ADVERTISEMENT

Can we finally put the Obamacare fight to rest?

zeke4ahs

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 26, 2003
46,545
21,708
113
Now that the ruling has come down? And then, hopefully next week we can put the gay marriage thing aside also. It's time to move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meyerhoosiers2
The law was put to rest the day it passed. The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.
 
Now that the ruling has come down? And then, hopefully next week we can put the gay marriage thing aside also. It's time to move on.

No we can't

Obamacare is in a fight with itself. It is unworkable and unsustainable without major revision, maybe even repeal and reenactment. Obama himself understands this as he rewrote the effective date of the statute having to do with the employer mandate and delayed it until he is almost out of office. The employer mandate is critical to the statutory scheme and he won't put that into effect because he knows what the consequences will be for millions of workers. Meanwhile we scratch our heads and wonder why the economic recovery is the worst ever.
 
Now that the ruling has come down? And then, hopefully next week we can put the gay marriage thing aside also. It's time to move on.
This was a Supreme Court decision over the parsing of language. It doesn't have anything to do with the efficacy of the law, it was merely a minuscule part of it. The law needs to be repealed or completely overhauled to effectively reduce the cost of healthcare and that debate will continue as we see the unchecked costs of insurance continue to skyrocket and peoples wages continue to decrease. The continuum doesn't work.
 
Now that the ruling has come down? And then, hopefully next week we can put the gay marriage thing aside also. It's time to move on.
It's a decisive victory. In particular the Court didn't decide the case under the Chevron analysis -- which grants deference to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute. The majority said that the language is ambiguous but instead of merely granting deference, it expressly held that the administration's interpretation is correct. This means that the next Republican President can't adopt a different interpretation. The core provisions of Obamacare are now conclusively established.
 
The law was put to rest the day it passed. The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.
So the vote was 6-3. Not even close. You don't think any of those six vote to protect the Constitution.
 
Says the person that doesn't have their premiums jumping.
Actually, my premiums have gone up a bit. But I'm more than happy to do that if it helps others ( like my sister) who has health insurance for the first time in her life.
 
Obamacare is in a fight with itself. It is unworkable and unsustainable without major revision, maybe even repeal and reenactment. Obama himself understands this as he rewrote the effective date of the statute having to do with the employer mandate and delayed it until he is almost out of office. The employer mandate is critical to the statutory scheme and he won't put that into effect because he knows what the consequences will be for millions of workers. Meanwhile we scratch our heads and wonder why the economic recovery is the worst ever.
The law needs to be repealed or completely overhauled to effectively reduce the cost of healthcare and that debate will continue as we see the unchecked costs of insurance continue to skyrocket and peoples wages continue to decrease. The continuum doesn't work.
Those who've been wrong about Obamacare from the beginning persist in being wrong, despite all evidence. Meanwhile, back in reality, the law is working better -- and costing less -- than even its supporters expected. And the Republican alternative to Obamacare still is and always will be vaporware. I'll let this stand as my reaction to that.
 
The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.
This case had nothing to do with the Constitution, dave.
 
So the vote was 6-3. Not even close. You don't think any of those six vote to protect the Constitution.
Absolutely not they voted out of conscience to protect an active social law called Obamacare. It could not would not ever overturn no matter what the Constitution says. It is legislating from the bench and in plain English that is what the Supreme Court has been doing for many years in helping to guide social policy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iubud
The law was put to rest the day it passed. The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.

Actually dave

This case had nothing to do with the constution. It was strictly a case of interpreting a federal law. No matter how the Supremes decided this case, the law would be here and constitutional.
 
Those who've been wrong about Obamacare from the beginning persist in being wrong, despite all evidence. Meanwhile, back in reality, the law is working better -- and costing less -- than even its supporters expected. And the Republican alternative to Obamacare still is and always will be vaporware. I'll let this stand as my reaction to that.
 
Actually, my premiums have gone up a bit. But I'm more than happy to do that if it helps others ( like my sister) who has health insurance for the first time in her life.

What is her background?
 
