Trumpcare has Arrived


I have no idea what your source is trying to say, because they demand that I subscribe in order to read it. So, if something that law has declared illegal is going on, why hasn't the Trump people gone to the Supreme Court and have it stopped? Could it be that Donny has decided that he does not need no stinkin' judicial branch of government?

From the link:

By Spencer S. Hsu, Greg Jaffe and Lena H. Sun May 12, 2016
A federal judge struck down a portion of President Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act health law Thursday, ruling that Obama exceeded his authority in unilaterally funding a provision that sent billions of dollars in subsidies to health insurers.

In a 38-page decision, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District put her ruling on hold pending the administration’s certain appeal. Her decision sided with the U.S. House of Representatives, which brought the lawsuit challenging more than $175 billion of spending after a party-line vote by House Republicans in July 2014.

The House GOP argued that the administration’s decision to subsidize deductibles, co-pays and other “cost-sharing” measures was unconstitutional because Congress rejected an administration request for funding in 2014. Obama officials said they withdrew the request and spent the money, arguing that the subsidies were covered by an earlier, permanent appropriation.
<<snip>>

Under the ruling, in order for the subsidy payments to be constitutional, Congress would be required to pass annual appropriations to cover the subsidies’ cost.


At stake is whether the subsidy “can nonetheless be funded through the same, permanent appropriation. It cannot,” Collyer wrote, referring to the provision in question.


BTW the decision was upheld in the appellate court.


.

So, again, Trump does not need no "stinkin'" Supreme court decision. He just assumed their roll and powers, like all dictators do.


The case only went as high as the appellate court. it wasn't appealed to the supremes. The courts declared the payments illegal, Trump is required to abide by their ruling, you're just pissed that Trump isn't as cavalier with the law as your dear leader.


.

Interesting spin. Trump has suddenly become extremely mindful of obeying the law of the land. Was that before, or after, threatening to yank broadcasting licenses of media that critisizes him? Could it be that Trump is cherry picking federal legal rulings? Maybe he has learned to pick his battles better after losing repeatedly over immigration restrictions. I am sure that he regrets the ruling that forbids him from pulling federal grants from sanctuary cities. Anyway, as I said, the law was passed by congress, and signed by President Obama, but Trump feels that it is not the duty of the Supreme Court to rule on it. He has decided to be his own supreme court. I guess that I am not too sorry about this. Yanking insurance away from 12 million poor people , simply because he has failed to get his "Terrific" new health care plan through congress, is going to drive a stake through his presidency. His immature temper tantrum is going to cost him "bigly" this time.


Interesting deflection, if memory serves the supremes allowed most of the travel ban to go into effect and there's a new one in place now.

BTW the law requires congress to make annual appropriations, they haven't so the payments can't be made.

.
 
Due to his inability to pass healthcare reform to repeal and replace Obamacare Trump has decided to instead kill payments to insurers essentially guaranteeing that rates will go up across the board for everyone in this country.

"Two months ago, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that individual health plan premiums would be 20 percent higher than originally projected if the payments ceased. It also projected that premiums would be 25 percent higher than they otherwise would be by 2020, and that the federal deficit would be increased by almost $200 billion if the subsidies ended."

The Affordable Care Act can no longer be blamed for rising premium costs. This administration has failed and refused to run the ACA in the manner in which it was designed.

You can't take the wheels off a car and wonder why it doesn't drive.

What we have now is Trumpcare. Hope all of you that voted for him are happy now.

Obamacare bombshell: Trump kills key payments to health insurers
/—-/ it’s about time we stopped making the evil rich insurance companies richer. The bloodsuckers are seeing the end of the gravy train
 
Interesting deflection, if memory serves the supremes allowed most of the travel ban to go into effect and there's a new one in place now.

.
Actually what the USSC allowed, was a glass that was half empty. And after the first two glasses got half emptied, Trump has gone to yet a third glass to try it again.
 

I have no idea what your source is trying to say, because they demand that I subscribe in order to read it. So, if something that law has declared illegal is going on, why hasn't the Trump people gone to the Supreme Court and have it stopped? Could it be that Donny has decided that he does not need no stinkin' judicial branch of government?

From the link:

By Spencer S. Hsu, Greg Jaffe and Lena H. Sun May 12, 2016
A federal judge struck down a portion of President Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act health law Thursday, ruling that Obama exceeded his authority in unilaterally funding a provision that sent billions of dollars in subsidies to health insurers.

In a 38-page decision, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District put her ruling on hold pending the administration’s certain appeal. Her decision sided with the U.S. House of Representatives, which brought the lawsuit challenging more than $175 billion of spending after a party-line vote by House Republicans in July 2014.

The House GOP argued that the administration’s decision to subsidize deductibles, co-pays and other “cost-sharing” measures was unconstitutional because Congress rejected an administration request for funding in 2014. Obama officials said they withdrew the request and spent the money, arguing that the subsidies were covered by an earlier, permanent appropriation.
<<snip>>

Under the ruling, in order for the subsidy payments to be constitutional, Congress would be required to pass annual appropriations to cover the subsidies’ cost.


At stake is whether the subsidy “can nonetheless be funded through the same, permanent appropriation. It cannot,” Collyer wrote, referring to the provision in question.


BTW the decision was upheld in the appellate court.


.

So, again, Trump does not need no "stinkin'" Supreme court decision. He just assumed their roll and powers, like all dictators do.


The case only went as high as the appellate court. it wasn't appealed to the supremes. The courts declared the payments illegal, Trump is required to abide by their ruling, you're just pissed that Trump isn't as cavalier with the law as your dear leader.


.
^ alternative facts.


Link?


.
 
Interesting deflection, if memory serves the supremes allowed most of the travel ban to go into effect and there's a new one in place now.

.
Actually what the USSC allowed, was a glass that was half empty. And after the first two glasses got half emptied, Trump has gone to yet a third glass to try it again.


BTW, SCOTUS just vacated those lower court decisions completely 8-1.


.
 
I have no idea what your source is trying to say, because they demand that I subscribe in order to read it. So, if something that law has declared illegal is going on, why hasn't the Trump people gone to the Supreme Court and have it stopped? Could it be that Donny has decided that he does not need no stinkin' judicial branch of government?

From the link:

By Spencer S. Hsu, Greg Jaffe and Lena H. Sun May 12, 2016
A federal judge struck down a portion of President Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act health law Thursday, ruling that Obama exceeded his authority in unilaterally funding a provision that sent billions of dollars in subsidies to health insurers.

In a 38-page decision, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District put her ruling on hold pending the administration’s certain appeal. Her decision sided with the U.S. House of Representatives, which brought the lawsuit challenging more than $175 billion of spending after a party-line vote by House Republicans in July 2014.

The House GOP argued that the administration’s decision to subsidize deductibles, co-pays and other “cost-sharing” measures was unconstitutional because Congress rejected an administration request for funding in 2014. Obama officials said they withdrew the request and spent the money, arguing that the subsidies were covered by an earlier, permanent appropriation.
<<snip>>

Under the ruling, in order for the subsidy payments to be constitutional, Congress would be required to pass annual appropriations to cover the subsidies’ cost.


At stake is whether the subsidy “can nonetheless be funded through the same, permanent appropriation. It cannot,” Collyer wrote, referring to the provision in question.


BTW the decision was upheld in the appellate court.


.

So, again, Trump does not need no "stinkin'" Supreme court decision. He just assumed their roll and powers, like all dictators do.


The case only went as high as the appellate court. it wasn't appealed to the supremes. The courts declared the payments illegal, Trump is required to abide by their ruling, you're just pissed that Trump isn't as cavalier with the law as your dear leader.


.
^ alternative facts.


Link?


.
lol. you make up a whole story about the house v price lawsuit, and now want a link?
 
From the link:

By Spencer S. Hsu, Greg Jaffe and Lena H. Sun May 12, 2016
A federal judge struck down a portion of President Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act health law Thursday, ruling that Obama exceeded his authority in unilaterally funding a provision that sent billions of dollars in subsidies to health insurers.

In a 38-page decision, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District put her ruling on hold pending the administration’s certain appeal. Her decision sided with the U.S. House of Representatives, which brought the lawsuit challenging more than $175 billion of spending after a party-line vote by House Republicans in July 2014.

The House GOP argued that the administration’s decision to subsidize deductibles, co-pays and other “cost-sharing” measures was unconstitutional because Congress rejected an administration request for funding in 2014. Obama officials said they withdrew the request and spent the money, arguing that the subsidies were covered by an earlier, permanent appropriation.
<<snip>>

Under the ruling, in order for the subsidy payments to be constitutional, Congress would be required to pass annual appropriations to cover the subsidies’ cost.


At stake is whether the subsidy “can nonetheless be funded through the same, permanent appropriation. It cannot,” Collyer wrote, referring to the provision in question.


BTW the decision was upheld in the appellate court.


.

So, again, Trump does not need no "stinkin'" Supreme court decision. He just assumed their roll and powers, like all dictators do.


The case only went as high as the appellate court. it wasn't appealed to the supremes. The courts declared the payments illegal, Trump is required to abide by their ruling, you're just pissed that Trump isn't as cavalier with the law as your dear leader.


.
^ alternative facts.


Link?


.
lol. you make up a whole story about the house v price lawsuit, and now want a link?


I provided a link, you say my assertions are wrong, back it up.


.
 
it depends what went up. if it is purely existing policies, obummer's, if it is new policies written for trump's EO then trump's. Why is this so hard for stupid fks like you?

Who gets the credit if they go down?

Trump gets all the credit now if they go up or down.

This doesn't just affect new policies. This affects ALL policies. Do you understand how any of this works? Everytime you reply it becomes clear that you don't have any fucking clue.
explain how it impacts existing policies exactly? come on let's debate that. do you have any clue?
Oh no, his talking points won't cover that. Being able to buy across state lines will lower premiums. Competition in the market, always lower prices.

I get it, you know more than the CBO.

You, the person who likely peaked in middle school and now whose life revolves around hating on dum libs on the internet know more than the CBO.
I don't hate anyone, but it's common sense that competition will lower prices. I guess you and the cbo know nothing about economics.

You know nothing about insurance, the only way to lower prices is to strip benefits and to raise deductibles. You won't get anywhere close to a major medical plan. It doesn't work like material possessions.
 
Source: Congressional Budget Office analysis "The Effects of Terminating Payments for Cost-Sharing Reductions," August 2017

More than half of the people who buy Obamacare plans on government-run exchanges qualify for reduced out-of-pocket health charges that the CSRs subsidize. Those customers have relatively low incomes.

A greater number of people, about 85 percent of all Obamacare exchange customers, qualify for subsidies that reduce their monthly plan premiums. Those subsidies, in the form of federal tax credits, are not at risk from the Trump administration action on CSRs.

In fact, those premium subsidies will offset the price hikes that are expected from the CSR cutoff for millions of people. That is, the value of the tax credit-based subsidy rises in step with premium prices — so if premiums go up, so do the subsidies.


news flash;

rich bitch screws poor people.

and timing is perfect too - TA DAAAAAAAAAAA, mid term elections.

cya girls,
and you guys make this claim, which is a lie all the time.
Obamacare was gonna lower preimums....LIE
keep your doctor....LIE
when do you guys not lie?


cant read and comprehend can you dumbass ?

when premiums increase so do subsidies to offset the increase.

write that down .............. if you can write
hey dumb ass....why do premiums increase.....because they don't have cost controls....they just add more to the subsidies....that's why doctors love medicare.......they can charge whatever they want.....

you want to know how to really make healthcare inexpensive, make people pay for it directly......like you car insurance......I don't like geico, I'll go to state farm or allstate....and vice versa....

you want government to subsidise peoples insurance....nope.....get a job, pay for it like normal people.

Please tell me you didn't go to Ohio State. You know what the FPL is? Of course, you do, you just googled it.
 
Trump kills subsidies, millions of customers kill policies, millions of customers kill Republicans at mid term elections, then kill Trump in 2020.


PERFECT !
trump kills subsidies, insurance companies now know no more free money, insurance rates must come down to get business. economics 101.

Doesn't work like pizza pizza, offer two pizzas and increase your sales? Nope prices will only go up.
 
Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Analysis | Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Setting aside the question of whether a raw tally of executive orders is an effective metric of accomplishment, the move represents a particularly brazen about-face on messaging. Like many Republicans, Trump was deeply critical of Obama's use of executive orders despite the fact that Obama issued them at a slower pace than any president since Grover Cleveland.


Hypocrite much??
 
Trump kills subsidies, millions of customers kill policies, millions of customers kill Republicans at mid term elections, then kill Trump in 2020.


PERFECT !
Crazy Donnie's presiduncy was already dead. Apparently he wants a much bigger record of failure. One for the record books!
I love it. the left still doesn't know how business works. good thing trump does.

I was in the restaurant business 20 years, insurance 25+ and I have bitched for years insurance companies should market like restaurants or certain restaurants to no avail. So the health insurance business just doesn't seem to work like other businesses. Actuaries.
 
So, again, Trump does not need no "stinkin'" Supreme court decision. He just assumed their roll and powers, like all dictators do.


The case only went as high as the appellate court. it wasn't appealed to the supremes. The courts declared the payments illegal, Trump is required to abide by their ruling, you're just pissed that Trump isn't as cavalier with the law as your dear leader.


.
^ alternative facts.


Link?


.
lol. you make up a whole story about the house v price lawsuit, and now want a link?


I provided a link, you say my assertions are wrong, back it up.


.
You provided a link for the first decision. And then fantasized about the outcome of the appeal. You did not prove your bold assertions. Anyone interested and willing to invest 5 minutes can know that there is no outcome yet. The proceedings have been stayed mutiple times, 18 states have successfully intervened, etc. Look it up, hero.
 
Wait & see that is my plan. personal thoughts on the matter, its not looking good. next up think Social Security will get a cost increase, with a reduction of things covered.

