Skip to comments.On Not Cooperating With Obamacare
Posted on 11/25/2012 11:33:52 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The Hill has an interesting story reporting on Republican governors refusing to set up state exchanges under Obamacare which could save the states money since they are on the hook for costs in excess of federal grants. That means the feds will have to do it on a state-by-state basis, a daunting task even for this highly bureaucratic administration. Plus, it is perfectly legal under the law to engage in such passive resistance.
Some liberals say that approach isnt conservative because, in effect, it allows the feds to run state health care. (As if they care!) Im not buying. In case anyone hasnt noticed, HHS already does run health care nationally about issues important to the Obama political coalition as in free-birth-control rule, with more of the same no doubt coming soon. Indeed, Obamacare was designed to allow the technocracy to create entitlements nationally on the dimes of the private sector, while guaranteeing the employment of ever more technocrats.
After an appalling and incoherent Supreme Court ruling and the recent election, it does seem now that utter legal non cooperation is the only way remaining to impede the Leviathan. Heres another suggestion: Senate Republicans should filibuster confirmation of the soon-to-be-nominated members of the Independent Payment Advisory Board. No board, no IPAB autocracy. Of course, the president might then make a non-recess recess appointment, but that opens any action taken by IPAB to legal attack.
So, stalwart Obamacare opponents, time for some good old fashioned passive resistance. Go limp. For those on the political left who object to such blatant obstructionism, I have two words for you: sanctuary cities.
It's time to stop crying in our beers, retching our guts out over the reelection of Obama, running around like decapitated chickens and fainting at the prospects of our future.
Soldier getting up from floor: Trying to get some sleep, sir.
Gen. George S. Patton: "Well, get back down there, son. You're the only son of a bi#ch in this headquarters who knows what he's trying to do."
There is one thing every state has that would allow an easy stand up of an insurance exchange. Every state has federal employees that get insurance under the Federal Employee Health Benefit. FEHB has numerous options in just about every state for coverage. In essence these governors might be doing what a lot of people have been screaming for, get people the coverage that the government provides for its employees.
One way or another, it won't really matter. The ACA was written with one intended consequence, its failure. Its funding scheme works to cover only a finite number of people. If employers stop covering employees (which the ACA makes financially viable) then the number of people eligible for an insurance subsidy will quickly outstrip ACA's ability to pay. Employees won't care because many low wage employees will get a better deal under the ACA than they do from low wage employers.
When did we all become a bunch of lemmings dutifully walking off the cliff saying, "One way or another, it won't really matter?"
Comply? LOL I don’t even accept the authority of this POS p-resident.
Passive resistence until active resistence becomes feasible..
VOTING... is rididulous..
Any that votes henchforth are cowards or worse..
The COUP D-etat has happened... its not going to happen..
The left has made their move.. their Putsch..
If you look at the ACA it is built on a funding scheme where the three major components are 1) pulling money out of Medicare, 2) penalties on employers of more than 50 that don't provide full time employees with health coverage, and 3) taxes on the rich....and anybody that uses healthcare, tanning beds, medical devices, etc. Additionally they collect 10 years of taxes for 5 years of benefits.
All those revenue streams are supposed to support between 15 and 20 million people that are currently uninsured and is supposed to be revenue neutral. What happens when more than 20 million people show up for coverage under ACA? Well, the penalties to employers might go up, but the other two portions of the funding scheme can't be expected to increase. The plan will collapse under its own weight.
It was written that way and I don't think the ACA can last much past its first 10 year cycle before we are forced into a single payer plan as the only option. The government will have destroyed any way back.
We take the bull by the horns.
We must constantly highlight all the ways Big Government fails (and at such high prices in dollars and cents, and the utter failure of performance and product).
Besides a constantly subsidized bankrupt Amtrak, the subsidized “dying for years on the vine” U.S. Postal Service, us lining up for hours at a dysfunctional Dept. of Transportation, now the Federal cabal is destroying the best healthcare in the world - forcing it on a majority who do not want it - soon Big Government Obama, Reed and Pelosi will be dealing with the massive Student Loan bubble coming our way.
And how about that FEMA!?
Wow! We have all this material and we don’t use it.
Can the federal government even fund itself much past the next 10 years?
[ Wow! We have all this material and we dont use it. ]
Only a matter of time until people start disappearing..
They just “disappear”.. no one knows where.. just gone..
or intimidated into shutting up.. by threats to family or loved ones..
OR ALL THAT.. and more..
time to accept that it’s over.
Smile as you pay your inflated taxes. They won.
Certainly one of the things they could do is just add these people to the Medicare plan which already exists but just rename it. One big problem with this is that most docs are getting out of Medicare. In Texas employees of the Federal government use Blue Cross or GEHA which is located in Kansas City. There may be other choices but these are certainly major players. On September 1 the State of Texas moved its employees coverage from Blue Cross of Texas to United Healthcare. I found this switch interesting since AARP which supports Obamacare is part of United Healthcare and Texas is one of those that does not intend to establish state exchanges. It’s already a big convoluted mess.
He feels one of the ways that the government could immediately make insurance cheaper would be to make it easier for companies to become mutuals. Evidently there are a bunch of obstacles to that.
I will no more stop fighting this cancer on America and humanity than I will stop fighting the ever present weeds and fire ants attacking my lawn and garden.
Socialist Green Warriors want to weaken my weapons on the gardening front as well as on the social and economic front.
But we must not pause and cry about the way the battle has swung - allowing them to overrun our resistance. Once we do, they win and we have lost the fight.
Shame, shame on us if we roll over and give up.
Tend to your gardens. Keep growing faith, family, fortunes and freedom.
We fight this thing tooth and nail - we resist!
More Americans will join in that cause than they will a whimpering, foot-stomping parade.
The state media will portray us evil and greedy but we can use the publicity to get out how in the end this will hurt everyone.
Americans are attracted to and follow LEADERS!
“Some liberals say that approach isnt conservative because, in effect, it allows the feds to run state health care.”
Healthcare in the US is completely run by the feds. What do you think federal price controls via Medicare are? People don’t understand, healthcare is completely federalized.
We’ve been funneled onto this 3rd party pay path for a long time.
AARP is not part of United Healthcare. I am a former health insurance agent for United Healthcare, and specifically sold Medicare supplements promoted by AARP. They just have a business relationship, that’s all. I am not defending AARP because they are the last group that I would consider helping Medicare recipients. It’s all about the bottom line. And they stand to profit considerably under Obamacare.