Same old stuff with you.. Part of the law seems to be working, part doesn't. I deal with this law in many aspects. I have said before, and I will say it again...the best that can be said about this law at present is it is "incomplete" or "under review". We won't know a whole lot until the employer mandate hits the market place, and the sign-ups for the coming year after several people got hit on their tax returns for false/in-correct information and will experience an increase in the exchange.

Let us not completely throw this thing out yet, but at the same time, lets not bury our heads in the sand and fail to fix the parts that need fixing. At present, it has done some good, and some harm. Anybody that says anything different than that, just doesn't know what they are talking about.

And I say that as someone who was 100% against the law when it came out.
 
Actually, my premiums have gone up a bit. But I'm more than happy to do that if it helps others ( like my sister) who has health insurance for the first time in her life.

And aren't you a student? Thought you posted that on the BB board.
 
Strict constructionists Scalia, Thomas, and Alito apparently don't understand or don't want to understand the meaning of "state", i.e., A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government ;).
 
And aren't you a student? Thought you posted that on the BB board.
I wIsh! No, I'm old! I just live in Bloomington. For the last 15 years or so, my sister took care of my elderly parents. Before that, childcare. So she had low paying jobs with no insurance.
 
It's a decisive victory. In particular the Court didn't decide the case under the Chevron analysis -- which grants deference to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute. The majority said that the language is ambiguous but instead of merely granting deference, it expressly held that the administration's interpretation is correct. This means that the next Republican President can't adopt a different interpretation. The core provisions of Obamacare are now conclusively established.
The ratification of the Bill of Rights was unanimous. It provided no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Was that decisively over? Then where the heck did Roe v. Wade come from - an unborn person can be killed without due process of law.

You see, its endless and always will be because liberals will never succeed putting the huge questions to the people via a proposed Constitutional amendment through the Congress. Why? Because they could never win on any of those issues in the hands of the people and the states.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mike41703
The ratification of the Bill of Rights was unanimous. It provided no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Was that decisively over? Then where the heck did Roe v. Wade come from - an unborn person can be killed without due process of law.

You see, its endless and always will be because liberals will never succeed putting the huge questions to the people via a proposed Constitutional amendment through the Congress. Why? Because they could never win on any of those issues in the hands of the people and the states.
Once again, this case had nothing to do with the Constitution.
 
Absolutely not they voted out of conscience to protect an active social law called Obamacare. It could not would not ever overturn no matter what the Constitution says. It is legislating from the bench and in plain English that is what the Supreme Court has been doing for many years in helping to guide social policy.
Said a guy who hasn't read the opinions.
 
Those who've been wrong about Obamacare from the beginning persist in being wrong, despite all evidence. Meanwhile, back in reality, the law is working better -- and costing less -- than even its supporters expected. And the Republican alternative to Obamacare still is and always will be vaporware. I'll let this stand as my reaction to that.
There is not a shred of evidence Obamacare is "working" and the law hasn't even been fully implemented yet (which is a good thing). There is not one metric which would directly link the implementation of Obamacare with an across the board reduction in medical costs. Obamacare hasn't been a law that long. Prior to Obamacare there was a natural market correction that had flattened healthcare inflation which coincided with an explosion of health savings accounts and more and more Americans without health insurance.

I challenge you to do two things:
1. Less partisanship and more independent study.
2. Less personal attacks, snark and sarcasm and try to become more issue focused and work to improve your decorum on this board.

Thank you in advance.
 
Same old stuff with you.. Part of the law seems to be working, part doesn't. I deal with this law in many aspects. I have said before, and I will say it again...the best that can be said about this law at present is it is "incomplete" or "under review". We won't know a whole lot until the employer mandate hits the market place, and the sign-ups for the coming year after several people got hit on their tax returns for false/in-correct information and will experience an increase in the exchange.

Let us not completely throw this thing out yet, but at the same time, lets not bury our heads in the sand and fail to fix the parts that need fixing. At present, it has done some good, and some harm. Anybody that says anything different than that, just doesn't know what they are talking about.

And I say that as someone who was 100% against the law when it came out.
In light of your post at 12:12p, I assume that this is aimed at me. If so, let me repeat what I said above:

Those who've been wrong about Obamacare from the beginning persist in being wrong, despite all evidence. Meanwhile, back in reality, the law is working better -- and costing less -- than even its supporters expected. And the Republican alternative to Obamacare still is and always will be vaporware. I'll let this stand as my reaction to that.
In fact, the critics' predictions of doom have all failed. The law is* in fact "working better -- and costing less -- than even its supporters expected." Nevertheless, the critics insist that it is failing right now. This is what I was mocking. Their heads are buried somewhere other than in the sand.

Meanwhile, I've never predicted starbursts and unicorns. I supported the Affordable Care Act only because it was the best our dysfunctional system could produce. It works within a system I'd rather tear down, and it has shortcomings as a result. But why would anyone listen to baseless claims by those who've been persistently wrong? Why are you twisting my tail and not theirs? "Same old stuff with you."
______________________________________________________________________________
*Please note that the verb "is" speaks in the present tense. Thus the referenced sentence is a statement of what is, and not a prediction of what will be.
 
There is not a shred of evidence Obamacare is 'working'
lzi_gpd6puu6buc0blijhq.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrHoops
The law was put to rest the day it passed. The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.
Just to demonstrate that you actually understand that treasured document, d, why not explain the constitutional issues as you see them, including references to constitutional history and previous USSC decisions to show that you've studied the matter. I'm waiting here with tingling appendages, always willing to take a lesson as I am.
 
No we can't

Obamacare is in a fight with itself. It is unworkable and unsustainable without major revision, maybe even repeal and reenactment. Obama himself understands this as he rewrote the effective date of the statute having to do with the employer mandate and delayed it until he is almost out of office. The employer mandate is critical to the statutory scheme and he won't put that into effect because he knows what the consequences will be for millions of workers. Meanwhile we scratch our heads and wonder why the economic recovery is the worst ever.

God in heaven, C, you're tying the weakness of the economic recovery to ACA? That's unbelievably dumb, even for you.
 
It's a decisive victory. In particular the Court didn't decide the case under the Chevron analysis -- which grants deference to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute. The majority said that the language is ambiguous but instead of merely granting deference, it expressly held that the administration's interpretation is correct. This means that the next Republican President can't adopt a different interpretation. The core provisions of Obamacare are now conclusively established.
I am so glad the law is being upheld. We sorely need this healthcare bill. The affordable healthcare law is just an extension of medicare. Works the same way. Without it, people simply go to the emergency room and that costs even more and has no provision for preventative health care.
 
The law was put to rest the day it passed. The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.

You do realize the constitution means nothing on it's own. The Supreme Court tells us what the constitution means. Marbury v. Madison.
 
I am so glad the law is being upheld. We sorely need this healthcare bill. The affordable healthcare law is just an extension of medicare. Works the same way. Without it, people simply go to the emergency room and that costs even more and has no provision for preventative health care.

Where is the provision for preventive healthcare in this? Where is the incentive for healthy behavior? People who engage in unhealthy behavior should pay more. I think that is fair.
 
No we can't

Obamacare is in a fight with itself. It is unworkable and unsustainable without major revision, maybe even repeal and reenactment. Obama himself understands this as he rewrote the effective date of the statute having to do with the employer mandate and delayed it until he is almost out of office. The employer mandate is critical to the statutory scheme and he won't put that into effect because he knows what the consequences will be for millions of workers. Meanwhile we scratch our heads and wonder why the economic recovery is the worst ever.
The real problem is,IMO, medicare is too cheap. I am retired and pay less now than when I had a company plan while I was working. Much less in fact. I think we should all pay more to support the system which really works the same as my private plan did. That is, it has contracts with the providers and pay only a fraction of what is billed, same as my private plan did. Pretty well administered in my opinion.
 
This is killing the middle class. My personal deductible rose from $250 to $500. And my copays jumped from $20 to $30. Overall premium stayed the same.
The evidence I've seen doesn't support that too well, tb: it appears to me that in many or maybe most cases those who saw their costs go up had junk policies to begin with.
 
The evidence I've seen doesn't support that too well, tb: it appears to me that in many or maybe most cases those who saw their costs go up had junk policies to begin with.

I actually have very good health coverage that extends far beyond Obama's plan. This is a large corporate plan. Instead of raising premiums due to Obama care they simply raised the deductible and copays. This is happening across the board in corporate america. Full timers have also been eliminated across the board in retail for obvious insurance reasons.
 
The real problem is,IMO, medicare is too cheap. I am retired and pay less now than when I had a company plan while I was working. Much less in fact. I think we should all pay more to support the system which really works the same as my private plan did. That is, it has contracts with the providers and pay only a fraction of what is billed, same as my private plan did. Pretty well administered in my opinion.

Medicare is squeezing the doctors on pricing. As a result, the medicare system is screwed up in the fact that doctors are now ordering every procedure/test under the sun. Unnecessary procedures. That's what medicare is incentivizing. It's dangerous for everyone.

Secondly, the other elephant in the room is end of life care. Seniors actually haven't paid their fare share. They are living longer than anyone could have expected. In 10 years the average life expectancy will be 110? 120?
 
The law was put to rest the day it passed. The fight to protect and uphold the Constitution is a never ending battle. What is sad is that we cannot all agree to protect that treasured DOCUMENT!.

Soooooo, what you're saying is you're not a constitutionalist, a constitutional scholar of any kind, and don't have any idea what fights have anything to do with the constitution. Thanks for clearing that up. Yes, Chief Justice Roberts decided the ACA was constitutional because, well, it is. It's essentially a tax. Article 1, section 8, clause 1. Congress has the power to tax and spend. They tax you if you don't have health insurance and they spend your tax dollars on subsidies for poorer people to have affordable insurance. You don't have to like why you're being taxed and you don't have to like what they spend your tax dollars on. There are exactly two things you can do about it. 1) nothing 2) deal with it. I don't like the fact that we spend a trillion dollars per year on a global military empire. You know what? That's just tough shit for me.
 
I actually have very good health coverage that extends far beyond Obama's plan. This is a large corporate plan. Instead of raising premiums due to Obama care they simply raised the deductible and copays. This is happening across the board in corporate america. Full timers have also been eliminated across the board in retail for obvious insurance reasons.
If you're on a "large corporate plan" Obamacare has nothing to do with your coverage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrHoops
Medicare is squeezing the doctors on pricing. As a result, the medicare system is screwed up in the fact that doctors are now ordering every procedure/test under the sun. Unnecessary procedures. That's what medicare is incentivizing. It's dangerous for everyone.

Secondly, the other elephant in the room is end of life care. Seniors actually haven't paid their fare share. They are living longer than anyone could have expected. In 10 years the average life expectancy will be 110? 120?
Seniors living longer is a problem. People like me on medicare should pay more, I agree. Doctors and hospitals continue to build expensive facilities, offices, etc. Think they are doing just fine. Maybe too fine.
 
I actually have very good health coverage that extends far beyond Obama's plan. This is a large corporate plan. Instead of raising premiums due to Obama care they simply raised the deductible and copays. This is happening across the board in corporate america. Full timers have also been eliminated across the board in retail for obvious insurance reasons.
Why would an employer-provided plan raise plan costs because of ACA?

I think its unlikely that much if any unemployment is due to ACA, although the cost of providing health care as an employee benefit, which was more or less an historical accident to begin with, might be having an effect.

Last time I looked, we were paying nearly 20% of GDP for health care, while the next most expensive payor, which I believe was France, was paying around 11%, or roughly half. The research I did suggests that we don't get better health care outcomes here than France, Canada, Japan, Australia, or, believe it or don't, Cuba and Romania. We just pay a lot more for them, mostly due, far as I can see, to the fact that doctors and hospitals charge a lot more here than anywhere else, without providing any extra value. That doesn't make much sens
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT