Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 137

Thread: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

  1. #101
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,855

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Well, no, your idea of having a civil debate is stating that I am wrong because a Forbes article had a different opinion. That isn't debating.
    OK, but I'm not trying to be combative here. Can you quote Baucus or share a link to Baucus' comments?

  2. #102
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,698

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    OK, but I'm not trying to be combative here. Can you quote Baucus or share a link to Baucus' comments?
    No need to quote, you can watch him directly:

    Senate Hearing Tax Credits available State | Video | C-SPAN.org
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  3. #103
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,855

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    No need to quote, you can watch him directly:

    Senate Hearing Tax Credits available State | Video | C-SPAN.org
    I've watched that and posted a very long and detailed article about those comments - the Forbes article.

    The bottom line is Baucus isn't addressing the credit question in that exchange. He was addressing a point of order about a malpractice amendment, made some rambling comments that Ensign didn't buy at all, and said nothing that to me is directly on point to this discussion. The only comment I heard that relates to tax credits is this (in its entirety):

    "An exchange is essentially is tax credits. Taxes are the jurisdiction of this committee."

    Maybe a lawyer and an expert in rules of order can conclude that this informal exchange on another topic has far reaching implications about "by the state" versus "by the Feds on behalf of the state" but I don't see it and in any event it is a very oblique way to address what is a HUGE issue. There was more discussion about a malpractice amendment - this exchange less than 2 minutes - than anyone can find anywhere about the central question of credits.

  4. #104
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Thank you. I missed that in your previous post.
    Does this mean that you now acknowledge that the IRS did not write any portion of the IRS Code, and particularly any part of Sec 36B?

    So, as I have discussed with Greenbeard previously, even taking this changed verbiage of 36B into account that adds the reporting requirement for both 1311 and 1321 exchanges it doesn't prove that the states with federal exchanges were meant to get subsidies.
    I would say that discerning Congressional intent is not exactly a science so looking for definite proof is probably inappropriate. Even more inappropriate is thinking that a single statement is proof of any specific intent unless that statement is both (a) crystal clear *and* (b) not contradicted by other text in the bill.

    IOW, I don't think the requirement to report subsidies is, by itself, proof of intent just as I don't think the one phrase the lawsuit depends on (the one the right claims makes subsidies contingent on the purchase of a plan from a "state exchange") proves intent. Instead, I think the entire bill needs to be considered.

    The reporting to IRS by the exchanges had two functions: 1) To gather information on all taxpayers for purposes of enforcing the mandate and 2) for purposes of documenting subsidies. The inclusion of 1321 in this section does not automatically mean both were intended for 1321 exchanges.
    The fact that reporting who had purchased a plan through a federally facilitated exchange does not in any way say anything about the intent of Congress regarding subsidies. However, requiring Federally facilitated exchanges to report the amoung of subsidies they gave certainly suggests that Congress though they would be subsidizing individuals. Why ask the FFE's to report subsidies if they intended the FFE's to not give out any subsidies?

    In fact, since the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 changed the verbiage of 36B with regard to reporting, it seems all the less likely that the intent was to include federal exchanges built for the states in the subsidy program since in the correcting legislation they didn't change the key verbiage in the original legislation that excluded 1321 exchanges from subsidies for the states. Moreover, it still doesn't help that the chief advisor and architect has said numerous times on tape that the exclusion was on purpose.
    You're assuming that the verbiage in the original legislation (ie PPACA) excluded the FFE's from giving out subsidies. I don't share that assumption.

    And as far as Gruber's claims goes, he's a man who has admitted to telling serious lies. I do not think it's reasonable to argue that he has any credibility.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  5. #105
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    And the thing is everyone knows Congress as a legislative body intended for the subsidies to be available on all the exchanges. Certainly, if such a draconian penalty was attached to the states deciding NOT to establish exchanges, we'd expect someone to mention this at some point during months of hearings and debate on the floor - not one member of Congress did.
    More persuasively, if the intent was deny subsidies to states that didn't create their own exchanges in order to encourage them to create their own exchanges, then why didn't anyone warn the states that they would not get subsidies if they decided they weren't going to create their own exchanges?
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  6. #106
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Is that supposed to be a joke?

    Three repubs say they have a plan and we're supposed to believe that "the repubs have a plan" after hearing the rightwingers on DP claim that the republicans never supported an individual mandate even though more than 40 repub senators sponsored a bill that included an individual mandate?

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  7. #107
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    No need to quote, you can watch him directly:

    Senate Hearing Tax Credits available State | Video | C-SPAN.org
    I understand why you didn't quote Baucus

    It's because he doesn't say that FFE's will not be able to give out subsidies.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #108
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,899

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Is that supposed to be a joke?

    Three repubs say they have a plan and we're supposed to believe that "the repubs have a plan" after hearing the rightwingers on DP claim that the republicans never supported an individual mandate even though more than 40 repub senators sponsored a bill that included an individual mandate?

    Oh...it's no joke. Furthermore, it's more than the Democrats or the President have.

    Now think about it...if the Supremes rule against Obamacare, the government is going to be in crisis mode. Everyone's going to be scrambling for a solution. Well, guess what...the GOP have one and after seeing how screwed up the Democrats got it with their crappy law, the people will just want things fixed. The only thing the Democrats are going to be able to come up with is a change in the law to correct their crappy original wording. But that won't take care of all the other crappy stuff that's going to pop up...and you KNOW more will pop up. It's that kind of law...it just keeps on giving crap.

    So...okay...the GOP have a solution...the Democrats will push for more crap and the Democrats will refuse to vote for the GOP's solution. The President will vow to veto their solution. Now it comes down to who can win the propaganda war...who can make the other side look like the bad guys. I'm under no illusions the GOP will win that battle. So we just might end up with more of the crappiness from Obamacare...in spite of another Supreme Court ruling against it.

    So tell me, sangha...what are you all worried about? Why are you still beating this horse...before it's dead?
    TANSTAAFL

    An armed society is a polite society.
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  9. #109
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    Oh...it's no joke. Furthermore, it's more than the Democrats or the President have.

    Now think about it...if the Supremes rule against Obamacare, the government is going to be in crisis mode. Everyone's going to be scrambling for a solution. Well, guess what...the GOP have one and after seeing how screwed up the Democrats got it with their crappy law, the people will just want things fixed. The only thing the Democrats are going to be able to come up with is a change in the law to correct their crappy original wording. But that won't take care of all the other crappy stuff that's going to pop up...and you KNOW more will pop up. It's that kind of law...it just keeps on giving crap.

    So...okay...the GOP have a solution...the Democrats will push for more crap and the Democrats will refuse to vote for the GOP's solution. The President will vow to veto their solution. Now it comes down to who can win the propaganda war...who can make the other side look like the bad guys. I'm under no illusions the GOP will win that battle. So we just might end up with more of the crappiness from Obamacare...in spite of another Supreme Court ruling against it.

    So tell me, sangha...what are you all worried about? Why are you still beating this horse...before it's dead?
    Worried?

    I laugh at the contortions the repubs put themselves in order to retain the support of their hateful and delusional base of wingnuts.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  10. #110
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,899

    Re: In Four-Word Phrase, Challenger Spied Health Care Laws Vulnerability

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Worried?

    I laugh at the contortions the repubs put themselves in order to retain the support of their hateful and delusional base of wingnuts.
    Not sure what contortions you are talking about. All I see in this thread are liberals/progressives/Democrats contorting and spinning. Everyone else is just talking about what the law actually says.
    TANSTAAFL

    An armed society is a polite society.
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •