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.
That is correct and if I were Obama I would delay the implementation of the exchanges for the opt out states until those states that set up exchanges were up and running and then when the opt out states see the benefits that they are missing... well it would be fun. Unfortunately and contrary to conservative opinion Obama isn't as politically devious as I would be.
States were given the option though. They were not mandated.
One would have hoped that if you are going to supply an option then you have a plan for all choices.
Sounds like HHS didn't plan very well for them to handle this.
"Problem solved". Now what physicians are going to see all these wonderful new medicaid patients? Further, if medicare cuts to providers go through, we will have, in addition, millions of medicare patients being kicked to the crub.
1-There is no such thing as states' rights (governments don't have rights).
2-It is, however, within the power of the states to create an exchange for its people. If they refuse to do so, the law allows federal government to do it for them.
You are talking about a law that was declared constitutional as a tax law, aren't you? Do you know that the Constitution says that all revenue laws have to originate in the House of Representatives and this law originated in the Senate and only about 4 Senators had anything to do with writing it? No debate or anything even in the Senate. The end is coming.
You are talking about a law that was declared constitutional as a tax law, aren't you? Do you know that the Constitution says that all revenue laws have to originate in the House of Representatives and this law originated in the Senate and only about 4 Senators had anything to do with writing it? No debate or anything even in the Senate. The end is coming.
Pelosi ran the House and she'll swear that she personally wrote it so it did originate in the House.
Water under the bridge roy. You're not going to win that one.
More than that, it would **** off their political contributors... the largest and most influential insurance companies who would be only one of many insurance companies in the list people would end up shopping for.
NIce try, Ghost. Why didn't you mention something about the feds being the only ones with printing presses for money?
Sounds like a pretty high level of bureaucratic confusion involved, with several govs expressing frustration at the lack of information coming from HHS. Pres. Obama managed to get it passed (barely), got it through the courts, but it remains unpopular with over 50% still favoring repeal. CNN Not Reporting Own ObamaCare Poll
Implementation will be a big test for Obama in his second term He's going to have to somehow make sure that ACA does not turn into his Iraq. No doubt his team is great at campaigning, at winning elections, and at winning PR battles. I don't see the evidence that they are great at implementation.
It is through the courts, up to a point. I wonder what the courts will say about the place that law originated once they are asked to rule about it. The law was, barely passed, in a totally unconstitutional manner since it has been declared a tax law and not constitutional in any other way. Implementation is going to be really tough because of this but Sebelius has spent most of her time writing rules for that implementation.
Not to those with functioning brain and a desire to work for its people. MANY states have taken advantage of the opportunity. Those with slower brains pushing them, are understandably lagging behind (for now, until booted out).
Booted out of what, Ghost? Are you saying that the Obama administration will kick those states out of the Union?
Every state will eventually comply. Don't fool yourselves. Emotions are still running high after the election.
Every state will comply with an unconstitutional law? I think you have failed to know what the Constitution we still have in effect says about origination of revenue laws. Look at Article I, Section 1, Clause 1.
That is correct and if I were Obama I would delay the implementation of the exchanges for the opt out states until those states that set up exchanges were up and running and then when the opt out states see the benefits that they are missing... well it would be fun. Unfortunately and contrary to conservative opinion Obama isn't as politically devious as I would be.
But the law that all this comes from is unconstitutional as a tax law because of origination. I guess Obama hasn't been told about this yet.
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.
