Valerie
Platinum Member
- Sep 17, 2008
- 31,521
- 7,388
- 1,170
In your first video, the Healthy American's Act (Wyden-Bennet), does not have federal mandates in it Healthy Americans Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It changes who buys insurance for individuals from employers to individuals buying it.
I'm not sure what you're quibbling with--is it the definition of mandate? Wyden-Bennett established that "Each adult individual shall have the responsibility to enroll in a [Health Americans Private Insurance] plan" and specified penalties for failing to do so. Structurally that requirement is different from a similar requirement in the ACA because they're assessed very differently.
But are you telling me that this difference is enough not only to win Mitt Romney's support and put this ugly judicial business behind us, but also to erase the perception that there's any mandate on the individual at all? If that's all it'll take to end the controversy, I'd be all for swapping Wyden-Bennett's language with the ACA's on this point right now. Perhaps Wyden can introduce the bill making the revision.
I'd be interested in seeing/reading that missing explanation from that venue (not some other one where's he's cleared the etch a sketch). He clearly said "no, no, I like mandates" in response to Charlie Gibson (?) saying "...although you've backed away from mandates on a national basis."
He believes in personal responsibility and accountability and sees no problem with a State quantifying the cost of Health Care in their own community. He believes the People's best interest is best represented in that manner...
...whatever the justices decide in what is certain to be a landmark decision, the case against ObamaCare extends far beyond questions about its constitutionality. President Obama's program is an unfolding disaster for the American economy, a budget-busting entitlement, and a dramatic new federal intrusion into our lives.
It is precisely for those reasons that I've opposed a one-size-fits-all health care plan for the entire nation. What we need is a free market, federalist approach to making quality, affordable health insurance available to every American.
...
A key question is how to provide care for the poor, the uninsured and the chronically ill. My program begins by taking seriously the words of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." In line with the intentions of our Founding Fathers, I favor giving each of the 50 states the resources and the responsibility to craft the health care solutions that suit their citizens best.
Why I'd repeal ObamaCare
Health Care
God forbid the Federal Government set MANDATES on the insurance industry instead of the people!!
To the extent that we have any federal regulation, it should focus on helping markets work. Thus, to take one much discussed problem, individuals with pre-existing conditions who have maintained continuous health insurance coverage should be guaranteed the ability to retain coverage. Also, individuals are currently prohibited from purchasing health insurance across states lines, which reduces competition and makes many plans subject to expensive state benefit requirements. The federal government can open up these restricted markets. States could still regulate their insurance industries, but consumers across the U.S. would benefit from lower costs and greater choice.
Last edited: