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.
Or maybe the Democrats could do something that they failed to do when Obamacare was first designed/implemented which is to have BOTH sides participate instead of just one. Isn't that what government was designed to do, represent BOTH sides?
How's about that idea?
Put on your thinking cap or at least your reading glasses.
Don't wish too hard. You may get what you wish for. I've heard this time and time again.
Rep. Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield California was on Morning Joe this morning exploring all of the options regarding the repeal of Obama care. He seemed determined to start the repeal process without including the options that people find acceptable.
The question that screams to be asked is: Once Obamacare is repealed, how many years will it take to re-institute those provisions that the public likes and needs?
Are you one of the twenty million who now has insurance under Obamacare?
What are your thoughts?
How many people will die because of preexisting conditions?
I don't know. According to my childless son and daughter-in-law in their early thirties they went from paying their own and a $65/month catastrophe plan to paying $515/month with a $4,000 deductible, of which they have yet to remotely come near. My daughter-in-law claims paying $27/month out of pocket for her birth control pills was way cheaper. You've got to admit paying $324 for pills, $80 for a doctor's visit, $60 for labs, and $780 for catastrophic coverage premiums is cheaper than paying not quite $500 towards your deductible and around $6,200 in premiums. Basically, their new "improved" insurance takes at least $5,000/year out of their pocket. Those are some expensive birth control pills.
There needed to be something done to help the uninsured but destroying what worked for the other 300M was not the answer. Oh, and some of those 20M were not uninsured previously, their policy was declared not good enough by the government despite them believing it was good enough.
In Kentucky, prior to Obamacare, they had a rule that pre-existing conditions had to be covered if you had valid insurance through another company prior or one year after taking coverage if you had none for a year or more. The rule if you had a gap of less than one year was that the previous conditions didn't have to be covered for them at a rate of two months per one month of non-coverage (up to one year). It seemed reasonable to me. As to the coverage of children up to 26, test is easy enough to keep. Those are the two most popular parts of Obamacare.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
They might all realize that anything that needed to be said, has been, many time over. So let's get on with it. Time's a wasting. Lot to do and a short time to do it.
Democrats could stand down and let the Republicans have it with ACA, Medicare, Social Security, Food Stamps...
This would give voters a chance to see if this is what they really want.
Who is paying you to say that?
If you and the Republicans bring down Medicare, I promise a serious recession.
If you and the Republicans bring down Social Security I promise a depression like your generation has never seen.
I promise you unemployment that will idle you for years.
Or maybe the Democrats could do something that they failed to do when Obamacare was first designed/implemented which is to have BOTH sides participate instead of just one. Isn't that what government was designed to do, represent BOTH sides?
How's about that idea?
How do you get participation from this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch McConnell
The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.
There was considerable negotiations with and input from Republicans in both the Senate and the House before it was passed.
Oh how soon we forget how things went....
Quote:
Obamacare was signed into law in March 2010. If you recall, Nancy Pelosi’s Democratic majority in the House of Representatives was unable to pass their version of a healthcare law. Because all revenue bills have to originate in the House, the Senate found a bill that met those qualifications: HR3590, a military housing bill. They essentially stripped the bill of its original language and turned it into the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), aka Obamacare.
The Senate at that time had 60 Democrats, just enough to pass Obamacare. However after the bill passed the Senate, Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy died.
In his place, Massachusetts elected Republican Scott Brown. That meant that if the House made any changes to the bill the Senate wouldn’t have the necessary number of votes to pass the amended bill (because they knew no Republicans would vote for Obamacare). So Senate Leader Harry Reid cut a deal with Pelosi: the House would pass the Senate bill without any changes if the Senate agreed to pass a separate bill by the House that made changes to the Senate version of Obamacare. This second bill was called the Reconciliation Act of 2010. So the House passed PPACA, the Senate bill, as well as their Reconciliation Act. At this point PPACA was ready for the President to sign, but the Senate still needed to pass the Reconciliation Act from the House.
Remember that the Senate only had 59 votes to pass the Reconciliation Act since Republican Scott Brown replaced Democrat Ted Kennedy. Therefore in order to pass the Act Senate Democrats decided to change the rules. They declared that they could use the “Reconciliation Rule (this is a different “reconciliation” than the House bill). This rule was only supposed to be used for budget item approvals so that such items could be passed with only 51 votes in the Senate, not the usual 60. Reconciliation was never intended to be used for legislation of the magnitude of Obamacare. But that didn’t stop them.
So both of the “Acts” were able to pass both houses of Congress and sent to President Obama for his signature without a single Republican vote in favor of the legislation. The American system of governance was shafted. To quote Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings of the House Rules Committee during the bill process: “We’re making up the rules as we go along.”
Who is paying you to say that?
If you and the Republicans bring down Medicare, I promise a serious recession.
If you and the Republicans bring down Social Security I promise a depression like your generation has never seen.
I promise you unemployment that will idle you for years.
Oh, I agree. 100%.
Only it's not me and the Republicans. They're shooting themselves in the foot all by their lonesomes. I have nothing to do with it.
But I do think the Democrats should not try to save them from their fiasco.
Let's see how that Ayn Rand vision for our nation works out.
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.
