• 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!

Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263:617]

tres borrachos said:
Thank you for links, Glen, but they don't support your post:

1. You'll find that most of the standards were suggested by the Heritage foundation when they first proposed what we today call Obamacare.

The first link (from 2006), while interesting, doesn't validate the above. Was what he suggested incorporated into the ACA?

The link showing that GHWB advocated the idea of an individual mandate doesn't have anything to do with The Heritage Foundation.
Click to expand...

The first link DOES support health insurance exchanges. The fact that the health insurance exchanges of today aren't ABSOLUTELY 100% PRECISELY what the author of that article envisioned does not negate the fact that he supported the idea of health insurance exchanges.

And you should look again at that page 25 - it says that the proposals come from (among others) "The Heritage Foundation Butler 1992".

Face it, guy - the most important parts of Obamacare - the parts that make it viable and workable and available to all American citizens - came from the CONSERVATIVES. We took your boys' idea and made it work...and because we are the ones making it work, your side hates us for it and wants to deny all connection to it.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
The first link DOES support health insurance exchanges. The fact that the health insurance exchanges of today aren't ABSOLUTELY 100% PRECISELY what the author of that article envisioned does not negate the fact that he supported the idea of health insurance exchanges.

And you should look again at that page 25 - it says that the proposals come from (among others) "The Heritage Foundation Butler 1992".

Face it, guy - the most important parts of Obamacare - the parts that make it viable and workable and available to all American citizens - came from the CONSERVATIVES. We took your boys' idea and made it work...and because we are the ones making it work, your side hates us for it and wants to deny all connection to it.
Click to expand...

I'm not a guy, I'm a girl.

What he suggested is not what ultimately happened.

And by the way, are you now crediting the HF with being the first entity to come up with the idea of an exchange of any kind....meaning that the Democrats were only copying HF concepts?

Rather than have to decide whether to pay for full coverage or not, employers could make defined contributions of any size to the exchange. Moreover, employers could also enable employees, including those working part-time and on contract, to buy health insurance with pre-tax dollars. Under a Section 125 plan, any premium payments made by workers, even part-time workers or contract employees, would be 100 percent tax-free. This is especially important for workers in firms that require them to pay part of the health insurance premium. Employees, not employers, would buy the health care coverage with pre-tax dollars, would own their own health plans, and would take them from job to job without the loss of the generous tax benefits of conventional employer-based coverage

Are employers giving their employees pre-tax dollars to buy insurance on exchanges?

Do employers give their employees a choice of which of all of the national plans to buy?

The best option is a health insurance market exchange. A properly designed health insurance exchange would function as a single market for all kinds of health insurance plans, including traditional insurance plans, health maintenance organizations, health savings accounts, and other new coverage options that might emerge in response to consumer demand. In principle, it would function like a stock exchange, which is a single market for all varieties of stocks and reduces the costs of buying, selling, and trading stocks. For the same reasons, other types of market transactions are also centralized, such as farmers' markets, single locations where shoppers can purchase a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables, and Carmax, where consumers can choose from among all kinds of makes and models of automobiles

If I live in California, can I buy from any company in any state, or am I only buying the offerings available in my state?

And besides the individual mandate idea, which came from Butler in 1989, not 1992 (I posed the link so you can read his lecture publication), what other ideas did the HF provide that went into the ACA specifically?
 
By the way, the reference on page 25 to Butler in 1992 was referencing Butler's 1992 idea to give tax credits for buying insurance, saying that the tax codes were negatively impacting insurance and healthcare, and the tax code needed to be reformed. It wasn't about the individual mandate.

Did the tax code get re-written in the ACA?
 
tres borrachos said:
I'm not a guy, I'm a girl.

What he suggested is not what ultimately happened.

And by the way, are you now crediting the HF with being the first entity to come up with the idea of an exchange of any kind....meaning that the Democrats were only copying HF concepts?

Rather than have to decide whether to pay for full coverage or not, employers could make defined contributions of any size to the exchange. Moreover, employers could also enable employees, including those working part-time and on contract, to buy health insurance with pre-tax dollars. Under a Section 125 plan, any premium payments made by workers, even part-time workers or contract employees, would be 100 percent tax-free. This is especially important for workers in firms that require them to pay part of the health insurance premium. Employees, not employers, would buy the health care coverage with pre-tax dollars, would own their own health plans, and would take them from job to job without the loss of the generous tax benefits of conventional employer-based coverage

Are employers giving their employees pre-tax dollars to buy insurance on exchanges?

