Skip to comments.Why Obama Care Is Still No Sure Thing
Posted on 11/18/2012 9:26:03 PM PST by FreedomNotSafety
Link only. Can't copy with my phone.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Another article mentions how hard avoiding the fiscal cliff will hurt high tax states (which are mostly dem paradises) if tax deductions are limited.
Take these two together and it could inflict some real deserved pain on some blue states. They can have Obama care and an even higher tax bill. Might start bringing some of them to their senses.
Instead of following the Obama administration's plan, states should seek real reform. For example, they should demand that Washington transform the federal portion of Medicaid for non-disabled and non-elderly beneficiaries into a uniform block grant, with state discretion over eligibility and benefits. The goal should be to turn Medicaid into a premium-assistance program rather than government-run insurance. Medicaid could then be used to help people enroll in mainstream insurance plans. This is the way to help the low-income uninsured get the same kind of coverage as other Americans.
President Obama won re-election and Democrats maintained control of the Senate this month, but the states hold the future of ObamaCare in their hands. Knowing the harm the law would do to their citizens, to the economy and to American health care, governors should refuse to become its enablers.
My state is secure from implementing an exchange but I will donate money to help campaign in other states to prevent an exchange.
Obama is has and is running a full time campaign. We cannot pause our campaign.
Is there a single elected Republican anywhere who is against Obamacare? They can’t admit it to their voters, but they all are 100% behind Obamacare.
True. And sadly, Republican governors can be voted out of office and replaced with compliant Democrats.
I bet your state does implement an exchange, and much faster than you expect?
I live in NYC, and it’s certainly not by choice.
It looks like there will be a national exchange that a resident of a state who did not implement the exchange can join. States can challenge the Federal Exchanges in Court but its unlikely they will prevail..
What is it like to live in Bloomberg’s nanny-state fiefdom?
Folks generally don't know what is in the bill which is understandable but pretending its not a done deal is just another example of conservatives wishing for a world that doesn't exist...
“What is it like to live in Bloombergs nanny-state fiefdom?”
Probably the same way I live and work in L.A. surrounded by fudgepackers and freaks.
in WI, Gov. Walker stated that if the state started an exchange, they’d be stuck paying for it. If the feds do so, they’ll have to use federal money. He says that since a majority of people don’t want Obamacare, it would be wrong to force his state to waste it’s money on it. Let the feds spread the wealth around.
So called GOP governors will cave.
Example: Christ Christie - will cave when Obama blows him a kiss.
Another example: Rick Perry - will cave when fedgov threatens him.
I can only imagine. The closest I have ever been to LA is LAX and Long Beach.
You do not know what you are talking about —
the MEDICAID mandates were STRUCK DOWN by the courts, by a 7-2 vote.
And, the “Federal Exchanges” are NOT funded, and do NOT have the same powers as any State Exchange, such as penalties on businesses.
You obviously have a vested interest in pushing this GOP line of BS I don't....
If they are against it, why aren't they fighting it?
You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about, and you are making a fool of yourself and wasting the time of good conservatives.
READ the WSJ article for starters, it talks of the Republican Governors Conference, where there was STRONG opposition to Obamacare, and the WSJ article also mentions Democrat Governors who do not want to go along with all of the Obamacare provisions.
You are clueless, and you obviously have an agenda here to discourage those of us who DO know what we are talking about.
The only course for a RATIONAL conservative is to focus on winning Republican Primary elections and pushing our cause within the Republican Party.
Every political party will contain human beings, and there is no possible way you can create a “3rd Party” that will not have the same problems as the GOP, and you will accomplish nothing other than handing victory to Obama and the Liberals by splitting the vote.
You need to consult an attorney that can explain both the reasoning and the vote count of the SC’s decision.
You can push your GOP rhetoric but luckily for the country fewer and fewer folks are buying it...
My agenda is I am 100% against Obamacare. If you hate me because of that and want me to just accept Obama/Romneycare, I can live with you hating me. I am 100% against it, no matter what you tell me.
You are worse than the enemy, on this issue, you are a traitor giving aid and comfort to the enemy while you pretend to be on our side.
Sorry, I am not letting you push me into a 3rd party. You want everyone who is against Obamacare to be pushed out of the GOP and into a 3rd party. Well, I’ve got bad news for you. You are not going to get your wish. Every single elected Republican should be pressured to reject Obamacare every single day. If you think that hurts there poor wittle feelings, too bad. They were elected to represent the voters. I am sick of them acting like proud members of President Obama’s posse.
How come 5 of the governors who were allegedly against Obamacare, came out last week and announced they were acquiescing to Obamacare, including the governor of Florida. John Boener said after the election that the election was a total vindication for Obama, and he had to give in. That louse McConnell has always been for it.
There aren’t enough people against Obamacare to fill a bathroom? Maybe in your neighborhood, but I’d like to introduce you to a lot of people who are totally against it. You have the right to support Obamacare all you want, but we have a right to oppose it.
I merely pointed out that if the States don't implement exchanges Obamacare mandates that thew Federal Government can set up the changes themselves. I also pointed out that IMO it was likely that many GOP Governors like Walker of WI would let the Feds implement their exchanges.
From those two observations your clearly inferior powers of deductive reasoning concluded I was pushing a 3rd party agenda....
I dont believe telling folks there is hope Obamacare wont be more or less totally implemented based on wishful thinking makes sense. It could be rolled back or repealed in the future if Conservatives were in control but I see no evidence the GOP is intent on becoming Conservative in the future
I’d rather live in Greece.
If, only, Judge Roberts would change his mind, and change his vote on Obamacare, too!
“If the state doesn’t implement an exchange the Feds will come in and do it for them...a point missed by a lot of folks...”
So? Zero will have to get the house to appropriate the money to run the federal exchanges. And why should the States carry Zero’s water for him?
Actually, the strongest reason is . . . PORK. States are able to get $100,000,000 to $200,000,000 from the feds to study the problem, plan the exchange, and implement it. That creates huge opportunities for state lawmakers to dispense money to favored constituents. Colorado has already designed a system where the AVERAGE salary of exchange employees will be north of $150,000.
Regardless that Justice Roberts referenced Gibbons v. Ogden to defend his stance on Obamacare, activist Roberts seems to have wrongly ignored that Justice John Marshall had made the following statements in Gibbons that reasonably kill Obamacare.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress (emphases added)." --Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
The bottom line concerning Obamacare is the following. Given that the Supreme Court had previously clarified that Congress has no constitutional authority to regulate healthcare, including no power to lay taxes in the name of healhcare, healthcare a 10th Amendment protected state power issue, then Congress was required to do the following before establishing Obamacare.
Article V of the Constitution requires Congress to first successfully petition the states for an amendment to the Constitution which delegates to Congress the specific new power, in this case healthcare, in order to regulate, tax and spend for healthcare, before establishing Obamacare. So based on Justice Marshall's official statements, Obamacare was established without the necessary consent of the Article V majority.
In fact, note the following relevant page in govtrack.us. Evidently Congressman Jessie Jackson Jr. has been trying to propose a healthcare amendment for years. But govtrack.us notes that any resolution requiring an amendment to the Constitution is essentially ignored.
"Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right ..."--govtrack.us
And note the following comment under PROGNOSIS as to why such a resolution will probably never pass. You may need to scroll down a little.
'The resolution's title starts with "Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United." (-10%)'
>>>What is it like to live in Bloombergs nanny-state fiefdom?
Weird. The subway system has grown progressively worse in the last few years: severe crowding, fewer trains, stoppages in the middle of tunnels, slowdowns, etc.
Quite unlike the late ‘90s when Giuliani was at the helm.
I also notice far more despair in terms of an alarming increase in the number of homeless I see on the street, as well as the constant parade of panhandlers in public places, as well as in the subway (on the platforms and on the cars as well). Additionally, there’s this almost constant police presence everywhere you go...
There are still plenty of shops, museums, etc., but I’ve also noticed a trend on the part of pedestrians toward looking more like San Francisco: openly gay couples male or female (or something in between) holding hands, embracing, kissing, etc. More “freakish” looking people with LOTS of tattoos over their whole body and body piercings (nose, eyelids, ears, including “ear gouging”).
Lots of women pushing strollers with babies, mainly (so far as I can see) Latinas. Nanny Bloomberg has also been pushing women to breast-feed rather than use bottles. I guess his campaign is working: I’ve noticed an increase in the number of women on the subway who openly breast-feed their babies . . . just like in those charming banana republic countries you read about in old issues of National Geographic.
Yes, “New York, New York, it’s a helluva town.”
That’s why I’m starting to research if there’s any place for someone like me in Texas.
I guess it’s gut check time for a lot of Republican governors. Time to separate the cowardly RINO scumbags from the genuine conservatives. There’s been some big talk from a few, but I’ll wait to see real action, thank you.
"Fudgepacker" is just a polite word for faggot.
This is a very important distinction.
Thus states that refuse to create their own exchanges would effectively be repealing a large part of the lawsparing their citizens from the job-killing employer mandate and from assaults on their religious liberty. In some cases people would even be spared from the individual mandate to buy coverage, since in the absence of exchange subsidies more families would qualify for exemptions from the mandate.
If the State implements an exchange, the Feds still run it but the State pays for it. THAT is a point missed too often.
By not implementing an exchange, a State is saved the cost - and there is no loss of control of anything.
Thats why Im starting to research if theres any place for someone like me in Texas.”
Yes, there is.
Plus, it’ll never get the votes to pass. /s