Obamacare in complete disarray

Then let the states choose.

That's the strategy, yes.

Maybe I am missing something.

If the states don't set up the exchanges, the fed comes in and does it for them.

If he citizens of a particular state don't want to participate, as I understand it, they still participate.

Am I wrong ?

There will be a federally-facilitated exchange that Americans without employer-sponsored insurance in states without functioning markets can use to buy insurance from insurers in their states.
 
From the OP

· The temporary "high risk" pools that Obamacare created, to provide a way for those with pre-existing health conditions to get insurance immediately, are undersubscribed yet way over budget. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the $5 billion allocated to these pools could enroll 200,000 consumers. They envisioned enrollment growing to more than 400,000. But only 77,877 have signed up as of July, yet the program is way over its budget. More than a quarter of these state-based risk pools are short on cash.

******************

Oh goody.
 
That's the strategy, yes.

Maybe I am missing something.

If the states don't set up the exchanges, the fed comes in and does it for them.

If he citizens of a particular state don't want to participate, as I understand it, they still participate.

Am I wrong ?

There will be a federally-facilitated exchange that Americans without employer-sponsored insurance in states without functioning markets can use to buy insurance from insurers in their states.

What do you mean federally-facilitated. Does this mean a state can say no and it's citizens avoid the tax ?
 
What do you mean federally-facilitated. Does this mean a state can say no and it's citizens avoid the tax ?

When have states ever legally overruled federal taxes on behalf of their citizens?

Federally-facilitated means the feds will build the marketplace, pay for it, make the design decisions (unless states want to partner, in which case they can still provide direction without taking on full responsibility), and manage day to day operations. States don't have to build marketplaces for their residents, but as American citizens those residents still get access to competitive marketplaces.
 
What do you mean federally-facilitated. Does this mean a state can say no and it's citizens avoid the tax ?

When have states ever legally overruled federal taxes on behalf of their citizens?

Federally-facilitated means the feds will build the marketplace, pay for it, make the design decisions (unless states want to partner, in which case they can still provide direction without taking on full responsibility), and manage day to day operations. States don't have to build marketplaces for their residents, but as American citizens those residents still get access to competitive marketplaces.

i.e. There is no "choice" not to participate.

Tell me again what happens to the individual who does not purchase health insurance ?

And did we ever get the unions to agree to pay the tax on their cadillac plans ?
 
Last edited:
i.e. There is no "choice" not to participate.

Participate in what? And who? It sounds like you're conflating states and individuals. States don't have to do or participate in anything.

Tell me again what happens to the individual who does not purchase health insurance ?

They forgo some of their tax rebate in April and go on with their life.
 
Has anyone seen a comparison between the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and "the average insurance program" ?
 
i.e. There is no "choice" not to participate.

Participate in what? And who? It sounds like you're conflating states and individuals. States don't have to do or participate in anything.

Tell me again what happens to the individual who does not purchase health insurance ?

They forgo some of their tax rebate in April and go on with their life.

In Summary.....if people choose not buy insurance, they are penalized.

And they will still pay the taxes associated with others getting insurance through the government.
 
Yes the Republicans have been pretty successful in undermining the ACA.

Really? Are you sure? I mean that's great news if it's true - but I'm suspicious on that claim. I sorta doubt they're going to impede it much at all.

Sure hope they prove me wrong though.
 
Last edited:
That's the strategy, yes.

Maybe I am missing something.

If the states don't set up the exchanges, the fed comes in and does it for them.

If he citizens of a particular state don't want to participate, as I understand it, they still participate.

Am I wrong ?

There will be a federally-facilitated exchange that Americans without employer-sponsored insurance in states without functioning markets can use to buy insurance from insurers in their states.

Nope, if the States refuse the exchanges don't happen...its the achilles heel of the plan.
 
i.e. There is no "choice" not to participate.

Participate in what? And who? It sounds like you're conflating states and individuals. States don't have to do or participate in anything.

Tell me again what happens to the individual who does not purchase health insurance ?

They forgo some of their tax rebate in April and go on with their life.

In Summary.....if people choose not buy insurance, they are penalized.

And they will still pay the taxes associated with others getting insurance through the government.

Yes.

It all shoves us toward a federal single payor program.
 
Nope, if the States refuse the exchanges don't happen...its the achilles heel of the plan.

When last we spoke, you were reading the text of legislation that isn't the Affordable Care Act and thus coming to wrong conclusions. I would assume that's still the case, except there was no iteration of the legislation in 2009 that corresponds to what you're describing.
 
Participate in what? And who? It sounds like you're conflating states and individuals. States don't have to do or participate in anything.



They forgo some of their tax rebate in April and go on with their life.

In Summary.....if people choose not buy insurance, they are penalized.

And they will still pay the taxes associated with others getting insurance through the government.

Yes.

It all shoves us toward a federal single payor program.

Yippee! The corporatists control the money supply, soon our health care. What's next? I'm betting food. Look for artificial engineered food shortages and price inflation. Centralized control is the only solution!!!

Compliant consumers and obedient soldiers. That's what it's all about.
 
Nope, if the States refuse the exchanges don't happen...its the achilles heel of the plan.

When last we spoke, you were reading the text of legislation that isn't the Affordable Care Act and thus coming to wrong conclusions. I would assume that's still the case, except there was no iteration of the legislation in 2009 that corresponds to what you're describing.

Sorry Green,nope.

I was reading it straight from the Bill.

+You've been wrong at every turn here.
 
Nope, if the States refuse the exchanges don't happen...its the achilles heel of the plan.

When last we spoke, you were reading the text of legislation that isn't the Affordable Care Act and thus coming to wrong conclusions. I would assume that's still the case, except there was no iteration of the legislation in 2009 that corresponds to what you're describing.

Sorry Green,nope.

I was reading it straight from the Bill.

+You've been wrong at every turn here.

I'll help you out, since you seem like an eager learner (if not particularly good at finding the right information). Below is a link to the relevant section of the U.S. Code, current federal law. Check subsection (c), "Failure to establish Exchange or implement requirements".

42 USC § 18041 - State flexibility in operation and enforcement of Exchanges and related requirements | LII / Legal Information Institute
 
Last edited:
Anyone read Sally Pipes book on Obamacare ?

I'm thinking of getting a copy.

I'm seeing a new one by Nick Tate.

Anyone know much about that one ?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top