Do employers give their employees a choice of which of all of the national plans to buy?

The best option is a health insurance market exchange. A properly designed health insurance exchange would function as a single market for all kinds of health insurance plans, including traditional insurance plans, health maintenance organizations, health savings accounts, and other new coverage options that might emerge in response to consumer demand. In principle, it would function like a stock exchange, which is a single market for all varieties of stocks and reduces the costs of buying, selling, and trading stocks. For the same reasons, other types of market transactions are also centralized, such as farmers' markets, single locations where shoppers can purchase a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables, and Carmax, where consumers can choose from among all kinds of makes and models of automobiles

If I live in California, can I buy from any company in any state, or am I only buying the offerings available in my state?

And besides the individual mandate idea, which came from Butler in 1989, not 1992 (I posed the link so you can read his lecture publication), what other ideas did the HF provide that went into the ACA specifically?
Click to expand...

First off - my apologies - no girl deserves to be called 'guy'. Y'all are better than that.

That said, while the health insurance exchanges we have today through the ACA accomplishes its goals through different means than how the HF guy proposed, it's STILL a health insurance exchange. Your argument is like saying that the Tesla's not the same as, say, a Dodge Challenger. The mechanics by which they work are wildly different...but they accomplish largely the same goal.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
First off - my apologies - no girl deserves to be called 'guy'. Y'all are better than that.

That said, while the health insurance exchanges we have today through the ACA accomplishes its goals through different means than how the HF guy proposed, it's STILL a health insurance exchange. Your argument is like saying that the Tesla's not the same as, say, a Dodge Challenger. The mechanics by which they work are wildly different...but they accomplish largely the same goal.
Click to expand...

No worries on the gender thing. It seems to happen to me a lot. I thought that pink thing in my avatar would help.:)

I don't know who first proposed the idea of a national insurance exchange, Glen. I think it predates 2006...don't you? He proposed a form of exchanges in 2006 which in my opinion, would be better than the way they were ultimately set up in the ACA (again, that is merely my opinion, and not based on any real analysis). But I don't believe any one of us can say with any level of honesty that insurance exchanges were a Heritage Foundation idea.
 
tres borrachos said:
No worries on the gender thing. It seems to happen to me a lot. I thought that pink thing in my avatar would help.:)

I don't know who first proposed the idea of a national insurance exchange, Glen. I think it predates 2006...don't you? He proposed a form of exchanges in 2006 which in my opinion, would be better than the way they were ultimately set up in the ACA (again, that is merely my opinion, and not based on any real analysis). But I don't believe any one of us can say with any level of honesty that insurance exchanges were a Heritage Foundation idea.
Click to expand...

Here's a good history of how the main parts of Obamacare were first proposed.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Here's a good history of how the main parts of Obamacare were first proposed.
Click to expand...

First off, that's a partisan attack piece on Heritage. Secondly, it reiterates everything that we've already talked about - Butler, the individual mandate, and so on.

Do we have anything that answers the question of when the concept of exchanges was first introduced.

Are you suggesting that "Obamacare" is a law that was crafted by The Heritage Foundation?
 
tres borrachos said:
First off, that's a partisan attack piece on Heritage. Secondly, it reiterates everything that we've already talked about - Butler, the individual mandate, and so on.

Do we have anything that answers the question of when the concept of exchanges was first introduced.

Are you suggesting that "Obamacare" is a law that was crafted by The Heritage Foundation?
Click to expand...

Yes, that MSNBC article is a partisan attack on the HF...but look again at the references. Are the references simply partisan hack pieces...or are they good, solid info?

And while O-care was not itself directly crafted by the HF, the HF did come up with most of the major concepts that enable Obamacare to work. Remember, the same advisers who designed Romneycare also designed O-care...and if you'll look around, there was no great conservative hue and cry in Massachusetts about "government-run health care" at the time. Conservatives only started to raise hell about what would become Obamacare when his administration started pushing it for health care reform (after the CBO pointed out that single-payer would actually cost us some tax dollars).
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Yes, that MSNBC article is a partisan attack on the HF...but look again at the references. Are the references simply partisan hack pieces...or are they good, solid info?

And while O-care was not itself directly crafted by the HF, the HF did come up with most of the major concepts that enable Obamacare to work. Remember, the same advisers who designed Romneycare also designed O-care...and if you'll look around, there was no great conservative hue and cry in Massachusetts about "government-run health care" at the time. Conservatives only started to raise hell about what would become Obamacare when his administration started pushing it for health care reform (after the CBO pointed out that single-payer would actually cost us some tax dollars).
Click to expand...

One conservative with The Heritage Foundation proposing the idea of an individual mandate in 1989 doesn't have anything to do with conservatives (such as myself) objecting to the idea of the ACA, Glen.

And I don't live in MA, so why would I or any conservative who lives outside of MA have any objection to "Romneycare"?

But again, the link you provided just reiterates what we already know.

Stuart Butler gave a lecture in 1989 and suggested an individual mandate. What does that have to do with conservatives in 2009/2010?

Besides the individual mandate which was suggested by Butler in 1989, what are the other "major concepts" of the ACA that the Heritage Foundation suggested, and were the first to suggest?
 
tres borrachos said:
One conservative with The Heritage Foundation proposing the idea of an individual mandate in 1989 doesn't have anything to do with conservatives (such as myself) objecting to the idea of the ACA, Glen.
Click to expand...

We were discussing where the idea first came from, right?

And I don't live in MA, so why would I or any conservative who lives outside of MA have any objection to "Romneycare"?
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything at all about your personal opinion on Romneycare...but are conservatives in one part of the nation really so different from other parts of the nation? Or is it just those 'Massachusetts conservatives' who were all screwed up? And seeing how the most powerful Republican in the nation during the Clinton years - Newt Gingrich - was all for the Heritage Foundation's ideas, well, I do think his words can be taken as an indication of what most conservatives thought at the time.

But again, the link you provided just reiterates what we already know.

Stuart Butler gave a lecture in 1989 and suggested an individual mandate. What does that have to do with conservatives in 2009/2010?
Click to expand...

No, the article links to more than that.

[/\QUOTE]Besides the individual mandate which was suggested by Butler in 1989, what are the other "major concepts" of the ACA that the Heritage Foundation suggested, and were the first to suggest?[/QUOTE]

In the same article he proposed (in so many words) the expansion of Medicaid:

a new index of eligibility would be developed to link Medicaid coverage to poverty instead of welfare. This is an important distinction, because many poor families struggling to keep off welfare currently risk enormous and uncovered medical bills because they are not eligible, or do not seek, to go on to the welfare rolls.

And in a link from the article he says:

First, a conservative proposal must change the political debate. It must put the liberals on the de- fensive, by grabbing the initiative and forcing the debate down a very different path from that pre- ferred by the Left. Anything short of this will mean that we shall merely lose slowly. The second principle is that the conservative alternative system must be based solidly on the foun- dations of a market economy-consumer choice, competit i on, private contracts, and market prices. The function of government-if anything at all-should only be to set broad rules of the "game," and maybe to finance the minimum health care services of those who cannot afford to obtain these by any other means. T h e third principle is that we should create a system which does not on balance increase govern- ment, either in scale or degree of intrusion.

See the boldface? Sound familiar? What is O-care doing but expanding Medicaid, and using an individual mandate to ensure that everyone (not otherwise covered by Medicaid or Medicare) is covered by PRIVATE insurance?

Look, TB, it drives most conservatives nuts to think that the Dems took what was originally their idea and ran with it...but we did. And the only way most conservatives can deal with it is to try to deny that they never, ever had anything to do with it in the first place.
 
a new index of eligibility would be developed to link Medicaid coverage to poverty instead of welfare

He didn't suggest Medicaid expansion, Glen, in so many words or otherwise.

He, as I've been saying all along, suggested an individual mandate in his lecture in 1989. That's all. And the Democrats & Liberals have latched on to that and run with it for years as if it means something. Why? Keep in mind this was one person giving a lecture.

I oppose the ACA as a conservative, and it's not solely because of the individual mandate. I do oppose the individual mandate that Butler suggested, and I freely express that unapologetically. Was there a law passed or some rule that says I have to agree with everything that every Conservative lecturer has ever said in the history of conservatism?

You keep calling it "their" idea, by the way. Stuart Butler is one person, so the correct words you meant to type are "the Dems took what was originally his idea and ran with it".

And while that's fascinating and all that stuff, what's the relevance anyway of Stuart Butler anyway?
 
sangha are you looking at the 2nd page of that PDF or are you looking at the page with the number 2 on the bottom?

Look at the 2nd page of the PDF immediately after the cover page. I believe you misunderstood what I was saying when I said page 2. I meant the 2nd page. My apologies.
 
tres borrachos said:
sangha are you looking at the 2nd page of that PDF or are you looking at the page with the number 2 on the bottom?

