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 I guess the individual mandate is not required after all and hence the state lawsuits are essentially rubbish. A state can do without the individual mandate so long as they can achieve similar results, so now all those Republican Governors can show off their great ideas and implement their own systems! Of course, they know they can't hence the law suits.
This part of the bill is devilishly clever on the Democrats part.
"So let us review how the waiver language works now, because my reading of what we have in the bill now is, if a state can demonstrate that they can meet the criteria -- particularly on cost containment, improving the delivery system -- they can do it without an individual mandate..."
I liked this bill (now law) from the beginning. I know scare tactics and they don't work on me. And now it's even better. I smell a second term.
Obama's not for the greater good of America, my foot.
FYI - Even though I voted for him, I haven't agreed 100% with him. But 90 - 95% seems to be good. How many people agree 100% anyway? Don't know of any poll on this question... but I'd certainly say... NONE.
So I guess the individual mandate is not required after all and hence the state lawsuits are essentially rubbish. A state can do without the individual mandate so long as they can achieve similar results, so now all those Republican Governors can show off their great ideas and implement their own systems! Of course, they know they can't hence the law suits.
This part of the bill is devilishly clever on the Democrats part.
"So let us review how the waiver language works now, because my reading of what we have in the bill now is, if a state can demonstrate that they can meet the criteria -- particularly on cost containment, improving the delivery system -- they can do it without an individual mandate..."
Fantastic! I can't wait to see what the states who are suing will do with this info. You know, the Republicans have it all figured out and they want health care reform as much as the Democrats. Looks like they'll have a chance to prove it. This is great news!!
Location: Midessa, Texas Home Yangzhou, Jiangsu temporarily
1,506 posts, read 4,280,755 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne
How so, specifically?
10th amendement. This a power reserved to the states, the federal government cannot mandate that it be done.
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
If the framers of the constitution had intended for the federal government to have this power then there would be no need for federalism, we could just have a central government with no state governments.
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.
