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

Skip to comments.

Republicans Have No Plan If Obamacare Is Struck Down. Some Don’t Think It’s Even Possible.
Huffpo ^ | 7/10/19 | Igor Bobic

Posted on 07/11/2019 5:42:55 AM PDT by DoodleDawg

The threat to do away with Obamacare is once again on the rise nearly 10 years after it was passed, as a major challenge to the health care law got a sympathetic-sounding hearing in a federal appeals court this week.

If the case does ultimately reach the Supreme Court, and five justices agree to strike down the Affordable Care Act, experts say it would upend the U.S. health care system and strip health insurance from an estimated 20 million people. Many millions more would lose crucial protections they might need in case of catastrophic medical issues ― including coverage for those with preexisting conditions.

Republicans in the U.S. Senate don’t appear to be sweating the likelihood of such a scenario, however. Some are pinning their hopes on the courts to reject the challenge, which is backed by the Trump administration, on the grounds that it isn’t serious and is legally moot.

(Excerpt) Read more at huffpost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; Miscellaneous; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 0carenightmare; fakenews; gopesetablishment; huffingtonpost; obamacare; obamalegacy; rinos; socialism; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 next last
To: DoodleDawg

Here’s a plan... If you want something that someone else has to provide, pay for it. If you can’t afford it, there are many options, such as not having it, borrowing for it, saving for it, asking someone else to pay for it, negotiate with the provider... Works for EVERYTHING ELSE in life, including essentials such as food and water.


81 posted on 07/11/2019 8:06:15 AM PDT by jimmygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Based on some freepers’ bad attitudes? I don’t think so.


82 posted on 07/11/2019 8:10:47 AM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
I’m not as down on Roberts over that ruling as most Freepers are. For one thing, the ObamaCare penalty IS a tax. It’s administered by the IRS and paid when you file your tax return. What else would it be?

Secondly, Roberts was right on target in one of his public comments after the ruling: It’s not the job of the U.S. Supreme Court to fix a stupid law. That’s the job of Congress.

83 posted on 07/11/2019 8:11:34 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("Knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave." -- Frederick Douglass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

If what you’re saying is true, then it’s likely that the reduction of the penalty to $0 wasn’t scheduled to take effect until the 2019 tax year.


84 posted on 07/11/2019 8:14:52 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("Knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave." -- Frederick Douglass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Even if it isn’t, they cannot collect anyways...............


85 posted on 07/11/2019 8:16:03 AM PDT by Red Badger (We are headed for a Civil War. It won't be nice like the last one....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
He wasn't "right on" in any way shape or form. He could have ended it, but didn't.

It was unconstitutional because it mandated we buy insurance. Period.

That was the argument of all the other conservative judges, and that of Roberts until the last minute. His change of mind was far from brilliant, it was a tortured legal opinion, one of the most awful in memory.

86 posted on 07/11/2019 8:23:03 AM PDT by Lakeshark (Trump. He stands for the great issues of the day. Stay the course!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere
they had a very good plan accepted by the House but lost by one vote in the Senate.....2 years ago
That was John McLAME and his infamous "thumb's down." That SOB.
87 posted on 07/11/2019 8:26:58 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
I'd like to know why there needs to be a "plan" at all.

If Obamacare is struck down, wouldn't that simply mean that we revert back to when the law didn't exist? Wouldn't that mean that private insurers are again free to offer group policies based on risk pools?

-PJ

88 posted on 07/11/2019 8:27:53 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein
...not the majority of Americans who work hard and have employer-based health care.

...no one wants to pay for their Obamacare because no one in their right mind wants to pay $2000-4000 dollars a month with huge deductibles.

Based on past jobs and my experience with COBRA I don’t think employer-provided insurance is any less expensive than in the individual market (for similar coverage).

It’s just that the employee doesn’t see the whole cost and the employer gets tax advantages that individuals don’t.

89 posted on 07/11/2019 8:32:14 AM PDT by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Whatever happened to the concepts of competition in the insurance market by allowing companies to sell across state lines and tailor plans to individual needs?


90 posted on 07/11/2019 8:35:55 AM PDT by JimRed ( TERM LIMITS, NOW! Build the Wall Faster! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
It was unconstitutional because it mandated we buy insurance. Period.

It's the other way around. It's basically a tax that you can avoid paying by buying insurance coverage.

It's a stupid law, but there's no question that it's a tax.

Something to keep in mind here is that Roberts' ruling didn't uphold ObamaCare. It only upheld the individual mandate. There are plenty other more effective legal avenues to overturn ObamaCare. Some of them have actually been successful in the Federal courts, without much media coverage at all.

As far as I know there hasn’t been a single challenge to the ACA brought by an insurance company or a state insurance commission against the three ACA provisions that are the most blatantly unconstitutional: the requirement for pre-existing conditions coverage, the elimination of caps on coverage, and the establishment of a "uniform coverage standards."

The plaintiff in such a case would have to be an insurance company that wants to sell plans that don’t meet ACA requirements and/or a state that wants to allow such plans to be sold.

I have yet to see any reports of such a challenge, which leads me to believe that the insurance industry and its state regulators are perfectly fine with ObamaCare.

91 posted on 07/11/2019 8:37:59 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("Knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave." -- Frederick Douglass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Requiring insurers to carry those three things are the biggest factors that drive up the cost of health insurance in this country.

To some extent, but to a large degree these costs ultimately get dumped on the providers when patients can’t pay which results in higher charges for everyone and higher insurance rates.

The rest of the cost gets dumped on government and our taxes go up.

It isn’t like the costs of pre-existing conditions go away if they aren’t covered by insurance, and we don’t stop providing care for people when they hit their lifetime coverage limit. The costs just get shifted to somewhere less visible.

To me the strongest argument for single payer is it will make the total costs we pay as a society more visible and therefore more manageable.

As it is today the system is so opaque and there is much shifted cost that no one can get a handle on it.

92 posted on 07/11/2019 8:42:48 AM PDT by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Yes it was a stupid law. One that Roberts should have stopped, but didn’t. His tortured analysis left it in place.

The other four conservative judges said it was unconstitutional as I described. Roberts made an ass of himself when he did that. There was no excuse for him in doing so.


93 posted on 07/11/2019 8:44:28 AM PDT by Lakeshark (Trump. He stands for the great issues of the day. Stay the course!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

And yes, the insurance companies left, love the mandate.


94 posted on 07/11/2019 8:46:09 AM PDT by Lakeshark (Trump. He stands for the great issues of the day. Stay the course!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

And yes, the insurance companies left, love the mandate.


95 posted on 07/11/2019 8:46:11 AM PDT by Lakeshark (Trump. He stands for the great issues of the day. Stay the course!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: JimRed
Whatever happened to the concepts of competition in the insurance market by allowing companies to sell across state lines and tailor plans to individual needs?

Five states currently allow that and to date not a single policy has been sold across state lines. The insurance companies are not interested. No way to make any money off those policies and dozens of ways for them to lose their shirts off them.

96 posted on 07/11/2019 8:57:42 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
If Obamacare is struck down, wouldn't that simply mean that we revert back to when the law didn't exist? Wouldn't that mean that private insurers are again free to offer group policies based on risk pools?

It does revert to pre-Obamacare, without requirements to cover pre-existing conditions, a return to caps on payouts, and all the rest. Insurance companies would be free to do business as they did before.

97 posted on 07/11/2019 9:00:08 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

Insurance policies are legal contracts for financial services and are regulated at the state level.


98 posted on 07/11/2019 9:01:46 AM PDT by bankwalker (Immigration without assimilation is an invasion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

The way it was for 200 years beforehand, by keeping it out of government’s hands.


99 posted on 07/11/2019 9:24:03 AM PDT by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: semimojo
You raise some good points there, but I'm baffled by a couple of them.

It isn’t like the costs of pre-existing conditions go away if they aren’t covered by insurance, and we don’t stop providing care for people when they hit their lifetime coverage limit. The costs just get shifted to somewhere less visible.

Is there anything less visible than the transactions that are paid from an insurer to a doctor or medical facility?

To me the strongest argument for single payer is it will make the total costs we pay as a society more visible and therefore more manageable.

More "visible?" Maybe in aggregate. But at some point the number just becomes multiples of a bazillion and nobody cares anymore.

If you really want visibility, just have people pay out of their own pockets for most of their medical care. You can be damn sure the costs will go down if that were the case.

100 posted on 07/11/2019 9:26:01 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("Knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave." -- Frederick Douglass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 next last

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.

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