• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Appeals court rules against Obama healthcare law

"HHS approved 204 new waivers in April, with 38 of those – or roughly 19 percent – going to businesses located in Pelosi’s San Francisco district."

LOL!
 
no, the Appeals Court has deemed the individual mandate to be unConstitutional, not ALL of Obamacare.

and the SCOTUS has the final say anyways, so who cares what the lower courts think.

Without the mandate Obycare cannot fund itself.. It's dead!


Tim-
 
If greedy kkkhristianist kkkapitalist kkkreationist kkkaucasianisist doctors didn't have to make a bazillion dollars every year, then maybe healthcare would be affordable. They vacation in their second homes while minorities, non-christians, and the poor basically just have to deal with whatever illness comes their way. F***ing greedy f***s destroy the environment with their excessive consumption while the underprivileged classes are crushed by illness. Shame on this country.
Perhaps all of the underprivileged minority, non-christian, poor, charitable environmentalists should get together, work hard, graduate near the top of their class in college, spend another 10-15 in medical school and residencies, rack up six figure debts to pay for their schooling, and then work for free, or maybe 30k a year, so people like you aren't so inconvienced.
 
its not dead until the SCOTUS says so.

And when it does, what then will say you? That SCOTUS is ruled by Big Pharma and Corporate America? That SCOTUS is run by a bunch of elderly hating, poor hating idiots?
 
Without the mandate Obycare cannot fund itself.. It's dead!


Tim-

Not necessarily. Try this on: instead of requiring everyone who can afford it to buy insurance, create a new income tax surcharge that EVERYONE will have to pay, which is refundable with proof of insurance. Unconstitutional? No. Exactly the same effect as the mandate? Yes. Which should tell you that the mandate is not unconstitutional.
 
Not necessarily. Try this on: instead of requiring everyone who can afford it to buy insurance, create a new income tax surcharge that EVERYONE will have to pay, which is refundable with proof of insurance. Unconstitutional? No. Exactly the same effect as the mandate? Yes. Which should tell you that the mandate is not unconstitutional.

interesting idea. too bad the House would never pass it and the GOP in the Senate would filibuster it.
 
Not necessarily. Try this on: instead of requiring everyone who can afford it to buy insurance, create a new income tax surcharge that EVERYONE will have to pay, which is refundable with proof of insurance. Unconstitutional? No. Exactly the same effect as the mandate? Yes. Which should tell you that the mandate is not unconstitutional.

The whole point of calling it a mandate was to avoid calling it a tax, silly.. :)

Politicians, especially democrats, have trouble calling a tax hike, a tax hike..

By the way, your "idea" is the exact same thing as the mandate, no matter how much you think it isn't. Our hope is that we put people in positions of justice that are smart enough to figure our your little play on words.. :)


Tim-
 
The whole point of calling it a mandate was to avoid calling it a tax, silly.. :)

Politicians, especially democrats, have trouble calling a tax hike, a tax hike..

By the way, your "idea" is the exact same thing as the mandate, no matter how much you think it isn't. Our hope is that we put people in positions of justice that are smart enough to figure our your little play on words.. :)


Tim-

Yes, that was my point exactly. It is the same thing but if you state it the other way around, no one would question it's constitutionality. And either way it is ONLY a tax if someone makes the conscious decision not to take personal responsibility for himself and purchase health insurance. And why are we upset if someone who intentionally decides to sponge off everyone else has to pay a nominal tax? It's beyond me.
 
Obama's healthcare reform law is NOT the first time Americans were required to purchase something they might not otherwise want to buy.

The Militia Act of 1792 required all white men between 18-45 to buy a rifle, ammo, powder, and a satchel.

and yet for some odd reason, this law was never challenged in court.
 
Obama's healthcare reform law is NOT the first time Americans were required to purchase something they might not otherwise want to buy.

The Militia Act of 1792 required all white men between 18-45 to buy a rifle, ammo, powder, and a satchel.

and yet for some odd reason, this law was never challenged in court.

It really is absurd to argue that this is unconstitutional. In practical effect it is no different from any tax preference. It's like saying that the mortgage interest deduction is unconstitutional because it forces everyone to buy a house ... or else pay higher taxes.
 
And just think, we could have avoided all this nonsense if we'd just gone with the public option, which was what everyone actually wanted, instead of this mandate crap.
 
And just think, we could have avoided all this nonsense if we'd just gone with the public option, which was what everyone actually wanted, instead of this mandate crap.
Well I would have preferred single-payer or actual socialized medicine like England's NHS, but the public option would have been a good start.
 
Obamacare is a scourge and should end...it would cost us untold amounts..from start to finish it was done all wrong...America does not like obamacare does not want obamacare...and the way Pelosi gloated and sneered at america daily for weeks ramming it down everyones throat..is probably the single most reason Obama is as unpopular as he is and its certainly was the cause of the creation of the teaparty....end obamacare...there are many better ways to cover everyone with health care.
 
The waivers were written into the law to prevent businesses from being punished due to preexisting contracts. There is absolutely no evidence that waivers are being granted preferentially.

If a law doesn?t work, waive it away? - Boston.com

Ya, 1400 companies get waivers... and put it this way, it's not the mom and pop shops that are getting these waivers. It's those people that have the best capacity to actually cover the exorbitant cost this will create... how is that NOT preferential???

Health Care Law | San Francisco | Nancy Pelosi | The Daily Caller

Well I would have preferred single-payer or actual socialized medicine like England's NHS, but the public option would have been a good start.

Of course, because when you mix corporate and government power, you get fascism. Nobody wants that to happen.
 
Well I would have preferred single-payer or actual socialized medicine like England's NHS, but the public option would have been a good start.

They had to strangle people to get this vote passed as it was...single payer had no chance to pass...but Pelosi was hell bent on passing ANYTHING because she believed it would be her legacy...she passed a bad bill and she is forever labled in an unflattering way to say it nicely.
 
If a law doesn?t work, waive it away? - Boston.com

Ya, 1400 companies get waivers... and put it this way, it's not the mom and pop shops that are getting these waivers. It's those people that have the best capacity to actually cover the exorbitant cost this will create... how is that NOT preferential???

Health Care Law | San Francisco | Nancy Pelosi | The Daily Caller



Of course, because when you mix corporate and government power, you get fascism. Nobody wants that to happen.

Exactly, they can't call it a tax, because taxes have rules constiutionally..


Tim-
 
If a law doesn?t work, waive it away? - Boston.com

Ya, 1400 companies get waivers... and put it this way, it's not the mom and pop shops that are getting these waivers. It's those people that have the best capacity to actually cover the exorbitant cost this will create... how is that NOT preferential???

Health Care Law | San Francisco | Nancy Pelosi | The Daily Caller

Of course, because when you mix corporate and government power, you get fascism. Nobody wants that to happen.

You do understand that these waivers are temporary, right? They are only good until insurance exchanges are established in a couple years. The purpose is to allow existing coverage to continue until the exhanges are set up, at which point employees will have many more options.
 
I've always favored the idea of liberals just going their own way and creating their own voluntary universal health care system. They could invite anyone who wanted to join and then they could price it so that it was self-sustaining. Putting one's money where one's mouth is blazing a trail is a pretty good way of going about things.

Can't ordinary citizens form co-ops in order to do something like that now? I'm really not sure.
 
Back
Top Bottom