Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 131

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

  1. #11
    Educator Sgt Meowenstein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    07-22-17 @ 06:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    620

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

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    If they're supporting a state-managed health care program but opposing a nationally-managed health care program then it would fall in line with the conservative's "state's rights" argument.
    I understand the conservative argument, but I just don't think it holds water with most Americans. If you support something, you support it. Period. Otherwise, you just look like a flip-flopper.

    Anyway, as Obama stated a couple months back, if states can come up with their own health reform plans that achieve the same goals as Obama's, they're welcome to give them a go after 2014. Obama even said the federal gov't will help them implement those plans. The conservative argument holds no water.


  2. #12
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt Meowenstein View Post
    I understand the conservative argument, but I just don't think it holds water with most Americans. If you support something, you support it. Period. Otherwise, you just look like a flip-flopper.

    Anyway, as Obama stated a couple months back, if states can come up with their own health reform plans that achieve the same goals as Obama's, they're welcome to give them a go after 2014. Obama even said the federal gov't will help them implement those plans. The conservative argument holds no water.
    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.

  3. #13
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt Meowenstein View Post
    I understand the conservative argument, but I just don't think it holds water with most Americans. If you support something, you support it. Period. Otherwise, you just look like a flip-flopper.

    Anyway, as Obama stated a couple months back, if states can come up with their own health reform plans that achieve the same goals as Obama's, they're welcome to give them a go after 2014. Obama even said the federal gov't will help them implement those plans. The conservative argument holds no water.
    It holds no water because you don't agree with the premise. The issue of states' rights vs. federal authority is a valid one. The federal government has no constitutionally granted authority to mandate that every citizen purchase a specific product or utilize a specific industry. I believe that is the primary issue of contention with (most) conservatives. Of course, most of us don't support any form of single-payer health care either, but that is a separate point.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  4. #14
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

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

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    It holds no water because you don't agree with the premise. The issue of states' rights vs. federal authority is a valid one. The federal government has no constitutionally granted authority to mandate that every citizen purchase a specific product or utilize a specific industry. I believe that is the primary issue of contention with (most) conservatives. Of course, most of us don't support any form of single-payer health care either, but that is a separate point.
    I agree that states' rights vs. federal authority is a valid argument in some cases.

    I'm not talking about Daniels specifically here, but if we take a look at RomneyCare in Massachusetts, I believe that when it comes to his "conservative credentials," the states rights vs. federal authority argument is irrelevant. The problem many conservatives have with RomneyCare is the concept of the individual mandate in and of itself. For many conservatives, that's the sticking point and that's where Romney failed the litmus test, regardless of the whole states' rights vs. federal authority debate. These conservatives believe that no government, at any level, should be forcing citizens to buy a particular product, and that an individual mandate is repulsive no matter what level of government it resides at, and an affront to the conservative values and ideals about small/limited government.

    Now I have no idea about what the Daniels' proposal looked like, so I won't judge right now. Just trying to make a point here.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 05-19-11 at 04:54 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  5. #15
    Educator Sgt Meowenstein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    07-22-17 @ 06:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    620

    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.
    But like I said, Obama's decision to let states implement their own health care law destroys that argument. He told them to go for it, as long as they can achieve the same goals as his law. It's up to them. If they can't come up with an equal or better plan, then they get Obamacare. If they can come up with something equal or better, they're welcome to do it. So, what's the problem? It seems to me that Obama is trying to give states some freedom.


  6. #16
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt Meowenstein View Post
    But like I said, Obama's decision to let states implement their own health care law destroys that argument. He told them to go for it, as long as they can achieve the same goals as his law. It's up to them. If they can't come up with an equal or better plan, then they get Obamacare. If they can come up with something equal or better, they're welcome to do it. So, what's the problem? It seems to me that Obama is trying to give states some freedom.
    Obama is mandating that the states implement a healthcare program or forced into the national program and 26 states said NO. that is the issue. It is a federal mandate on a sovereign state to implement a personal responsibility issue. The freedom that the states are being given is do it your way or my way but do it, and that is wrong.

  7. #17
    Educator Sgt Meowenstein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    07-22-17 @ 06:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    620

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

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    I agree that states' rights vs. federal authority is a valid argument in some cases.

    I'm not talking about Daniels specifically here, but if we take a look at RomneyCare in Massachusetts, I believe that when it comes to his "conservative credentials," the states rights vs. federal authority argument is irrelevant. The problem many conservatives have with RomneyCare is the concept of the individual mandate in and of itself. For many conservatives, that's the sticking point and that's where Romney failed the litmus test, regardless of the whole states' rights vs. federal authority debate. These conservatives believe that no government, at any level, should be forcing citizens to buy a particular product, and that an individual mandate is repulsive no matter what level of government it resides at, and an affront to the conservative values and ideals about small/limited government.

    Now I have no idea about what the Daniels' proposal looked like, so I won't judge right now. Just trying to make a point here.
    Of course, the problem conservatives have is that they once supported the individual mandate before it became part of Obamacare. Not only did they support it, but it was their idea in the first place. They just look like hypocrites and flip-floppers.


  8. #18
    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
    Obama is mandating that the states implement a healthcare program or forced into the national program and 26 states said NO. that is the issue. It is a federal mandate on a sovereign state to implement a personal responsibility issue. The freedom that the states are being given is do it your way or my way but do it, and that is wrong.

    Yet these States will go crawling to the Feds when they medicaid money.

  9. #19
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt Meowenstein View Post
    Of course, the problem conservatives have is that they once supported the individual mandate before it became part of Obamacare. Not only did they support it, but it was their idea in the first place. They just look like hypocrites and flip-floppers.
    BS, a State mandate is different from a Federal Mandate and the people of MA voted on Romneycare. Did you vote on Obamacare?

  10. #20
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 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
    Yet these States will go crawling to the Feds when they medicaid money.
    You really have an obsession with me, Medicaid is a FEDERAL/STATE program and if the Federal Govt increases the mandate who should pay for it?

Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •