• 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!

Obama Health-Care Reform Act Ruled Unconstitutional(edited)

Anyone who claims to know how much the health care law will cost is missing one big piece of information: the exact cost of the benefits.

They can’t know it, because the benefits package is still being worked out, and its final shape will determine whether the Congressional Budget Office estimate was in the ballpark or not even close. Starting in 2014, all health plans offered through the state health insurance exchanges will have to offer the “essential health benefits package” — a set of minimum services all individuals and small businesses are supposed to have in their coverage. That package will have a direct impact on the cost of the law, because people will get subsidies to help them buy coverage if they can’t afford it on their own.

Make the benefits package too stingy, and consumer advocates will say the law failed in its goal of protecting people from big gaps in coverage. Make it too generous, though, and the premiums for those plans will go up — and the federal government will have to spend that much more on the subsidies.

If that happens, the CBO projections that the law will pay for itself — and actually reduce the deficit by $143 billion over 10 years — might underestimate the actual costs. That’s critical, because Democrats are making so much of the CBO’s estimate that the law will reduce the deficit while Republicans suggest it will actually drown the nation in red ink.

Or the higher premiums could just scare people away from buying coverage and make them decide the fines under the individual mandate would be cheaper. In that scenario, there wouldn’t be as many subsidies to pay — but not as many newly insured people, either.

The law doesn’t try to spell out the exact package. Instead, it lists several categories of benefits and leaves it to the Department of Health and Human Services to figure out exactly what to cover within those categories and what kind of limits the coverage should have. So the exact cost of the package won’t be known until HHS makes those decisions.

But even though the committee [put together by the institute of medicine] is keeping a tight lid on its deliberations — with strict orders to members not to make even general comments about the trade-offs they face — the institute’s report won’t actually recommend what should be in the package. All it will do is suggest what HHS officials should think about when they design the package.

Health law cost still a wild card - David Nather - POLITICO.com
 
Last edited:
why does weiner want a waiver

he says it's to SAVE COSTS to new york city
 
Which is where Obamacare puts millions of people

That again doesn't make sense. Millions are not an at risk population. Do you know how insurance works?
 
anthony weiner KNOWS
 
Then why bother with obamacare

Because fear mongering did not allow an honest discussion, or allow us to actually tackle the problem effectively. One step forward is better than no step at all.
 
Because fear mongering did not allow an honest discussion, or allow us to actually tackle the problem effectively. One step forward is better than no step at all.

Kind of depends whats at the end of that one step forward.
 
how sad



i know

that's why anthony weiner aint steppin forward or back

he's steppin OUT

Try to actually answer with your own thoughts if you can, but how do you know Weiner is correct abut anything?
 
anthony-i-wanna-waiver-weiner made the news yesterday for a different reason

it appears he's EXEMPT from paying the PARKING TICKETS the rest of us might be subject to

According to a Roll Call survey of vehicles parked on Capitol Hill and at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, as of mid-March, lawmakers were carrying at least $15,000 in outstanding tickets — ranging from expired meters to speeding camera violations — and potentially thousands of dollars more.

The District’s database showed Weiner received nearly $2,180 in tickets from 2007 to early March, including some instances in which he appears to have incurred multiple violations at the same time, such as failing to display current tags while parked in a taxi stand zone.

Members Collect Many Unpaid Tickets : Roll Call News

but never fear

AFTER mr i-wanna-waiver's remissions went PUBLIC he...

well, let's let his spokesman explain:

“All of the Congressman’s parking tickets have been paid. He is pleased to have helped decrease the D.C. budget deficit,” Weiner spokesman Dave Arnold said.

LOL!

thank goodness i-wanna-waiver doesn't live in paris

i-wanna-waiver-weiner woulda had to WALK
 
So, he wouldn't really know, right? :coffeepap
 
obamacare:

3/4 of a tril in new taxes

Director's Blog » Blog Archive » Additional Information on CBO’s Preliminary Analysis of H.R. 2

half trillion in cuts to medicare, all the while obama simultaneously expands its already teetering enrollment by millions

Capitol Briefing - Senate votes to keep Medicare cuts

er costs increase

ER visits, costs in Mass. climb - The Boston Globe

doctors refuse new medicare patients

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html

the doc fix passes, another quarter tril unaccounted for

Senate passes 1-year doc fix - The Hill's Healthwatch

another quarter T double counted

Budget Office Rebuts Democratic Claims on Medicare (Update1) - Bloomberg

our already broken backed states are burdened with 200 billion in the form of brand new medicaid enrollees

Governors balk over what healthcare bill will cost states - The Boston Globe
 
So, he wouldn't really know, right? :coffeepap

So let's hear some of your thoughts..... if ObamaKare is so wonderful, why are so many of Obama's pals getting waivers for it, while the poor guy with a family of four making $45,000/year gets soaked for over $2,500 in health insurance premiums whether he wants it or needs it.
 
So let's hear some of your thoughts..... if ObamaKare is so wonderful, why are so many of Obama's pals getting waivers for it, while the poor guy with a family of four making $45,000/year gets soaked for over $2,500 in health insurance premiums whether he wants it or needs it.

It's like mass public transportation. They want it for YOU, as long as they don't get caught dead on it.
 
So let's hear some of your thoughts..... if ObamaKare is so wonderful, why are so many of Obama's pals getting waivers for it, while the poor guy with a family of four making $45,000/year gets soaked for over $2,500 in health insurance premiums whether he wants it or needs it.

Who doesn't need it? Seriously, if he faces a major injury or illness, will he be able to pay for it on $45,000 a year? Believing that is the definition of delusional.

The bill is not yet perfect, and we should work to improve it. And we should do so without the fear mongering nonsense. Passing the buck is a common practice and no one should be surprised that a number seek to shirk responsibility. But no reform leaves us where we are, spending more than any other country, and receiving less for our money than most.
 
Who doesn't need it? Seriously, if he faces a major injury or illness, will he be able to pay for it on $45,000 a year? Believing that is the definition of delusional.

The bill is not yet perfect, and we should work to improve it. And we should do so without the fear mongering nonsense. Passing the buck is a common practice and no one should be surprised that a number seek to shirk responsibility. But no reform leaves us where we are, spending more than any other country, and receiving less for our money than most.

So, you are telling him what he needs for himself and his family... no, more than that, you are forcing him to pay for something he doesn't want, can't afford, and HE believes his family doesn't need. There is a name for the bull you are promoting.

What, no response to my question ??? I'm shocked.

I'll repeat it again in case you missed it .... Why should Obama's friends be able to get waivers if this program is so wonderful for all of us ???
 
So, you are telling him what he needs for himself and his family... no, more than that, you are forcing him to pay for something he doesn't want, can't afford, and HE believes his family doesn't need. There is a name for the bull you are promoting.

What, no response to my question ??? I'm shocked.

I'll repeat it again in case you missed it .... Why should Obama's friends be able to get waivers if this program is so wonderful for all of us ???

I'm telling him he's delusional if he thinks he doesn't need it. But instead of playing this silly game, tell me how he will afford a major illness of injury without insurance.
 
I'm telling him he's delusional if he thinks he doesn't need it. But instead of playing this silly game, tell me how he will afford a major illness of injury without insurance.

Still dodging I see. That's become your M.O.

I'll post again in case you missed it.......Why should Obama's friends be able to get waivers if this program is so wonderful for all of us ???
 
Still dodging I see. That's become your M.O.

I'll post again in case you missed it.......Why should Obama's friends be able to get waivers if this program is so wonderful for all of us ???

Oh, quit being stupid. No dodge. He needs insurance. He cannot afford a major illness or injury without it, and you refuse to address that because you know I'm right. So, you divert trying to make it about me. Weak ass **** that.

As for the waviers, I answered that. Try reading.
 
Oh, quit being stupid. No dodge. He needs insurance. He cannot afford a major illness or injury without it, and you refuse to address that because you know I'm right. So, you divert trying to make it about me. Weak ass **** that.

As for the waviers, I answered that. Try reading.

Stupid ??? I sure thought that was against the rules, but maybe they've been loosened up and calling fellow members names is now ok.

Did I miss that rule change ???
 
Stupid ??? I sure thought that was against the rules, but maybe they've been loosened up and calling fellow members names is now ok.

Did I miss that rule change ???

Your statement was stupid. But if I'm wrong for saying so, I'll apologize. That said, try addressing the point.
 
The bill is not yet perfect

LOL!

you can say that again

we should do so without the fear mongering nonsense

yup

the congressional budget office, the department of health and human services website, the asa...

and ANTHONY WEINER---LOL!

ooh, scary
 
Your statement was stupid. But if I'm wrong for saying so, I'll apologize. That said, try addressing the point.

No, not until you answer mine. You might claim to have answered the question, but you haven't ... at least not since it was brought up about Weiner.

You're not going to change and dictate the subject with me.

Should I repeat it again ??
 
No, not until you answer mine. You might claim to have answered the question, but you haven't ... at least not since it was brought up about Weiner.

You're not going to change and dictate the subject with me.

Should I repeat it again ??

I don't accept that waviers are limited to friends, and I have stated people will always seek to side step a responsibility. That is an answer. You just don't like the answer and wanted something that fiot your biased belief system.

Now, do me the same curtesy.
 
Back
Top Bottom