Repeal of Obamacare

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

but i figure if Team R has their panties in a twist, corporate money is involved somewhere.

Ah but see that's the brilliance of this whole thing - no matter what happens, the insurance companies win. They wrote the bill. If it stays, they have millions of new customers mandated to them by the government. If for some reason it goes away, they get to go back to putting the screws back to their paying customers the way they were before.

That's why this whole thing is a joke.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

and you wouldn't, they are getting their way on the issue completely unchallenged and without compromise of any kind.

My Intentionally vague reference about congressional control during this last decade:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ja...onstration.ogg

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Ah but see that's the brilliance of this whole thing - no matter what happens, the insurance companies win.
....
That's why this whole thing is a joke.

Good point.

[Platapus]

If the GOP offers up a better plan, then I think this is a good thing. If all they are doing is "anti-Obama" then it is just a political game.

I won't tell you what the smart money is betting on... I think you can guess.

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

If the GOP offers up a better plan, then I think this is a good thing. If all they are doing is "anti-Obama" then it is just a political game.

I won't tell you what the smart money is betting on... I think you can guess.

It's pretty obvious that such a game would have enormous negative political consequences for them in 2012.

If you consider that the repeal bill passed with a greater majority than the original obama care, including more party crossovers, it is only the first shot in the long game which will force Obama to defend his signature initiative in 2012. Given his past history on explaining/defending the law, it could very well be his achilles heal.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

the only chance of getting rid of Obama Care (which i think only parts of it should be scrapped) is if the United States Supreme Court rules it to be unconstitutional.

SCOTUS will most likely rule the law unconstitutional, the individual mandate is blatantly unconstitutional.Only way they would not is if obama gets to replace a conservative vote on the court with another Sotomayor or Kagan by the time it gets to the high court, hopefully he will not or it will fail thus why those opposed to obamacare in congress should launch their assault on the health control law.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

If you consider that the repeal bill passed with a greater majority than the original obama care, including more party crossovers, it is only the first shot in the long game which will force Obama to defend his signature initiative in 2012. Given his past history on explaining/defending the law, it could very well be his achilles heal.

Exactly

[mookiemookie]

Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance - In 1798

In July of 1798, Congress passed – and President John Adams signed - “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.” The law authorized the creation of a government operated marine hospital service and mandated that privately employed sailors be required to purchase health care insurance.

Looks like this sort of thing is more constitutional than some people think.

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/20...rance-in-1798/

[ETR3(SS)]

1.25 pages vs. 2000 pages. Just something to think about. For everyone.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

1.25 pages vs. 2000 pages. Just something to think about. For everyone.

I know. Isn't that funny? Even the 1947 Packers contract in the NFL thread that August posted was only 1 page. I imagine a modern NFL contract is probably like a book.

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

1.25 pages vs. 2000 pages. Just something to think about. For everyone.

more programs, and undoubtedly much of it filled with pet bills for big business.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance - In 1798



Looks like this sort of thing is more constitutional than some people think.

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/20...rance-in-1798/

A response......

The Federal government cannot constitutionally force American citizens to purchase services from “PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS”. The monies collected in regards to the Act in question were not required to be paid to a Private institution; they were required to be paid to agents of the Federal government.
Unless Obama Care intends to take over the health insurance industry, and intends to build Federal hospitals, it cannot constitutionally force American Citizens to purchase services from private institutions.

[gimpy117]

and whos idea was it to make people buy insurance and give tax credits in the first place? I think somebody is trying to pass the buck. Because I remember a certain party who for eight years said "tax credits this" and "tax credits that".

[August]

Despite the laudable intentions of Congress in enacting a comprehensive and transformative health care regime, the legislative process must still operate within constitutional bounds. Because an individual’s personal decision to purchase — or decline to purchase — health insurance from a private provider is beyond the historical reach of the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause does not provide a safe sanctuary.

- Federal District Court Judge Henry Hudson

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance - In 1798



Looks like this sort of thing is more constitutional than some people think.

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/20...rance-in-1798/

Actually Mookie - you should read the item in question.

"That from and after the first day of September next, the master or owner of every ship or vessel of the United States, arriving from a foreign port into any port of theUnited States, shall, before such ship or vessel shall be admitted to an entry, render to the collector a true account of the number of seamen that shall have been employed on board such vessel since she was last entered at any port in the United States, and shall pay, to the said collector, at the rate of twenty cents per month for every seaman so employed ; which sum he is hereby authorized to retain out of the wages of such seamen."

Emphasis added. Not ALL seamen were "taxed" - only those coming in from FOREIGN ports. If you worked on a boat that plied the coasts North and South while staying within US jurisdiction - you didn't get taxed. Thus - you have CHOICE - you can get taxed and work on a boat that goes to foreign ports - or you can work a "domestic only" boat - or you can find another line of work entirely and not worry about it.

The current "health care law" removes all choice when it comes to this - everyone is hit with the mandate - no matter what. Thus - you and the "blogger" are both trying to compare apples to oranges. Nice try - but its a different thing entirely.