Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NavVet

And I wouldn’t settle for the Supreme Court being the only option to remove the (non)Affordable Health Care Act;
http://www.newt.org/solutions/healthcare/

This comprehensive approach—cost, quality, competition, and coverage—can solve the problem of the uninsured with no individual mandate and no employer mandate. Everyone would be able to obtain essential health care and coverage when needed. For those who are too poor to buy health insurance, states will have more flexibility to provide them with the assistance they need to buy it. For those who nevertheless choose not to purchase coverage and then become too sick to do so, high risk pools will provide access to coverage. Once you have health insurance, you are assured you can keep it. By contrast, even Obamacare for all its trillions in taxes, spending, new entitlements, and new bureaucracy still does not achieve universal coverage.


7 posted on 04/17/2012 3:28:00 AM PDT by Son House (The Economic Boom Heard Around The World => TEA Party 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Son House

I would rather have Newt than Mitt, who I will absolutely not vote for, but all Newt is doing at this point is fund raising.


11 posted on 04/17/2012 3:58:34 AM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson