• 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!

House Bill Defunds Health Care

And because you DO support Obama Care obviously you do not want the Republicans to do anything but support it. You will have to accept that there are people who do not and will do anything that they can to stop Obama Care in its tracks and to repeal it.

Anyway given that the Obama administration is giving out waivers to most big Corporations and Unions it would only be fair to delay it if there is such a problem in implementing it for the big guys. Or do you think that the average joe and the small employer should just eat the cost that the more well endowed in influence and money gets to avoid.

1. I never said I supported Obamacare; I just think in the long run it will work out better than our current system.

2. I don't think the Republicans should support it; however, I think the Republicans should respect the law and, if they want it repealed, to do that by winning elections rather than resort to shooting the hostage.
 
1. I never said I supported Obamacare; I just think in the long run it will work out better than our current system.

2. I don't think the Republicans should support it; however, I think the Republicans should respect the law and, if they want it repealed, to do that by winning elections rather than resort to shooting the hostage.


1. I disagree that Obama Care is better than what we had before. And I think it was desined that way so there would be Single Payer.

2. The Republicans are responsible to their constituency and have swore a Oath to uphold the Constitution. The Supreme Court is not the final say in a law being Constitutional.
 
1. I disagree that Obama Care is better than what we had before. And I think it was desined that way so there would be Single Payer.

2. The Republicans are responsible to their constituency and have swore a Oath to uphold the Constitution. The Supreme Court is not the final say in a law being Constitutional.

1. You know what? I agree, and GOOD. We should have single payer. We are the most prosperous nation on earth, we SHOULD be able to offer health care to our citizenry. I do not believe that the health and well-being of our citizens should be subject to the whims of social Darwinism.

2. The Republicans are responsible to their financial benefactors, just like the Democrats are. Don't kid yourself that the Republicans are some mighty crusaders on some quest to do right by the people and the Democrats are evil charlatans who want to give all your money to the poors. That's hyperpartisan nonsense.

RE: The bold ... according to Marbury v. Madison and the principle of judicial review, it is.
 
1. You know what? I agree, and GOOD. We should have single payer. We are the most prosperous nation on earth, we SHOULD be able to offer health care to our citizenry. I do not believe that the health and well-being of our citizens should be subject to the whims of social Darwinism.

2. The Republicans are responsible to their financial benefactors, just like the Democrats are. Don't kid yourself that the Republicans are some mighty crusaders on some quest to do right by the people and the Democrats are evil charlatans who want to give all your money to the poors. That's hyperpartisan nonsense.

RE: The bold ... according to Marbury v. Madison and the principle of judicial review, it is.


1. Then with respect to Obama Care I count you as one of those who intend it to fail to make Single Payer more palatable.

2. The Dem Benefactors tend to be the on the Forbes' 500 List. The Benefators of the Republicans are a bit more modest than that. Some Republicans actually do believe in limited government and Constitutional Limits. Democrats do want to give crumbs from the government table but they have ulterior motives. It is naive to believe that only Republicans support the big man and Democarts want to give to the poor because they are such nice people.

RE: RE The bold ... Marbury v. Madison was the beginning of the end of Constitutional limits on government and the Authors of the Constitution never intended for one branch to be the final word whether a law passed or other acts by government were Constitutional (checks and balances).
 
Thank you! I finally get an intelligent retort.

Nonetheless, I am certain you can appreciate the awkward position Heritiage Foundation is in in all of this, originally advocating a mandate (maybe not the same type) and then trying to write friend of the court briefs to take essentially the opposite position. I am certain this is quite nuanced. I still appreciate the intelligent response with good information from which I can learn something rather than the yahoo responses simply telling me I am ignorant, but without an defense of such a position.

I will enjoy reading this and reconciling it to their original work and the mandate that is now a part of law.

I think they are in a horrible position trying to defend themselves against the double standard whereby Obama can take any and every position on an issue and get away with it, yet conservatives cant. Obama will make opposing statements in the same sentence and no one cares. Heritage think tanks an idea 20 years ago, rejects it, and suddently they are responsible forever.
 
I still think the Republicans oppose Obamacare because it was passed by the Democrats, and that the Democrats defend it for the same reason.

No one seems to be interested in what's in it.

individual mandate,
stay on parents' policy to age 26,
no more excluding "pre existing conditions",
state by state groups that individuals can buy into,
subsidized premiums for people without a lot of money,

what is it that is so good/so bad?
 
I still think the Republicans oppose Obamacare because it was passed by the Democrats, and that the Democrats defend it for the same reason.

No one seems to be interested in what's in it.

individual mandate,
stay on parents' policy to age 26,
no more excluding "pre existing conditions",
state by state groups that individuals can buy into,
subsidized premiums for people without a lot of money,

what is it that is so good/so bad?

Havent we had that debate for 5 years now?
 
1. I never said I supported Obamacare; I just think in the long run it will work out better than our current system.

2. I don't think the Republicans should support it; however, I think the Republicans should respect the law and, if they want it repealed, to do that by winning elections rather than resort to shooting the hostage.

Democrats should respect the law. The debt ceiling, is the law. It's there for a reason.
 
1. You know what? I agree, and GOOD. We should have single payer. We are the most prosperous nation on earth, we SHOULD be able to offer health care to our citizenry. I do not believe that the health and well-being of our citizens should be subject to the whims of social Darwinism.

2. The Republicans are responsible to their financial benefactors, just like the Democrats are. Don't kid yourself that the Republicans are some mighty crusaders on some quest to do right by the people and the Democrats are evil charlatans who want to give all your money to the poors. That's hyperpartisan nonsense.

RE: The bold ... according to Marbury v. Madison and the principle of judicial review, it is.
The only way that would work is if you sterilized the poor. As long as the poor can pump out babies as fast as they want to it's a bottomless pit of need that will never be filled.
 
I still think the Republicans oppose Obamacare because it was passed by the Democrats, and that the Democrats defend it for the same reason.

No one seems to be interested in what's in it.

individual mandate,
stay on parents' policy to age 26,
no more excluding "pre existing conditions",
state by state groups that individuals can buy into,
subsidized premiums for people without a lot of money,

what is it that is so good/so bad?
They need to allow insurance companies to compete nationally and not just state by state. Right now only companies who's presence is in the state can do business in that state.
The problem with insurance is it doesn't change the runaway spending of cost of medical care. The more people who can afford something the greater the demand, the more expensive it becomes. For example, student loans are responsible for making college tuitions going up. The more people who can afford something the bigger the demand, the higher the price.
 
They need to allow insurance companies to compete nationally and not just state by state. Right now only companies who's presence is in the state can do business in that state.

Actually, that is a myth. The truth is that any company can sell insurance in any state, but that they must follow the guidelines of the state in which they are doing business. They can't set up an office in a state that has few regulations, then sell in another state and ignore the laws in that state.

The problem with insurance is it doesn't change the runaway spending of cost of medical care. The more people who can afford something the greater the demand, the more expensive it becomes. For example, student loans are responsible for making college tuitions going up. The more people who can afford something the bigger the demand, the higher the price.


You have a good point there, but the fact of the matter is that most of our health care was covered by insurance before anyone thought of Obamacare.

So, what about the points you just quoted, are any of them a problem? Are there other parts of the bill that I didn't post?
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/u...l=1&adxnnlx=1379520833-M0U+hZzlocDrMbeP5FlRag

House Bill Cuts Health Funds, Raising Odds of U.S. Shutdown

By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Published: September 18, 2013

WASHINGTON — House Republican leaders — bowing to the demands of their conservative wing — will put to a vote on Friday a stopgap spending measure that would strip all funding from President Obama’s signature health care law, increasing the likelihood that the government will shut down in two weeks.


So what's going on here? Another defeat Obamacare vote? And will this shut down the government like in the 90's? If so, will it come back to bite the Republicans in the a**?

Why the urgency to defeat this "train wreck"? If that's what this is, why not let it fail and bring down its Democratic authors? Republicans have shown they can play politics with the welfare of the American people by threatening the full faith and credit of the country, so why not let the law destroy itself, then sweep in and take the credit for predicting it?

My question is, do Republicans fear that ACA will not be the disaster they predict, or even worse, a success, and are trying to sabotage it before they look bad for opposing it? Or is this just a stunt to appease their radical right wing? "Obamacare delenda est"?

Though I think die Republicans are also to fault, I certainly dislike the President running the country in such a reckless way. He has known this was coming for long enough to reduce government spending. He didn't and that is irresponsible.
 
1. I never said I supported Obamacare; I just think in the long run it will work out better than our current system.

2. I don't think the Republicans should support it; however, I think the Republicans should respect the law and, if they want it repealed, to do that by winning elections rather than resort to shooting the hostage.

"shooting the hostage" LOL. That's exactly what the Democrats did when they passed this disaster and what they continue to do. Not one respectable poll from the start of this mess as shown that the American people want Obamacare. Not one.

The Republicans have done the other part. They won elections. At this point the democrats can continue their un-American ways by continuing to ram this down our throats or they can do it the American way, what the people want. But I suspect they will allow the phony government shutdown and try to distract the American people with fear mongering which is really all they are good for.
 
"shooting the hostage" LOL. That's exactly what the Democrats did when they passed this disaster and what they continue to do. Not one respectable poll from the start of this mess as shown that the American people want Obamacare. Not one.

The Republicans have done the other part. They won elections. At this point the democrats can continue their un-American ways by continuing to ram this down our throats or they can do it the American way, what the people want. But I suspect they will allow the phony government shutdown and try to distract the American people with fear mongering which is really all they are good for.



So what your saying is Democrats are un American because they dont believe in what I believe so I gotta ask please back this statement up. Was this not a Republican idea. Why did they not offer something better. Do not blame the Senate on this because Republicans had 8 years to do this under Bush and they didnt lift a finger. So tell me what is un American about trying to take care of Americans? Its better than bobming third world countries that never posed a threat or arming terroirist who some 20 years later run planes into towers?
 
Yep, the bill was passed in 2009. Debated for a year before that. All the arguments have been made.

I see.

So now there's no longer any point in debating what's actually in the bill, only in which party supports it and which doesn't.
 
I see.

So now there's no longer any point in debating what's actually in the bill, only in which party supports it and which doesn't.

Pretty much. Thats what the Democrats got when they passed a significant bill which didnt have Republican support.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/u...l=1&adxnnlx=1379520833-M0U+hZzlocDrMbeP5FlRag

House Bill Cuts Health Funds, Raising Odds of U.S. Shutdown

By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Published: September 18, 2013

WASHINGTON — House Republican leaders — bowing to the demands of their conservative wing — will put to a vote on Friday a stopgap spending measure that would strip all funding from President Obama’s signature health care law, increasing the likelihood that the government will shut down in two weeks.


So what's going on here? Another defeat Obamacare vote? And will this shut down the government like in the 90's? If so, will it come back to bite the Republicans in the a**?

Why the urgency to defeat this "train wreck"? If that's what this is, why not let it fail and bring down its Democratic authors? Republicans have shown they can play politics with the welfare of the American people by threatening the full faith and credit of the country, so why not let the law destroy itself, then sweep in and take the credit for predicting it?

My question is, do Republicans fear that ACA will not be the disaster they predict, or even worse, a success, and are trying to sabotage it before they look bad for opposing it? Or is this just a stunt to appease their radical right wing? "Obamacare delenda est"?

I think that timing the shutdown with the implementation of the ACA is 100% intentional. A shutdown will certainly hurt the GDP, perhaps even throwing the economy into a recession. The GOP will then blame the recession on the ACA, even though it has already been priced into the economy. Sabotaging the US economy may actually help the GOP politically.
 
Pretty much. Thats what the Democrats got when they passed a significant bill which didnt have Republican support.

Yep. It's all about partisan rancor, isn't it? It's part of the same partisanship that has resulted in a dysfunctional Congress.

It's pathetic, that's what it really is.
 
I think that timing the shutdown with the implementation of the ACA is 100% intentional. A shutdown will certainly hurt the GDP, perhaps even throwing the economy into a recession. The GOP will then blame the recession on the ACA, even though it has already been priced into the economy. Sabotaging the US economy may actually help the GOP politically.

The tea party types are so demented, they probably think this will work.
 
I think that timing the shutdown with the implementation of the ACA is 100% intentional. A shutdown will certainly hurt the GDP, perhaps even throwing the economy into a recession. The GOP will then blame the recession on the ACA, even though it has already been priced into the economy. Sabotaging the US economy may actually help the GOP politically.

Thats very likely. I doubt that the gov shutdown will put us back into a recession though.
 
I think that timing the shutdown with the implementation of the ACA is 100% intentional. A shutdown will certainly hurt the GDP, perhaps even throwing the economy into a recession. The GOP will then blame the recession on the ACA, even though it has already been priced into the economy. Sabotaging the US economy may actually help the GOP politically.

Quite possibly. Even if the public shames the Republicans now, memory is quite short. The Republicans were as much to blame for the debt ceiling crisis in 2011 and that was pretty much forgotten by 2012. How the public treats them in 2014 will depend on what happens in 2014.
 
Quite possibly. Even if the public shames the Republicans now, memory is quite short. The Republicans were as much to blame for the debt ceiling crisis in 2011 and that was pretty much forgotten by 2012. How the public treats them in 2014 will depend on what happens in 2014.

There's nothng for the GOP to be ashamed of. They did what they said, they FINALLY SHOWED A SPINE. This is what the People have been asking for. This is what will fire up the base, this is the will of the People. All polls show no one wants this.

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Public Approval of Health Care Law
 
Yep. It's all about partisan rancor, isn't it? It's part of the same partisanship that has resulted in a dysfunctional Congress.

It's pathetic, that's what it really is.

Yes, its all about winning elections, and not about serving the people.
 
Back
Top Bottom