Look at the 2nd page of the PDF immediately after the cover page. I believe you misunderstood what I was saying when I said page 2. I meant the 2nd page. My apologies.
Click to expand...

I was looking Page 2. When I look at the 2nd page, I still don't see what you describe. I see a page with text that begins with "The Heritage Foundation was established in 1973". Looking through the entire PDF, I do not see what you are seeing. I see no description of demographics
 
sangha said:
I was looking Page 2. When I look at the 2nd page, I still don't see what you describe. I see a page with text that begins with "The Heritage Foundation was established in 1973". Looking through the entire PDF, I do not see what you are seeing. I see no description of demographics
Click to expand...

At the bottom of that page that you are looking at. Right above the name & address of The Heritage Foundation (which is their demographic information). It is in italics and starts with the word "Note".
 
tres borrachos said:
At the bottom of that page that you are looking at. Right above the name & address of The Heritage Foundation (which is their demographic information). It is in italics and starts with the word "Note".
Click to expand...

I see *that*, but that does not support your claim that the only part of ACA that the Heritage Foundation supported was the individual mandate.
 
sangha said:
I see *that*, but that does not support your claim that the only part of ACA that the Heritage Foundation supported was the individual mandate.
Click to expand...

My claim, which that supports, is that the opinions in the lecture were only those of Stuart Butler and not The Heritage Foundation, hence his disclaimer. My pointing that out to you wasn't to suggest that "the only part of the ACA that The Heritage Foundation supported was the individual mandate" for a number of reasons:

1. I never said anything close to that - I said the suggestion of an individual mandate was Butler's and Butler's alone, not The Heritage Foundation
2. I never recall hearing that The Heritage Foundation supported anything in the ACA - can you link where The Heritage Foundation said they supported the individual mandate in the ACA?
 
tres borrachos said:
My claim, which that supports, is that the opinions in the lecture were only those of Stuart Butler and not The Heritage Foundation, hence his disclaimer. My pointing that out to you wasn't to suggest that "the only part of the ACA that The Heritage Foundation supported was the individual mandate" for a number of reasons:

1. I never said anything close to that - I said the suggestion of an individual mandate was Butler's and Butler's alone, not The Heritage Foundation
Click to expand...

tres borrachos said:
It was a man named Stuart Butler from The Heritage Foundation, Glen, and he only suggested the individual mandate. Obamacare isn't just about the individual mandate, is it?
Click to expand...

No, you never said anything close to that! :roll:

2. I never recall hearing that The Heritage Foundation supported anything in the ACA - can you link where The Heritage Foundation said they supported the individual mandate in the ACA?
Click to expand...

I don't recall hearing anyone say "The HF supported something in the ACA". The discussion has been about how the idea for the individual mandate originated from the Heritage Foundation
 
sangha said:
No, you never said anything close to that! :roll:



I don't recall hearing anyone say "The HF supported something in the ACA". The discussion has been about how the idea for the individual mandate originated from the Heritage Foundation
Click to expand...

Well, I know you're smarter than this, and you're just trying to be contrary.

I posted that PDF because of post #793:

Do you have a link that neatly summarizes the plan that The Heritage Foundation published (not the Butler piece)? The one Butler published in 1989 which was actually a lecture he gave as I recall was published with the statement that nothing written in it were to be construed as reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation, or words to that effect

Now, I've had a bad day and got some unfortunate news so I'd rather not get into a pissing party. I'll rejoin this discussion if either you or Glen can produce a document showing a comprehensive healthcare reform plan that was introduced by The Heritage Foundation and not an opinion lecture by one person.

Thank you sangha.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Let's see... actual history vs. comments from an idiotic conservative blogger. I'll take history, showing, once again, that you have no education on this issue.
Click to expand...

Perhaps rather than just remaining in denial you can actually point to where there are any errors in the part of racism. Did you even watch the video or are so so firmly entrenched in your beliefs that you need constantly protect them?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Slyfox696 said:
When did the White House come out and say every American (or simply uninsured American) would be signed up on Obamacare in the first six months?
Click to expand...
Where did I say six months? And as well as being a ballsup there is now people who are being excempt from the laws while others are being taken to court.
The individual mandate extensions (which is what we're discussing) have been granted because the rollout was so terrible.
Click to expand...
And because people were told that they could keep their health care if they liked it, then were told that the health care they wanted to keep was inferior, then others were granted rights not available to other groups. That' why the majority of Americans of always opposed Obamacare and those who do support it tend to support the ideology, not whether its is working or will work.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom