Posted on 05/17/2012 1:18:40 PM PDT by Kaslin
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: "House Republican leaders are quietly hatching a plan of attack as they await a historic Supreme Court ruling on President Barack Obama’s health care law. If the law is upheld, Republicans will take to the floor to tear out its most controversial pieces, such as the individual mandate and requirements that employers provide insurance or face fines." Okay, so far, so good, if the health care bill is left intact, the Republicans say they're gonna take to the floor and try to take out the individual mandate and the requirement that employers provide insurance or face fines.
Now, they're not gonna have the votes to get that done, but they're gonna put on the show. But now listen. "If the law is partially or fully overturned they’ll draw up bills to keep the popular, consumer-friendly portions in place -- like allowing adult children to remain on parents’ health care plans until age 26, and forcing insurance companies to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. Ripping these provisions from law is too politically risky, Republicans say.
"The post-Supreme Court plan -- a ruling should come in June -- has long been whispered about inside House leadership circles and among the House’s elected physicians but is now being discussed with a larger groups of lawmakers, showing that Republicans are aggressively preparing for a big-time health care debate in the heat of an election-year summer. On Tuesday, the major options were discussed during a small closed meeting of House Republican leaders, according to several sources present. Then on Wednesday, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) gave the entire House Republican Conference a preview of where the party is heading. His message: 'When the court rules, we’ll be ready.' But Boehner warned that they’ll relegislate the issue in smaller, bite sizes, rather than putting together an unwieldy new health care bill."
I don't know if they're floating a trial balloon here to gauge your reaction to this, which is entirely possible. By the way, it's not new. I've heard it said before that the Republicans think holding on to the kids on your policy 'til they're 26 and the preexisting conditions, we don't want to get rid of that, no, no, no, people like that. We've gotta find a way to keep that. You know, that's been whispered about ever since Obamacare was signed into law, and it has been a point of contention with conservative Republican voters who want this whole thing thrown out. If the court throws it out, don't put some of it back. This goes to the whole point, they set the premise, and then we end up reacting to it.
So the premise is, we gotta have a major health care bill. All right, so we have to have a major health care bill. Okay, so Republicans, we'll do one, but it'll be smarter and it'll be better and it'll be smaller. And that's the way these things go. So I'm just gonna put it to you. Supreme Court overturns all of health care, just a hypothetical, do you want the Republicans writing a new piece of legislation that would contain provisions for letting your kids stay on your policy 'til he or she's 26 and forcing insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions? I must tell you, when you force insurance companies to cover X, you don't have insurance anymore.
Well, the 26-year thing, before Obamacare, kids were on their parents' policies as long as they were in college. That's another argument for not going to college. So as long as the kid was in college, yeah, theoretically they weren't working, well, they're not gonna be working when they get out of college, either. 'Cause the theory was the kid could stay on the parents' policy until he's 26, while in college. That was supposedly a proviso even before Obamacare. The Republicans, they're floating it, they want to keep that. Even if the court overturns all of Obamacare, and they want to keep the proviso that forces insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions.
Look, I live in Realville. I'm the mayor. You force insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions we're not talking insurance anymore. We're talking welfare. It's not insurance. People don't want to hear this I know. (interruption) What are the Republicans afraid of? I think the Republicans are afraid of what the Democrats are going to say if the whole thing's overturned. And it's very predictable. Obama and the Democrats -- and I'll bet you the ads are already done. "Five white people on the Supreme Court took your health insurance away from you. Well, four white guys and a traitor that's black took your health coverage away from you, took your health care away from you. They still have theirs. They still have theirs but they just took yours. You know that's what the campaign's gonna be. In fact, there's a part of me that believes Obama actually wouldn't mind that, since he's totally focused on getting reelected right now. I mean without that all the rest of what he wants to do is academic.
Some of the ridiculous stuff that he's doing now oriented toward getting reelected, it's not a stretch to believe that he wouldn't have a problem with this thing being found unconstitutional, 'cause, boy, what an opportunity they would think that is. "The Republican judges on the court," is what they would say. "The Republican judges on the court just took away your health care that we worked for a hundred years to get you. Over Republican objections, every congressional term, Republicans have always opposed you having health care, free health care, affordable health care," all those words will be thrown in. And five Republican judges just took it away from you. That's what the Republicans are afraid of. So if it's overturned and that campaign starts, what the Republicans in Congress want to do, "No, no, no, we like some provisions of this." That's why they're floating this. I guarantee you. Well, I can't guarantee you. I think they're floating this to gauge reaction to it. So I thought I'd put it out there and let you react however which way you will.
