• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Alabama votes to limit Obamacare

Too bad about that pesky federal preemption.
 
We need to fight for state's rights. Even if there's only a 10 percent chance of this winning, we need to drag them in to court, drag our feet, delay delay delay, and above all else, FIGHT.

Bobcat said:
If enough states vote it out, SCOTUS will have to rethink their ruling.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
Yesterday.

Way to go Alabama. We should not give up this fight.
Click to expand...

A massive waste of taxpayer dollars. To fight it, that is.

Let it be implemented. Don't fight it. You can't fight what-if's.

If the problems are overwhelming, the legislation will be tweaked. But all of you who think some form of national healthcare is going away are simply wasting your time.
 
If we can bury Obama with this for a couple years, he'll have less time to screw everything else up.

MaggieD said:
A massive waste of taxpayer dollars. To fight it, that is.

Let it be implemented. Don't fight it. You can't fight what-if's.

If the problems are overwhelming, the legislation will be tweaked. But all of you who think some form of national healthcare is going away are simply wasting your time.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, I'm sure the Supreme Court is going to revisit state nullification. That's only been settled law since...Andrew Jackson was president. :lol:
 
Peter Grimm said:
If we can bury Obama with this for a couple years, he'll have less time to screw everything else up.
Click to expand...

He can't screw much up without the help of the Republican House of Representatives.
 
Kandahar said:
Yeah, I'm sure the Supreme Court is going to revisit state nullification. That's only been settled law since...Andrew Jackson was president. :lol:
Click to expand...

So one can be assured that CA (OR and CO) conflicting pot laws will be challenged and that immigration sanctuary cities/states will get jumped on. lol
 
MaggieD said:
He can't screw much up without the help of the Republican House of Representatives.
Click to expand...

I want to agree with that, but there are just too many end-runs available to him, as he's shown the past four years. I'm afraid the US Constitution and state's rights are dead. Kids graduating from high school now don't even remember when they were alive. Federal interference is an every day fact of life for them.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
So one can be assured that CA (OR and CO) conflicting pot laws will be challenged and that immigration snactuary cities/states will get jumped on. lol
Click to expand...

Those state laws do not legally prevent the federal government from enforcing federal laws, and technically the federal government is well within its power to continue to enforce federal drug/immigration laws in those places if it wants to...although as a practical matter, it will be very difficult to do so without any cooperation of the states. :)

The Affordable Care Act, on the other hand, does not NEED the cooperation of Alabama as a practical matter. If Alabama refuses to cooperate, the ACA gives the federal government the power to set up a federal health exchange in Alabama without the state's permission.
 
clownboy said:
I want to agree with that, but there are just too many end-runs available to him, as he's shown the past four years. I'm afraid the US Constitution and state's rights are dead. Kids graduating from high school now don't even remember when they were alive. Federal interference is an every day fact of life for them.
Click to expand...

Conservatives in the populace can't do much more than we've done: vote for Conservatives. If young people never get that? Then our country will eventually spend its way broke. If they decide to give up freedoms for a mediocre life and the humdrum existence that Democrats would have in store for us through their nanny programs, so be it. It's their choice. It's up to them.

Sometimes I think the Democrats' slogan ought to be: Just Enough. For Everybody.
 
Kandahar said:
Those state laws do not legally prevent the federal government from enforcing federal laws, and technically the federal government is well within its power to continue to enforce federal drug/immigration laws in those places if it wants to...although as a practical matter, it will be very difficult to do so without any cooperation of the states. :)

The Affordable Care Act, on the other hand, does not NEED the cooperation of Alabama as a practical matter. If Alabama refuses to cooperate, the ACA gives the federal government the power to set up a federal health exchange in Alabama without the state's permission.
Click to expand...

But how practical is doing that for each state? The idea is that the feds would then have to set it up their "exchanges" from scratch (rent office space, hire staff, advertise and etc.) while complying with all existing Alabama medical insurance laws (woops the feds overlooked that detail). I would love to see how that goes and hope other states will do the same and let Obama run Obamacare. When the federal gov't "takes over" something then they should be asked to carry the full load including all the administrative costs from office space to staff and supplies.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
But how practical is doing that for each state? The idea is that the feds would then have to set it up their "exchanges" from scratch (rent office space, hire staff, advertise and etc.) while complying with all existing Alabama medical insurance laws (woops the feds overlooked that detail).
Click to expand...

It's not impractical. The states would have to do it themselves anyway...the only thing that will change is that it'll be a fed-run office instead of a state-run office. The federal government has the resources to do it in every state if necessary (although it won't be necessary in most states).

I would love to see how that goes and hope other states will do the same and let Obama run Obamacare. When the federal gov't "takes over" something then they should be asked to carry the full load including all the administrative costs from office space to staff and supplies.
Click to expand...

The reason it was originally supposed to be state-run was as an olive branch to the states' rights crowd. I have no problem with the federal government running it all, but if you're concerned about state sovereignty, what you are advocating is counterproductive. These kind of state laws are essentially just sour grapes from people who don't like the ACA. If they want small government they'd be better off letting their state do it, but it's no skin off my nose if they want Obama to do it for them instead.
 
Kandahar said:
It's not impractical. The states would have to do it themselves anyway...the only thing that will change is that it'll be a fed-run office instead of a state-run office. The federal government has the resources to do it in every state if necessary (although it won't be necessary in most states).



The reason it was originally supposed to be state-run was as an olive branch to the states' rights crowd. I have no problem with the federal government running it all, but if you're concerned about state sovereignty, what you are advocating is counterproductive. These kind of state laws are essentially just sour grapes from people who don't like the ACA. If they want small government they'd be better off letting their state do it, but it's no skin off my nose if they want Obama to do it for them instead.
Click to expand...

The SCOTUS took away the stick (cuts in total state medicare) so why would any state want to play ACA themselves? What right does a state have if they run the ACA "exchange" mess themselves, other than to pay part (if not all) of the admistrative costs and to match the medicaid funding portion?
 
MaggieD said:
A massive waste of taxpayer dollars. To fight it, that is.

Let it be implemented. Don't fight it. You can't fight what-if's.

If the problems are overwhelming, the legislation will be tweaked. But all of you who think some form of national healthcare is going away are simply wasting your time.
Click to expand...

Just like all the other entitlements that are bankrupting us have been tweaked?
 
Aberration said:
Just like all the other entitlements that are bankrupting us have been tweaked?
Click to expand...

Oh, eventually all those chickens are going to home to roost. What else can we do except resign ourselves to the inevitable? Pulling out our hair isn't working. Voting conservative isn't working. Our Congress (at both the state and Federal levels) are like little children. They won't learn until they see for themselves.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The SCOTUS took away the stick (cuts in total state medicare) so why would any state want to play ACA themselves? What right does a state have if they run the ACA "exchange" mess themselves, other than to pay part (if not all) of the admistrative costs and to match the medicaid funding portion?
Click to expand...

They will be able to determine which policies are eligible for the exchange, in accordance with their state's policy preferences. Additionally, they won't pay the administrative costs...the federal government provides a grant to the states that implement their own exchange.
 
MaggieD said:
Oh, eventually all those chickens are going to home to roost. What else can we do except resign ourselves to the inevitable? Pulling out our hair isn't working. Voting conservative isn't working. Our Congress (at both the state and Federal levels) are like little children. They won't learn until they see for themselves.
Click to expand...

By then it will be too late, it is probably already too late. We are destined to become a european socialist society. this election was the only chance of stopping it. Its done, we are Greece.
 
Bobcat said:
By then it will be too late, it is probably already too late. We are destined to become a european socialist society. this election was the only chance of stopping it. Its done, we are Greece.
Click to expand...

Then batton down the hatches and take care of your own. The people have spoken.
 
MaggieD said:
Then batton down the hatches and take care of your own. The people have spoken.
Click to expand...

thats what I am doing. the people have spoken and the people deserve what they voted for, they will find out pretty soon that its not what they expected--or what obama promised them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom