Let’s wrap this Freepathon up, Folks!
Posted on 03/01/2019 1:29:04 PM PST by jazusamo
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned Republicans on Friday that voting for Chad Readler, President Trump’s nominee to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, is a vote against protecting with people with pre-existing conditions.
Readler, who served until September as assistant attorney general for the civil division at the Department of Justice, filed a brief last year supporting a lawsuit filed by Texas and other states seeking to strike down the Affordable Care Act.
“As Mr. Readler is the author of the Trump administration’s decision to side with Republican attorneys general suing to repeal our health care law, Senate Democrats are united in opposing his nomination and we urge Republicans who claim to support protections for pre-existing conditions to join us in voting to reject him, as well,” Schumer said in a statement.
“Any Republican Senator who supports his nomination is supporting the Trump-Republican lawsuit to get rid of pre-existing condition protections and take away health coverage from millions of Americans,” he added.
Readler is one of three appellate court nominees set to receive a Senate vote next week.
Schumer said the vote will force every Republican “to show their constituents and the American people whether or not they stand for pre-existing condition protections.”
Readler argued in his June brief that the Affordable Care Act’s mandate on individuals to have health insurance was unconstitutional and as a result its guaranteed-issue and community-rating provisions — which ensure that people with pre-existing conditions have access to affordable insurance — must also be struck down.
Senate Health Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said at the time that Readler’s argument was “as far-fetched as any I’ve ever heard.”
“There’s no way Congress is going to repeal protections for people with pre-existing conditions who want to buy health insurance. The Justice Department argument in the Texas case is as far-fetched as any I’ve ever heard," he said in June.
Republicans control 53 Senate seats, and Vice President Pence would cast a tie-breaking vote in favor of the nominee in case of a 50-50 tie.
All Democrats are expected to vote against Readler.
Insurance that covers pre-existing conditions isn’t insurance.
Chuckie knows he can’t stop it. His mouth and ass in hand is all he has.
Yep.
Just try buying car insurance that covers pre-existing car accidents.
Or life insurance which covers pre-existing death.
I have a cantankerous, idiot of a horse I call BS. That’s short for his real name of course, but often I find myself calling him Schumer, or Chuck for short.
Strange, but true.
I love it, the rear end of your horse fits Schumer’s description perfectly. :^)
Let’s wrap this Freepathon up, Folks!
Democrats: protect pre-existing conditions; murder children in - and out - of the womb. Go figure!
Worth repeating. Over and over again.
All democrats are pretty much expected to vote against every nominee. Occasionally one or two might vote yes.
Just because a policy exists doesn’t make it constitutional or morally right.
A ban on abortions was once a pre-existing condition.
A ban on women voting was once a pre-existing condition.
A ban on blacks voting was once a pre-existing condition.
There was once a pre-existing condition banning citizens under 21 years of age from voting.
If those policies were restored because they were once pre-existing conditions democrats would never win another national election.
By that argument, and lawyer who defended a known murderer is against putting people in jail for murder, and if they get nominated as a judge, voting for them means you are for murdering people.
Amendment X is a pre-existing condition.
Both Upchuck Schumer and Lamar Alexander against ya, ya gotta be good. :^)
“I have a cantankerous, idiot of a horse I call BS.”
We used to have two little dogs. The male was named Hillary and the female Bill.
“Insurance that covers pre-existing conditions isn’t insurance.”
Right!!
When liberals dispute that, I like to ask them how much they think the premiums would be for a new fire insurance policy if they could sign up after their house had already burned down...
The reaction is always the same - they laugh at what a silly notion that is but they learn nothing - they insist health insurance is different somehow - EVERYTHING should be covered and it should be free.
Liberal is just another name for stupid.
I understand there are people on this website who make money in healthcare.
There are however a LOT who do not.
I supported Trump since before he even announced. I pay a LOT for insurance. A lot.
Too much, in my view.
Back in ‘92 we had adopted two donkeys from BLM in Riverside, California. The neighbor’s daughter named them Sally, and Harry. Sally was pregnant by a different suitor than Harry, and birthed a little Jack a few months later.
Named the little guy after the BIGGEST Jackass we could think of at the time. Named him Clinton.
“Just try buying car insurance that covers pre-existing car accidents.
Or life insurance which covers pre-existing death.”
The relevant analogy to “pre-existing conditions” in life insurance would seem to be mortality risk factors, like smoking. Smokers can buy life insurance, but they will be charged an appropriate risk premium. A viable private health insurance market for people with pre-existing conditions would exist if insurers were allowed to charge the appropriate risk premium, but many politicians would deem this to be “unfair.”
Fixed it for you.
While I sympathize for them, there should be an assigned risk pool for those who have existing conditions.
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.