AP sources: Administration mulls pared health law

AP ^

[Perdogg]

Covering all the bases ahead of a momentous Supreme Court ruling, the Obama administration plans to move ahead with major parts of the president's health care law if its most controversial provision does not survive, according to veteran Democrats closely involved with the legislation.

[plain talk]

I would agree. Otherwise the SC is into line item vetoesm. The whole is or is not constitutional. However they will describe what makes it unconstitutional - thus admin’s plans to modify law. So we must stop a new health care bill.

[JoSixChip]

"it’s quite evident that I am leading and you would do well to get out of the way."

If you believe that your whining is demonstrating leadership, then you should be voting for obumber.

[biggredd1]

the illegal aliens can now apply for the 16K IRS yobs.

[Forty-Niner]

We need to put a stake through both this law and Obama in this years election......Never again with the Socialist agenda!

[Forty-Niner]

“To do that you need a majority vote of both houses of Congress and the President’s signature.”

The House can defund it!

CitrusHeightsJohn(Niner)

[Myrddin]

There is no severability clause in the bill. If any part is found unconstitutional, the entire bill is invalid.

[hattend]

How will he fund it? If it’s found to be unconstitutional I hope the House will finally grow a pair and defund it.

[Lady Lucky]

Medicaid, the federal-state safety net program for low-income people

Almost-no-income is more like it. I know a man living on nothing but a $600 monthly pension. In Pennsylvania that means he is too wealthy to qualify for Medicaid. (And no, he has no significant assets, no bank accounts, no life insurance, etc.)

[Nip]

How can they?

The last time that I took a look at the actual, signed by Obama, law there was no clause which would allow the bill to continue if parts were found unconstitutional (severability). The various draft bills had the clause but the final version did not.

So, if the Supreme Court rules any part of ObamaCare unconstitutional the whole law goes under. Otherwise, the Supreme Court would be legislating from the bench. But then, isn't this what has been happening for years?

[Eva]

I think that the plan is to move ahead with major parts of the laws on an individual state basis. So, blue states will implement a lot of the Obamacare bill and receive federal funding, just like Mass. does now.

The states who do not implement the state parts of the bill, won’t get any federal subsidy and the Democrats think that is a threat. I’m not sure that it is.

[SharpRightTurn]

If only the mandate is struck down, we’ll see what kind of backbone the Stupid Party has—will they demand less government, more free market, and if the Dims won’t agree to that now tell them they’ll just have to wait until Jan. 20, 2012? Or will the Stupid Party go with the slimmed down Obummer Care?

[DoughtyOne]

Is Romney leading? No. So what you want me to do is fall in line behind him, and stay out of the way of folks who defend the defenseless.

Your motives may be pure as the driven show, but the defense of Romney is amazingly misguided.

[C210N]

While many posts here posit the bill will be struck in its entirety, which makes logical sense and is the ONLY path to a sound decision, it may still be partially struck down. That’s because there are 4 humans with brains on the court and one human with approximately half a brain. Then there are 4 drones, one of which is a horrid beast, and should have recused, that could throw a monkey wrench into the whole thing, causing a ruling not based on logic or pragmatism, but committeeism. A “logic” of a committee, needing to wheel and deal with the humans and the drones, and the teetering humanoid, that states the mandate be struck, but everything else left as-is, and let what happens forward (sic) work itself out... somehow...

[Repeal 16-17]

This sounds like a contingency procedure based on the Liberal Messiah's hopefully reasonable belief that the Individual Mandate will be struck down, with or without the rest of ObamaCare.

Maybe the Supreme Ladies gave Him a heads up.

[tsowellfan]

But but but Romney's the only one who can beat Obama I mean... perhaps Dennis Kusinich could too but unfortunately he's not a republican :( < /sarc

[tsowellfan]

Post the link so I can send it to Newt and post it on Twitter where Romney now says he will not repeal ObamaCare. This is HUGE! We may be able to replace him efore it’s too late.

[A Navy Vet]

I truly believe this is THE breaking point for the Bambi tyrannical administration. If even only the mandate is shot down, the rest can't survive without the funding. Bambi and company can TRY to push forward, but all that funding will no longer exist for their socialist program.

Bambi can try to massage what is left through political means, but his and Reid's and Pelosi's attempt to take over our medical care will be dead. They will quietly give up and look to other issues to get the dictator re-elected. The whole thing will just die, including the various agencies and positions still being put in place.

This is the issue that decides our Republic's fate. Even though he recently over-stepped the power of the Executive Branch with his illegal immigration "work permit" EO, Congress DID vote in the Obamacare law. At least they had some say, as unConstitutional as the mandate part is.

Mark my words, it's all going down. The "gimmes" may be half of the country populace, but they don't vote in the numbers the "producers" do.

The SLEEPING GIANT has awakened. The STATES have awakened! They are pushing back and winning.

Yes, I am now in the optimistic mode. Being a States' Rights advocate and seeing their fight for so many basic rights guaranteed under the Constitution, I have turned the corner. I have said for years that one of our ways back is through States' Rights. God Bless Arizona and others.

[RitaOK]

This was a CNN interview shown today on Wolf Blitzer’s afternoon program. Check out CNN, his show and note that the reporter was an older reporter whose name escapes me but it was not Blitzer.

This reporter guy could not GET Romney to say he would repeal Obamacare. He could not GET Romney to say how long Obamacare would be allowed to stand while the “longer term plan” was put together.

Romney is outrageous. He did say effectively that “we will work on these questions this week”.

The Establishment has no real objection to this Obamacare business in general, but for the tweek-out of the individual mandate (or fine), and the perhaps, just perhaps, the religious liberty impact certainly ongoing against all Catholic hospitals, schools, and all other Catholic institutions and ministries.

[tsowellfan]

I have noticed that since we got into the month of June many politicians have lessened their remarks on ObamaCare knowing that a decision is due out soon (this coming monday to be exact).

Do you think maybe they are keeping the powder dry knowing a decision on ObamaCare is coming out monday by the USSC and have no idea what the other side may do in response to whatever that decision is?

At this point we don’t know if ObamaCare will exist 6 days from now.

So, again... do you think that maybe they are keeping their powder dry?

How does Romney know if he will even have to repeal ObamaCare if it may not be around 6 days from now?

[Jane Long]

I searched for it (at CNN...yiccchh), but couldn't find it. What I did find was that Marco Polo Rubio is now backing off of his "Dream Act" legislation because the pResident stole his thunder. No doubt Rubio's phone has been ringing off the wall, too. Mcromeny had been attaching himself to Rubio's ridiculous plan, so I wonder what he'll (McRomeny) do for an "immigration" plan, now.

The GOPe seems flummoxed by Bamster's move. If they'd just stand up for (existing immigration) laws, it could be a slam dunk. That's asking too much, I guess.