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.
No, she's not right. There are other elements to obamacare that HAVE kicked in already. Because of the ruling voiding the WHOLE law, those elements would need to cease immediately. The judge said a second and separate injunction was not necessary because he presumes, like most law abiding administrations, that obama will abide by the ruling and stop implementation.
A STAY will be requested by obama so that the implementation can still go forward.
The ruling voiding the healthcare law was tied to the mandate. Its possible the Obama administration as an extra protection, but without the mandate actually kicking in yet it does not void the entire law. It would however, void the entire law if the mandate had already kicked in.
No, she's not right. There are other elements to obamacare that HAVE kicked in already. Because of the ruling voiding the WHOLE law, those elements would need to cease immediately. The judge said a second and separate injunction was not necessary because he presumes, like most law abiding administrations, that obama will abide by the ruling and stop implementation.
A STAY will be requested by obama so that the implementation can still go forward.
If other elements of Obama Care have kicked in already(I didn't know that so I looked it up) and the judge declared the whole thing VOID, an injunction is not necessary for that reason. So I'm wrong
Federal government needs to get a Stay and I'm right on that
-- Provides a $250 rebate to Medicare prescription drug plan beneficiaries whose initial benefits run out.
90 days after enactment
-- Provides immediate access to high-risk pools for people who have no insurance because of preexisting conditions.
Six months after enactment
-- Bars insurers from denying people coverage when they get sick.
-- Bars insurers from denying coverage to children who have preexisting conditions.
-- Bars insurers from imposing lifetime caps on coverage.
-- Requires insurers to allow young people to stay on their parents' policies until age 26.
2011
-- Requires individual and small group market insurance plans to spend 80 percent of premium dollars on medical services. Large group plans would have to spend at least 85 percent.
2013
-- Increases the Medicare payroll tax and expands it to dividend, interest and other unearned income for singles earning more than $200,000 and joint filers making more than $250,000.
2014
-- Provides subsidies for families earning up to 400 percent of the poverty level -- or, under current guidelines, about $88,000 a year -- to purchase health insurance.
-- Requires most employers to provide coverage or face penalties.
-- Requires most people to obtain coverage or face penalties.
2018
-- Imposes a 40 percent excise tax on high-end insurance policies.
By 2019
-- Expands health insurance coverage to 32 million people.
It is even more so when the party to be enjoined is the federal government, for there is a long-standing presumption “that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.”
I'm sure obama plans on ignoring this judgment, but I doubt the states OR the court OR the GOP House will allow him to do that.
He has 2 options;
File an appeal and request a stay of the injunction until the case is heard by a higher court.
Abide by the ruling - in other words, stop all implementation of obamacare.
Well, one more option, which is the likeliest - ignore the order. But.....we wouldn't expect this administration to do that, would we? Not after all his rhetoric of abiding by the rule of law and not usurping powers belonging to the other branches?
Quote:
Federal government needs to get a Stay and I'm right on that
Yes, that's what I and others have been saying. As of right now, obamacare is dead and void.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
The ruling voiding the healthcare law was tied to the mandate. Its possible the Obama administration as an extra protection, but without the mandate actually kicking in yet it does not void the entire law. It would however, void the entire law if the mandate had already kicked in.
Incorrect...again. The whole shebang has been deemed voided, because without the mandate, regardless of whether or not it has kicked in yet, the whole thing falls apart. You see, that was the mistake the dems made by neglecting to put in the severability clause and since they argued vehemently in court the mandate was essential to the law, that left the judge little choice.
Obama doesn't get to decide whether the law is voided - the judge did that for him.
We will eventually get to something like it. We still have some growing up to do, before we will be wise enough.
Just for the record, I do think that a better system for all Americans is needed, just not the GVT running it. And I also don't want big business running it either, ie greed. Myself and other colleagues doctors, nurses etc have spent countless hours thinking about our system. Some great minds have come up with some brilliant ideas to deliver quality healthcare but our ideas fall on deaf ears.
This medicare-for-all sounds interesting, but I'm still a bit hazy on how it would work. Would current medicare premiums go away? If current medicare is 80/20, am I correct in assuming that the 20% now borne by the recipient would then be borne by the payroll taxpayers?
I don't know - I'll go look it up But your medicare payroll tax would be higher, that's a given.
Payment of taxes to the Medicare for All fund, which for most individuals and families is the Medicare payroll tax as the only tax contribution required.
But health insurance premiums drop to zero, so there is a significant savings for many Americans.
— No so-called Medicare Advantage plan premiums, which are private health insurance company premiums
— No Part A monthly premiums
— No Part B monthly premiums
— No Part C monthly premiums
— No Part D monthly premiums
What is Covered:
primary care;
inpatient care;
outpatient care
emergency care;
prescription drugs;
durable medical equipment;
hearing services;
long term care;
palliative care;
podiatric care;
mental health services;
dentistry;
eye care;
chiropractic care;
substance abuse treatment
Not sure where you get your information from, but I can assure you that in the USA the system is far from the grave. I will agree that some adjustments are needed however, not one person in this country will go without healthcare. In my current position with the State of California, I am like a policeman say "in your house, or sitting in your car as a passenger" only im in the hospital setting.
CMS requires facilities to write off some patients debt and the facilities do just that. And often time more than requried. One example is a 235 bed level 2 hospital, they wrote off 11 million last month alone and I audited their work. I have NEVER seen a patient turned down for lack of ability to pay. I do think the "after the hospital care" needs adjusting but our system is far from the grave.
Anyone with an ounce of intelligence should come to the conclusion that having the GVT beit state or federal level would not be a smart move.
Keep it at the state level. The feds do not have the authority. The feds only have the authority to do what the US Constitution allows them to do, and nothing else.
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.
) and the judge declared the whole thing VOID, an injunction is not necessary for that reason. So I'm wrong