END TRANSCRIPT
I think that age 26 provision was separate from Obamacare and already in effect.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
THE GOP IS SO DAMN BLOODY STUPID!
I knew these spineless asses would try to piecemeal remove parts and keep others. NO!
The only way is to repeal Obamacare in its entirety. Anything they want to keep, things really needed, can be explicitly passed later.
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
END IT, DON’T MEND IT!
Do it and let me use the strongest terms:
You do this and every last omen of you will instantly and irreparably become M%&*//r F*/-&&&rs and we will rain holy hell on every last one of
I will burn money on opposition candidates just cuz.
The Hill quoted Boehner stating that there was no plan to do anything with Obamacare but repeal it -- if that was still necessary.
You can count on Politico to mis-report on Republican legislative plans.
Brave Sir Bohner will bravely turn his tail and flee.
Actually this is a good idea, that is, mentioning they are open to the less onerous areas of the law. In fact, it should reduce some pressure on the SC. Now they can void the entire law content in the knowledge the Congress is open to passing some replacement legislation. Of course, the legislation should be very narrow like allow for the sale of insurance across state lines, reducing malpractice claims and perhaps keeping the 26YO threshold by reducing it to say 23 or so.
Bonehead is quoted this afternoon as saying there is no such plan, they want to remove the entire law. We will see.
Before panicking and jumping to conclusions lets wait and see what the Supreme Court will do, sheesh
It was part of PPACA, it was just one of the first things to go into effect when it was signed in 2010.
Why do the Republicans think it is ok for THEM to dictate from DC?
These decisions belong at the state and community level. Washington STOP your power grabs.
I have always said that you have to take anything from Politico with some grain of salt because it is a left wing site and 0bama’s favorite
>> Before panicking and jumping to conclusions <<
Oh, c’mon. Cool it. Something like that kinda stuff could never happen around here!
Cowardly bastards.
>THE GOP IS SO DAMN BLOODY STUPID!<
.
No, you got it all wrong — the GOP = Gutless Old Party.
They are already grabbing the ankles in case the dhimmicrats win in November a.k.a. ‘Reaching across the Aisle’.
I received a notice from my health insurer in October, 2010, that it would be effective Jan. 1, 2011 and it said also that there could be no maximum payout for health insurance benefits, formerly, my max was $5,000,000 and due to these changes with the "Affordable Care Act",obamacare, my insurance premiums were being raised 32% on that day.
What pressure? They are appointed for life.
Good advice, but it won’t be taken by many. We are boiling over....
Tell the Republicans to oppose every part of this abomination of legislation.
But here is what you need to know. Your republican leadership will support ‘parts’ of the bill but the part they support most and will not go on record for is the Title IV taxes (not CFR Title IX!), that is Title IX to the final bill. This is the Ace-in-the-Hole the rats and GOP-e are hoping to implement as it is a trojan horse to a massive tax increase.
TITLE IX—REVENUE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A—Revenue Offset Provisions
Sec. 9001. Excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage.
Sec. 9002. Inclusion of cost of employer-sponsored health coverage on W-2.
Sec. 9003. Distributions for medicine qualified only if for prescribed drug or insulin.
Sec. 9004. Increase in additional tax on distributions from HSAs and Archer MSAs not used for qualified medical expenses.
Sec. 9005. Limitation on health flexible spending arrangements under cafeteria plans.
Sec. 9006. Expansion of information reporting requirements.
Sec. 9007. Additional requirements for charitable hospitals.
Sec. 9008. Imposition of annual fee on branded prescription pharmaceutical manufacturers and importers.
Sec. 9009. Imposition of annual fee on medical device manufacturers and importers.
Sec. 9010. Imposition of annual fee on health insurance providers.
Sec. 9011. Study and report of effect on veterans health care.
Sec. 9012. Elimination of deduction for expenses allocable to Medicare Part D subsidy.
Sec. 9013. Modification of itemized deduction for medical expenses.
Sec. 9014. Limitation on excessive remuneration paid by certain health insurance providers.
Sec. 9015. Additional hospital insurance tax on high-income taxpayers.
Sec. 9016. Modification of section 833 treatment of certain health organizations.
Sec. 9017. Excise tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures.
Subtitle B—Other Provisions
Sec. 9021. Exclusion of health benefits provided by Indian tribal governments.
Sec. 9022. Establishment of simple cafeteria plans for small businesses.
Sec. 9023. Qualifying therapeutic discovery project credit.
It’s a bunch of crap/
“Washington STOP your power grabs.’
They won’t. It is up to us to stop them.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.