You're getting a 2% increase next year, the bad news your part B premium is going up.

Or did you mean will they start in on SS and Medicare, I kind of have the feeling they will.
 
Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Analysis | Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Setting aside the question of whether a raw tally of executive orders is an effective metric of accomplishment, the move represents a particularly brazen about-face on messaging. Like many Republicans, Trump was deeply critical of Obama's use of executive orders despite the fact that Obama issued them at a slower pace than any president since Grover Cleveland.


Hypocrite much??
/----/
salve.jpg
 

Attachments

  • salve.jpg
    salve.jpg
    36.4 KB · Views: 35
Wait & see that is my plan. personal thoughts on the matter, its not looking good. next up think Social Security will get a cost increase, with a reduction of things covered.

You're getting a 2% increase next year, the bad news your part B premium is going up.

Or did you mean will they start in on SS and Medicare, I kind of have the feeling they will.
 
Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Analysis | Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Setting aside the question of whether a raw tally of executive orders is an effective metric of accomplishment, the move represents a particularly brazen about-face on messaging. Like many Republicans, Trump was deeply critical of Obama's use of executive orders despite the fact that Obama issued them at a slower pace than any president since Grover Cleveland.


Hypocrite much??
/----/ View attachment 154440
 
Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Analysis | Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Setting aside the question of whether a raw tally of executive orders is an effective metric of accomplishment, the move represents a particularly brazen about-face on messaging. Like many Republicans, Trump was deeply critical of Obama's use of executive orders despite the fact that Obama issued them at a slower pace than any president since Grover Cleveland.


Hypocrite much??
/----/ View attachment 154440
Yeah ol' Donny boi was sure butthurt about it during the campaign the way he said it was bad m'kay..
 
Wait & see that is my plan. personal thoughts on the matter, its not looking good. next up think Social Security will get a cost increase, with a reduction of things covered.

You're getting a 2% increase next year, the bad news your part B premium is going up.

Or did you mean will they start in on SS and Medicare, I kind of have the feeling they will.
 
Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Analysis | Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Setting aside the question of whether a raw tally of executive orders is an effective metric of accomplishment, the move represents a particularly brazen about-face on messaging. Like many Republicans, Trump was deeply critical of Obama's use of executive orders despite the fact that Obama issued them at a slower pace than any president since Grover Cleveland.


Hypocrite much??
/----/ View attachment 154440
Yeah ol' Donny boi was sure butthurt about it during the campaign the way he said it was bad m'kay..
 
Fortunately I don
Wait & see that is my plan. personal thoughts on the matter, its not looking good. next up think Social Security will get a cost increase, with a reduction of things covered.

You're getting a 2% increase next year, the bad news your part B premium is going up.

Or did you mean will they start in on SS and Medicare, I kind of have the feeling they will.
Fortunately I don't have to have medicare
 
Fortunately I don
Wait & see that is my plan. personal thoughts on the matter, its not looking good. next up think Social Security will get a cost increase, with a reduction of things covered.

You're getting a 2% increase next year, the bad news your part B premium is going up.

Or did you mean will they start in on SS and Medicare, I kind of have the feeling they will.
Fortunately I don't have to have medicare
 
Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Analysis | Six times Trump said executive orders were bad before he decided they were actually good
Setting aside the question of whether a raw tally of executive orders is an effective metric of accomplishment, the move represents a particularly brazen about-face on messaging. Like many Republicans, Trump was deeply critical of Obama's use of executive orders despite the fact that Obama issued them at a slower pace than any president since Grover Cleveland.


Hypocrite much??
/----/ View attachment 154440
Yeah ol' Donny boi was sure butthurt about it during the campaign the way he said it was bad m'kay..
/----/ I sent your reply to the UN for a translation. They have no idea what the hell you're trying to say. Please re-post in English. TIA
 
Due to his inability to pass healthcare reform to repeal and replace Obamacare Trump has decided to instead kill payments to insurers essentially guaranteeing that rates will go up across the board for everyone in this country.

"Two months ago, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that individual health plan premiums would be 20 percent higher than originally projected if the payments ceased. It also projected that premiums would be 25 percent higher than they otherwise would be by 2020, and that the federal deficit would be increased by almost $200 billion if the subsidies ended."

The Affordable Care Act can no longer be blamed for rising premium costs. This administration has failed and refused to run the ACA in the manner in which it was designed.

You can't take the wheels off a car and wonder why it doesn't drive.

What we have now is Trumpcare. Hope all of you that voted for him are happy now.

Obamacare bombshell: Trump kills key payments to health insurers

Does this mean I'm not going to get the $2500 savings every year that Obama promised me? DERP!

Yes, that’s what it means mr.deflector, you got it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top