Judge Rejects Obamacare Individual Mandate Provision

[pBills]

Personally, the current bill is terrible, but instead of repealing it, Congress should look to improve it. But that makes way too much sense for our government- which by the way, is the government of the best place on earth. I think that statement should replace "In god we trust" on our money.

 

 

Thank god someone has finally said it.

[Magox]

Personally, the current bill is terrible, but instead of repealing it, Congress should look to improve it. But that makes way too much sense for our government- which by the way, is the government of the best place on earth. I think that statement should replace "In god we trust" on our money.

It doesn't work that way Adam, if they did your way, the health insurance system would go out of control. The heart of the bill is the mandate, without the mandate it doesn't work, people will opt out at an even higher rate than what we are seeing today, and they will only buy insurance until they get sick, because the insurers simply aren't able to deny coverage. Which means that rates would go even much higher than what we are seeing today. Now of course, the mandate they have now lacks teeth, the penalties are so little, that many people will opt out anyway because they'd rather not have to pay the higher monthly premiums, because the premiums end up being much higher than the one time tax or penalty. Not only that, there is no recourse for not paying the tax or penalty either, so the mandate truly lacks teeth.

 

So, when you said "but that makes way too much sense for our government", you had no clue in what you were saying.

 

So you either keep the mandate and try to improve the bill or you repeal the whole thing. Those are the only two options, and considering that the mandate very well may be unconstitutional and that it lacks teeth, rates are going to continue to keep going up at a faster rate than they did before the bill was even written.

 

In a nutshell, they !@#$ed up the health insurance system even more so than before they tinkered with it. The best thing you can hope for, if you care about rising rates, is to repeal the bill and totally rewrite it and put back in some of the popular provisions such as covering people with pre existing conditions.

 

My solution for that all along was set up a special exchange, funded by the government that offers insurance for ONLY people who have pre existing medical conditions. What this would do is filter out all the sick people off of the private exchanges into the government medical pre existing exchange, therefore minimizing the risk and total medical reimbursements payed by the insurers, which would lower EVERYONE ELSE's health insurance.

 

Now THAT would make too much sense by our government.

 

Why? Because the GOP would hear the word "government" medical pre existing exchange and would hoot and holler because government shouldn't be involved in anything and the liberals would be against it because they want to offer this sort of exchange for everyone so that they could achieve a semblance of Universal Health Care.

Edited December 15, 2010 by Magox

[Rob's House]

Thank god someone has finally said it.

And by your 26th post in this thread it still wasn't you.

[Adam]

It doesn't work that way Adam, if they did your way, the health insurance system would go out of control. The heart of the bill is the mandate, without the mandate it doesn't work, people will opt out at an even higher rate than what we are seeing today, and they will only buy insurance until they get sick, because they aren't able to deny coverage. Which means that rates would go even higher. Now of course, the mandate they have now lacks teeth, the penalties are so little, that many people will opt out anyway because they'd rather not have to pay the higher monthly premiums, because the premiums end up being much higher than the one time tax or penalty. Not only that, there is no recourse for not paying the tax or penalty either, so the mandate truly lacks teeth.

 

So, when you said "but that makes way too much sense for our government", you had no clue in what you were saying.

 

So you either keep the mandate and try to improve the bill or you repeal the whole thing. Those are the only two options, and considering that the mandate very well may be unconstitutional and that it lacks teeth, rates are going to continue to keep going up at a faster rate than they did before the bill was even written.

 

In a nutshell, they !@#$ed up the health insurance system even more so than before they tinkered with it. The best thing you can hope for, if you care about rising rates, is to repeal the bill and totally rewrite it and put back in some of the popular provisions such as covering people with pre existing conditions.

 

My solution for that all along was set up a special exchange, funded by the government that offers insurance for ONLY people who have pre existing medical conditions. What this would do is filter out all the sick people off of the private exchanges into the government medical pre existing exchange, therefore minimizing the risk and total medical reimbursements payed by the insurers, which would lower EVERYONE ELSE's health insurance.

 

Now THAT would make too much sense by our government.

 

Why? Because the GOP would hear the word "government" medical pre existing exchange and would hoot and holler because government shouldn't be involved in anything and the liberals would be against it because they want to offer this sort of exchange for everyone so that they could achieve a semblance of Universal Health Care.

Is it really that hard to open state lines for insurance? Oh, wait, that would kill the influx of special interest money that the politicians from the best place on earth get.........

[Rob's House]

Beg from sex? Definitely not from your mom. Ooops, sorry was that mean?

 

Dude you seriously need to lighten up. You are one uptight mo-fo... speaking of sex. Go get some change and buy yourself a woman. You really need to get laid.

Mere coincidence that you and Conner both go the way of the mama jokes on consecutive days? Hmmmm. Curious how you both parrot the same brand of retardation and level [read that lack] of class. Did Conner give up on finding a friend and have to create one?

 

As far as buying a woman, I'm still holding out hope that Obama will sign a mandate requiring women to sleep with me. I would talk about your mother, but I usually don't f*ck and tell. I will say that if all men really were created equal she wouldn't need me to provide what your dad can't. BTW, she said I got deeper than you ever do.

[pBills]

And by your 26th post in this thread it still wasn't you.

 

 

I have said that before MANY MANY MANY times. Sorry you didn't notice.

[Magox]

Is it really that hard to open state lines for insurance? Oh, wait, that would kill the influx of special interest money that the politicians from the best place on earth get.........

They should do that, but that still has nothing to do with the mandate. Without the mandate, this bill from a scale of one to ten, ten being the highest, is a one... Right now it is a two, because the mandate they do have is wimpy. If you are going to have a mandate, then put some teeth on that mother!@#$er.

[DC Tom]

Well since you are not a doctor. I'm sure you would royally @$#%#! it up.

 

And I already mentioned that it healed quite well. Guess what? While doctors are better trained than I am, I'm also smarter than most doctors.

 

As I stated before, I am not a huge fan of the mandate. So YES, one should be able to opt out. Biggest deal is that they need to make it more affordable so that people who are having a hard time can have an easier time gaining coverage.

 

And you're still dodging the question...but no matter, since this is getting to the real crux of the matter: the near-universal mandate for purchasing health insurance, about which you apparently agree with everyone else. It shouldn't be a mandate. So why the !@#$ are you arguing with us, shitbird???

 

And the government is never going to make health insurance more affordable, nor are they going to make health care cheaper AND more accessible. Given my family experiences where I've had to deal personally with Medicaid, I think the best start to achieving those goals is probably to get the government OUT of it.

[pBills]

Mere coincidence that you and Conner both go the way of the mama jokes on consecutive days? Hmmmm. Curious how you both parrot the same brand of retardation and level [read that lack] of class. Did Conner give up on finding a friend and have to create one?

 

As far as buying a woman, I'm still holding out hope that Obama will sign a mandate requiring women to sleep with me. I would talk about your mother, but I usually don't f*ck and tell. I will say that if all men really were created equal she wouldn't need me to provide what your dad can't. BTW, she said I got deeper than you ever do.

 

 

You are talking about a lack of class. Yet if someone doesn't agree with you they are an idiot, they need to beg for sex, etc. Wow, you have really set the bar high when class is concerned. Did your feelings get hurt today?

 

Nice mom jokes... difference between me and you is that I could give a crap what you write.

[DC Tom]

Personally, the current bill is terrible, but instead of repealing it, Congress should look to improve it.

 

I disagree, only because I think the current bill is SO terrible that there's no fixing it, and it has to be trashed and a new, rational one started from scratch.

[Dante]

Do you take this type of logic with you whereever you go?

 

Everyone wishes everything were cheaper. Thanks for bringing up a point no one is discussing. It's the embarrassingly ridiculous concept that the government in any way, shape or form has even the slightest idea or ability to be the entity that actually makes health care cheaper.

 

 

bingo. And I would add the ability to do it better. I have relatives that come to the US from Canada to get yearly cancer checkups. My uncle, who eventually died of pancreatic cancer, came to the US when push came to shove. His son, my cousin, fearing the same fate comes to the states for the BEST hospitals and yearly tests. He has the money to do so. If the feds do such a great job, why would these people feel the need to come south and pay for treatment? I mean, they already have been raped by taxes to pay for this stuff. Could it be that private enterprise can achieve better results? People can run all the studies they want. Quote all the bs they want to but I go by real life experiences.

So take it for what its worth. To me, other than a disdain for creeping socialism, is why I fear government run healthcare so much.

[Adam]

They should do that, but that still has nothing to do with the mandate. Without the mandate, this bill from a scale of one to ten, ten being the highest, is a one... Right now it is a two, because the mandate they do have is wimpy. If you are going to have a mandate, then put some teeth on that mother!@#$er.

I am back and forth on the mandate. I would be for it, if they would put in a provision, blocking it from becoming a precedent for future mandates on buying other things. The concept of everyone having insurance would eliminate the term "pre-existing condition" and go a long way to reduce costs. Add to that, opening state borders and we could really have some of the the best health insurance in the world- and it could be accomplished without adding to the deficit. Would that reduce the need for Medicade/Medicare and go even further to reducing the deficit?

[pBills]

And I already mentioned that it healed quite well. Guess what? While doctors are better trained than I am, I'm also smarter than most doctors.

 

 

 

And you're still dodging the question...but no matter, since this is getting to the real crux of the matter: the near-universal mandate for purchasing health insurance, about which you apparently agree with everyone else. It shouldn't be a mandate. So why the !@#$ are you arguing with us, shitbird???

 

And the government is never going to make health insurance more affordable, nor are they going to make health care cheaper AND more accessible. Given my family experiences where I've had to deal personally with Medicaid, I think the best start to achieving those goals is probably to get the government OUT of it.

 

 

Because I HATE when people make statements like "I hate the government telling me what to do... they are killing my freedoms". Just cracks me up.

 

You may be right... personally I think when you keep the government completely out of it, the companies will still continue to raise rates, cut people off from their insurance because of an ailment, etc. Not believing that will truly act in an ethical way.

 

I disagree, only because I think the current bill is SO terrible that there's no fixing it, and it has to be trashed and a new, rational one started from scratch.

 

 

Which would never happen. It is clear as day that Republicans have had no interest in taking this on. Why would they if they had it trashed?

[Adam]

Because I HATE when people make statements like "I hate the government telling me what to do... they are killing my freedoms". Just cracks me up.

 

You may be right... personally I think when you keep the government completely out of it, the companies will still continue to raise rates, cut people off from their insurance because of an ailment, etc. Not believing that will truly act in an ethical way.

 

 

 

 

Which would never happen. It is clear as day that Republicans have had no interest in taking this on. Why would they if they had it trashed?

It isn't just on the republicans and never was- it is on the american people, who talk big, but don't play big.

[Magox]

 

 

 

 

 

Which would never happen. It is clear as day that Republicans have had no interest in taking this on. Why would they if they had it trashed?

Because they campaigned on it, and they already have their plan and they would have the votes to make it happen, as long as Obama is defeated and they take over the Senate.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement after the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirmed in a letter tonight that the Republican health care plan will lower health care premiums by up to 10 percent and reduce the deficit by $68 billion over 10 years without imposing tax increases on families and small businesses:

 

And guess what? No rise in taxes, no mandates and no government spending.

 

Imagine that

[pBills]

It isn't just on the republicans and never was- it is on the american people, who talk big, but don't play big.

 

 

Very true... and yes Democrats are included in that mix when mentioning parties. I should have stated that.

 

Because they campaigned on it, and they already have their plan and they would have the votes to make it happen, as long as Obama is defeated and they take over the Senate.

 

 

And guess what? No rise in taxes, no mandates and no government spending.

 

Imagine that

 

 

There is no way I will believe that there will be no rise in taxes, no mandates or no government spending. Sorry just not buying it.

[Magox]

Very true... and yes Democrats are included in that mix when mentioning parties. I should have stated that.

 

 

 

 

There is no way I will believe that there will be no rise in taxes, no mandates or no government spending. Sorry just not buying it.

Well, that's the way it is whether you buy it or not. It's simple their plan was much less complex, and more importantly logical. Allow health insurers to compete across State lines, you see Pbills, competition is a good thing for lowering prices, yeah, it's true. Also, TorT reform, well we all know that if you cap their liability that lowers premiums, and tax credits for lower income earners. All this requires no raising of taxes, no mandates and no government spending. Simple.

 

You probably didn't even read the CBO scoring did you?

[Adam]

Well, that's the way it is whether you buy it or not. It's simple their plan was much less complex, and more importantly logical. Allow health insurers to compete across State lines, you see Pbills, competition is a good thing for lowering prices, yeah, it's true. Also, TorT reform, well we all know that if you cap their liability that lowers premiums, and tax credits for lower income earners. All this requires no raising of taxes, no mandates and no government spending. Simple.

 

You probably didn't even read the CBO scoring did you?

I am all for lowering malpractice suits, but I hope there is an exception for gross misconduct. I have heard some horror stories- granted, they are few and far between.

[IDBillzFan]

But you're dodging the question: why can't I opt out of health insurance like I can car insurance?

You can if you can get a job with one of the 200+ companies that the WH has decided give waivers to. Or start your own company and get a waiver. Have you seen the list of companies that received a waiver? There is actually a company with one employee who literally got approval for a waiver within 24 hours of receipt of his request. Surely they'll give you the same waiver, right?

[pBills]

Well, that's the way it is whether you buy it or not. It's simple their plan was much less complex, and more importantly logical. Allow health insurers to compete across State lines, you see Pbills, competition is a good thing for lowering prices, yeah, it's true. Also, TorT reform, well we all know that if you cap their liability that lowers premiums, and tax credits for lower income earners. All this requires no raising of taxes, no mandates and no government spending. Simple.

 

You probably didn't even read the CBO scoring did you?

 

 

You honestly believe that no one will place earmarks into this bill?

 

I am all for lowering malpractice suits, but I hope there is an exception for gross misconduct. I have heard some horror stories- granted, they are few and far between.

 

 

Totally agree.