Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 131

Thread: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

  1. #101
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    You can't explain it, because you don't know what you're talking about. Each and every state has the right to allow any health insurance company to sell in their state - in other words its the states that are stopping this competition, not the Federal Government.
    So the Federal Govt. has no impact on insurance regulations? So then why did you bring up the Federal Govt. as being a problem?

  2. #102
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    interstate congress? Great now I can't of the word you actually meant
    Thanks, cw, exactly right, I knew it was an interstate commerce issue

  3. #103
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Thanks, cw, exactly right, I knew it was an interstate commerce issue

    That opens the doors to the feds.

  4. #104
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    If you believe in states rights then you support the state to decide NOT to implement a state or national run program. That isn't what Obama wants. 26 states do not want the mandate and Obama is fighting that. Obama cannot fund his national healthcare program without the mandate. You want the federal govt. to mandate that the states implement a healthcare program even if they do not want to do so. That argument holds no water.



    I believe that this fellow was also a strong states rights advocate when he was blocking the door at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963.
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  5. #105
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post


    I believe that this fellow was also a strong states rights advocate when he was blocking the door at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963.
    While conservatives viewpoint is more less bullet points from AM talk radio I do think there are valid reason for State and local controls over healthcare:

    Within the United States, there are dramatic variations among regions and racial or ethnic groups in the rates of death from preventable causes. While aiming to provide solutions to the problems of incomplete insurance coverage and inefficiency of care delivery, health care reformers have given insufficient attention to the design, funding, and evaluation of interventions that are tailored to local realities and address preventable causes of death. The big picture — the poor and declining performance of the United States, which goes far beyond the challenge of universal insurance — will inevitably get lost if we do not routinely track performance and compare the results both among countries and among states and counties within the United States.

    Ranking 37th

  6. #106
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,762

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt Meowenstein View Post
    Yes, asinine far-right hyperbole.



    Oh, Rasmussen? Why am I not surprised? Here, take a look at a real study on the role of health care reform in the '10 elections. You'll find that health care was not the main issue of the '10 elections; and that support for the law was largely divided along party lines with a slight majority of independents having negative views; but a large majority of Americans supporting the individual components of the law. Hardly a mandate on health care reform, like you keep repeating. More of a mandate on the economy, like I said.
    Ya missed a few quotes from your article.

    In addition to having concerns about the impact of the health care law, many Americans question the federal government’s ability to solve health care problems. When asked how much confidence they had that when the federal government decides to solve problems in health care, those problems will actually be solved, a majority (56%) of the public said they had just a little confidence or no confidence at all (WP–KFF–Harvard University).
    People have no confidence in the federal government to enact reforms effectively. In fact quite a lot think they will simply make matters worse. I mean, this is from your own link.

    You also missed this :
    A plurality (48%) of registered voters who say they intend to vote for a Democratic candidate believe the law will not make much difference to the economy; more of them think that the economy will be better off (39%) than think it will be worse off (9%) because of the law. On the other hand, three fourths (75%) of those who say they intend to vote for a Republican candidate believe that the nation’s economy will be worse off because of the health care law (HSPH).
    So I guess it was about the economy.
    shrug

  7. #107
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,762

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post


    I believe that this fellow was also a strong states rights advocate when he was blocking the door at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963.
    Race card. Thud.

    Cmon, at least pretend like you can make a valid point.

  8. #108
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    That opens the doors to the feds.
    but in the venue in which it was intended to be. During the Articles of Confederation time-period, states had a field day imposing tariffs, fees, and all manner of trade restrictions on each other. Hence, when the Constitutional Congress attempted to delineate precisely what the powers of the Fed would be v the States, they put in a regime based (in this area) mostly around the Fed having the ability to enforce peace between the states, but not positive action. Congress can tell New York that it cannot ban grain shipments from Illinois, but it can't tell New York that it must buy them. Like much of our Constitution, it was negative in nature. Flat out embargoes (which is what these are. The state of (for example) Kentucky currently has a trade embargo on all 49 of the other states in the health insurance markets) certainly fall under that schema of area's where Congress has the right (and I would say the duty - if not the mandate) to act.

  9. #109
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post


    I believe that this fellow was also a strong states rights advocate when he was blocking the door at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963.


    oh yeah? well you know who wasn't a fan of decentralized decision making when it came to a national healthcare policy?


    that's right.......









    Charlie Chaplain.





    I see your race-card and raise you a godwinning.
    Last edited by cpwill; 05-20-11 at 12:40 AM.

  10. #110
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    but in the venue in which it was intended to be.
    Intended to be? I just don't think it is all that clear. We both could present arguments as to the intentions supporting our POV. And We could probably quote the same person saying the exact opposite things. The couple of things I do know are that the Founding Fathers were pretty smart people and very knowledgeable about the most contemporary ideas of their time. Another thing I know is they lived in the 18th century and while could have imagined all these wonderful gadgets we have today they did not have to deal with them.



    During the Articles of Confederation time-period, states had a field day imposing tariffs, fees, and all manner of trade restrictions on each other. Hence, when the Constitutional Congress attempted to delineate precisely what the powers of the Fed would be v the States, they put in a regime based (in this area) mostly around the Fed having the ability to enforce peace between the states, but not positive action. Congress can tell New York that it cannot ban grain shipments from Illinois, but it can't tell New York that it must buy them. Like much of our Constitution, it was negative in nature. Flat out embargoes (which is what these are. The state of (for example) Kentucky currently has a trade embargo on all 49 of the other states in the health insurance markets) certainly fall under that schema of area's where Congress has the right (and I would say the duty - if not the mandate) to act.
    If you are trying to start a conversation about negative and positive rights you will not get to far with me. I pretty much think it is a false dichotomy especially in the area of health care and prevent health care delivery from moving into the 21st century.

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
  •