed. We now have HCAs. It's definitely different. But if doing that means everyone has health coverage? Fine. I also would like to not have health care tied to a particular employer. My first choice would be universal health care or Medicare for all. But since that's not happening, I say, if you kill ACA, kill Medicare too so everyone can share in the results.
Our whole plan changed. We now have HCAs. It's definitely different. But if doing that means everyone has health coverage? Fine. I also would like to not have health care tied to a particular employer. My first choice would be universal health care or Medicare for all. But since that's not happening, I say, if you kill ACA, kill Medicare too so everyone can share in the results.
But not only does everyone NOT have health coverage, but we now have more without it than previously, and the CBO says we will never go below 30 million uninsured.
Maybe we break it down by state? I'm in Washington State and our exchange is doing fine. But I would not want people just moving here when they got sick. So I would say they have to live here five years before they qualify to participate. Something like that. I honestly do not want those that didn't support ACA to suddenly benefit once they got sick. They should live the results of their votes.
Right. It could just become a state-by-state issue. Insurance is local anyway, those states continuing with AC will have reduced premiums (subsidized) and the other states participants will see huge premium increases.
And the states that didn't accept expanded Medicaid will still have their hospitals closing thru lack of funding (fed) resulting in reduced access to ERs.
But not only does everyone NOT have health coverage, but we now have more without it than previously, and the CBO says we will never go below 30 million uninsured.
Hey, as a Republican, go ahead and end it. End health care coverage for everyone on ACA. And end health care coverage for everyone on Medicare. Make it equal. If government health care is bad, it's bad. And give me my money back for Medicare. I've been paying the maximum for years and I want it back.
That is an issue, if the supreme courts shoot down the exchanges what about the 30+ states. Let them figure out their own problems which has not been successful how will that work out, maybe having indigent and poor showing up at emergency rooms is the way to go.
That would actually save a fair bit of money. The poorest people in the country are in the south and most of the southern states did not set up their own exchange.
ACA didnt fix ONE problem that caused the demand for ACA..
What caused the demand for the ACA? It would seem reasonable that people that could not get insurance at any price were, at least in part, a catalyst for the ACA.
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.
