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.
You realize that there is going to be an easy fix to this for the GOP: pass a temporary extension of federal subsidies until sometime in 2017. The GOP could take the opportunity throw in some other riders that might otherwise be vetoed by the president.
It wouldn't surprise me if Boehner & McConnell have their spies who have already informed them of what is in the decision, and know exactly what they are going to do after the decision is made public.
You might want to stockpile some drugs for the day after the release of the decision, because your anticipated orgy of schadenfreude is not likely to materialize. It is interesting to see what really motivates a moonbat, however. It's not about getting good policy or what's good for the country. It's about trying to make the other side look silly. Classic elementary-school playground stuff....
Well said.
The Republican base is smart enough to know that a Republican alternative to Obamacare that satisfied them would never pass for as long as Obama is president because Obama wouldn't sign it, and the Republicans don't have anything close to a veto-proof majority.
All the Republicans have to do is pass a bill extending the subsidies into 2017 and then dare the Democrats and Obama to veto it.
In the meantime, they should launch a media campaign in the swing (competitive) states during the election season setting out their vision of health care -- which should concentrate on cutting costs while preserving quality and availability.
The uninsured rate was 16.4% (Q1 2010) and is currently at 11.9%.
That's a 27% decrease and no, it is not insignificant.
From the chart posted it's 1.5% from just before Obama until now. Insignificant. Besides, again, the argument was it was far, far higher. What happened?
If the Suprme Court rules to take away subsidies on this flimsy case, we are a banana republic.
Whether one likes the affordable care act or not, the whole premise of this case makes zero sense and has zero basis in objective reality.
The argument is that Democrats and the President meant to punish states that didn't create their own marketplace, but they never discussed this anywhere or with anyone is asinine and dishonest.
They didn't discuss this poison pill in the law with the media, or other democrats, or conservatives.
I mean come on, but again we are dealing with a majority conservative court, and reality is irrelevant to conservatives.
They didn't discuss anything in the law with anyone. Not only that, they lied about what was in it.
But keep in mind that the ONLY alternative presented by our loyal Republicans is to let people with preexisting conditions and/or a lack of funds DIE.
That there is a pretty low bar. And for all its NUMEROUS flaws, the ACA easily surpasses the "I got mine so **** you" approach.
I've noted this before and will again. If Obama had done what candidate Obama promised president Obama would do and was only able to pass things like the pre-existing condition change and keeping college age kids on people's policies at that he would have remained very popular. The (D)'s don't lose the House and he could have implemented further changes (in the open).
It does no good to "have yours" when you still can't afford the co-pays and deductibles.
The Republican base is smart enough to know that a Republican alternative to Obamacare that satisfied them would never pass for as long as Obama is president because Obama wouldn't sign it, and the Republicans don't have anything close to a veto-proof majority.
All the Republicans have to do is pass a bill extending the subsidies into 2017 and then dare the Democrats and Obama to veto it.
In the meantime, they should launch a media campaign in the swing (competitive) states during the election season setting out their vision of health care -- which should concentrate on cutting costs while preserving quality and availability.
They will lose. The promise was to do everything they could to end Obamacare if they get the Senate. They've done nothing. No one is going to believe them again.
Actually payments to providers participating in Medicare are going down.
What is the difference between Medicare and Obamacare with a 100% govt subsidy? That seems to be the reason why the payments are going down. Kill Medicare and put everyone on Obamacare. No need for two programs.
What is the difference between Medicare and Obamacare with a 100% govt subsidy? That seems to be the reason why the payments are going down. Kill Medicare and put everyone on Obamacare. No need for two programs.
Few can afford the co-pays and deductibles under Obamacare. Especially on top of the cost of the policies.
But keep in mind that the ONLY alternative presented by our loyal Republicans is to let people with preexisting conditions and/or a lack of funds DIE.
That there is a pretty low bar. And for all its NUMEROUS flaws, the ACA easily surpasses the "I got mine so **** you" approach.
#1 rule when trying to fix something, DONT DO MORE DAMAGE..
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.
