Do Republicans need a Plan B for Obamacare?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is that when voters overwhelmingly pass a measure recognizing marriage as between a man and a woman and some judge tells them they're wrong?

Yes it is..
It is one of the strongest elements of our Constitution

Checks and Balances

Thanks for bringing it up

Just like a lefty....

Chose what is convenient.

So We The People don't always prevail.....

Got it.

Actually you didn't get it.

We the people prevail when the people act in a manner consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

More....is doubtful. Most liberals stop at the general welfare clause and go get in the free Obama phone line.

LOL....only conservatives think the General Welfare clause relates to food stamps and obamaphones

Well no. no they don't. But liberals think it means carte blanche to justify any entitlement program they want. It's like fairy dust to them. Just read all the liberal arguments at USMB alone invoking the clause. You know this is true.

It doesn't matter what liberals "think." What matters is the case law.

And anyone who involves that case law correctly understands the meaning of the Constitution concerning a given issue.

 

[Foxfyre]

It is hard to make a call as to what is more destructive to liberty and human potential: slavish devotion to bigger and more intrusive government? Or slavish adoration of the courts?

 

[The Rabbi]

"the /big sugar daddy/cradle to grave security group"= whay Big Business has in today's Repub party Foxy. We "get it", you disapprove of social welfare but approve of corporate welfare which amounts to much, MUCH more. Take your partisan blinders off.

Social welfare consumes about 40% of the budget. "Corporate" welfare doesn't consumer nearly that amount. That doesn't make corporate welfare OK. It isn't. But the push for crony capitalism is from the left, not the right.
In all a thoroughly failed post.

 

[kwc57]

Does the GOP echo chamber really tell you that the Democrats are the minority party?

No, the map of the U.S. house does. And it's about to get worse for you.

So, how about that explanation as to how We The People kicked your asses out ?

Republicans have a gerrymandered map. A million more of We the People voted for Democratic Congressmen than Republican

Democrats hold the Senate and White House

How do you account for the majority of governors and state legislatures being Republican. So called gerrymandering wouldn't apply there........just as it hasn't in the house. But it's a nice excuse.

 

[kwc57]

LOL....only conservatives think the General Welfare clause relates to food stamps and obamaphones

Well no. no they don't. But liberals think it means carte blanche to justify any entitlement program they want. It's like fairy dust to them. Just read all the liberal arguments at USMB alone invoking the clause. You know this is true.

No I don't

What I see is conservatives defining the General Welfare clause as some kind of Welfare program....just like you just did

I don't like calling people liars, but you sir are lying. Liberals justify their actions on the clause. Republicans don't define it as a welfare program, we simply point out what you do with it.

 

[Foxfyre]

"the /big sugar daddy/cradle to grave security group"= whay Big Business has in today's Repub party Foxy. We "get it", you disapprove of social welfare but approve of corporate welfare which amounts to much, MUCH more. Take your partisan blinders off.

Social welfare consumes about 40% of the budget. "Corporate" welfare doesn't consumer nearly that amount. That doesn't make corporate welfare OK. It isn't. But the push for crony capitalism is from the left, not the right.
In all a thoroughly failed post.

And I don't approve of social welfare. I just disapprove of the federal government providing social welfare because that is the most expensive, ineffective, and corrupting way to provide social welfare and comes with far more negative consequences than anything to commend it.

I also disapprove of 'corporate welfare' at the federal level because it too invariably produces more negatives than any positives and is always corrupting.

I would favor the federal government getting out of the charity and benefits game entirely, but I don't think any so-called 'progressives' would ever agree to that. They prefer a system in which THEY choose who is deserving of feeding at the federal public trough and THEY choose who will be required to pay for that.

Obamacare should never have passed, nor would it have if the federal government had been in any way honest about what they intended. And if the Republican's plan had been implemented instead of Obamacare way back then, we would be a whole bunch better off today than we are.

 

[WillReadmore]

3 pages in and Repubs only solution is no solution and/or why should we offer an alternative

Again, moron

Reduce regulations to allow ANY group to negotiate group rates (groups of businesses, clubs, groups of people, HOA's, chess clubs, etc etc etc)
Reduce regulations to open up the marketplace across the board and across state lines
Make SIMPLE law that states that all citizens must be able to purchase a healtcare or health insurance plan regardless of pre-existing conditions
Enact tort reform to reduce lawsuits
Reduce regulations to allow individual practices or groups of practices to offer preventative care at a monthly subscription cost, leaving the catastrophic care to insurance or to health savings accounts
Make a SIMPLE law requiring all medical providers to publish a price list for good and services so that costs are not hidden behind some 'all inclusive' insurance plan

It is not government's duty or job to be your nanny, your insurance provider, your healthcare provider, the one that funnels forced 'customers' to approved businesses who pay the government off, r anything of the sort

The underlined feature above is a key feature of Obamacare. It is being paid for with the health care mandate - that is, if the mandate were dropped, that feature would have to be dropped, too.

Both Rs and Ds searched for an alternative to pay for that within a system that used private insurers (that is, not single payer), and neither side found one.

There is a larger point here. You can SAY stuff like your post above, but talk is cheap. The bottom line is that Republicans have not come up with an alternative to our new system.

All they've got is "no".

 

[Foxfyre]

3 pages in and Repubs only solution is no solution and/or why should we offer an alternative

Again, moron

Reduce regulations to allow ANY group to negotiate group rates (groups of businesses, clubs, groups of people, HOA's, chess clubs, etc etc etc)
Reduce regulations to open up the marketplace across the board and across state lines
Make SIMPLE law that states that all citizens must be able to purchase a healtcare or health insurance plan regardless of pre-existing conditions
Enact tort reform to reduce lawsuits
Reduce regulations to allow individual practices or groups of practices to offer preventative care at a monthly subscription cost, leaving the catastrophic care to insurance or to health savings accounts
Make a SIMPLE law requiring all medical providers to publish a price list for good and services so that costs are not hidden behind some 'all inclusive' insurance plan

It is not government's duty or job to be your nanny, your insurance provider, your healthcare provider, the one that funnels forced 'customers' to approved businesses who pay the government off, r anything of the sort

The underlined feature above is a key feature of Obamacare. It is being paid for with the health care mandate - that is, if the mandate were dropped, that feature would have to be dropped, too.

Both Rs and Ds searched for an alternative to pay for that within a system that used private insurers (that is, not single payer), and neither side found one.

There is a larger point here. You can SAY stuff like your post above, but talk is cheap. The bottom line is that Republicans have not come up with an alternative to our new system.

All they've got is "no".

The simple solution is to set up assigned risk exchanges for the difficult to insure group just as is done for general liability, work comp, E & O, earthquake and flood insurance etc. And then allow the free market to take care of the rest.

 

[WillReadmore]

Again, moron

Reduce regulations to allow ANY group to negotiate group rates (groups of businesses, clubs, groups of people, HOA's, chess clubs, etc etc etc)
Reduce regulations to open up the marketplace across the board and across state lines
Make SIMPLE law that states that all citizens must be able to purchase a healtcare or health insurance plan regardless of pre-existing conditions
Enact tort reform to reduce lawsuits
Reduce regulations to allow individual practices or groups of practices to offer preventative care at a monthly subscription cost, leaving the catastrophic care to insurance or to health savings accounts
Make a SIMPLE law requiring all medical providers to publish a price list for good and services so that costs are not hidden behind some 'all inclusive' insurance plan

It is not government's duty or job to be your nanny, your insurance provider, your healthcare provider, the one that funnels forced 'customers' to approved businesses who pay the government off, r anything of the sort

The underlined feature above is a key feature of Obamacare. It is being paid for with the health care mandate - that is, if the mandate were dropped, that feature would have to be dropped, too.

Both Rs and Ds searched for an alternative to pay for that within a system that used private insurers (that is, not single payer), and neither side found one.

There is a larger point here. You can SAY stuff like your post above, but talk is cheap. The bottom line is that Republicans have not come up with an alternative to our new system.

All they've got is "no".

The simple solution is to set up assigned risk exchanges for the difficult to insure group just as is done for general liability, work comp, E & O, earthquake and flood insurance etc. And then allow the free market to take care of the rest.

I doubt this idea was missed by all congressmen and their advisers. It aggregates the high risk rather than spreading it, of course. I doubt private insurance companies would be all that interested to handle members of a pool where every member has some dread disease - a pool where those who survive are probably a worse financial load than those who simply die, and where some of our most costly procedures and drugs are a constant. You could always propose government support, I suppose.

But, it's unlikely you're going to find a champion for modifying this system. Boehner actually had some changes he wanted to propose a few months ago, but his party refused to let him bring them up. I have no idea whether they were any good.

Right now Republicans are not in a mood to try to make things work. They still see their best advantage in failure of health care in America. And, that is totally disgusting.

 

[Listening]

Republicans have a gerrymandered map. A million more of We the People voted for Democratic Congressmen than Republican

Democrats hold the Senate and White House

Hey asswipe.

In 2006 and 2008, whoever or whatever voted in a bunch of democrats. I really does not matter what the absolute proportions are. (Your 1 million number is meaningless...in some places where the R had no opponent...people didn't bother to vote....).

But in 2010, whether they be democrat or republican or whatever, a bunch of them chose to vote for an R thus kicking you back into being the minority party in the house.

Now, what does that tell you.

It tells me you are partisan moron

What you've told me is that you won't own up to the fact that in 2010, America reversed itself to a great degree.

Got it.

 

[Listening]

More....is doubtful. Most liberals stop at the general welfare clause and go get in the free Obama phone line.

LOL....only conservatives think the General Welfare clause relates to food stamps and obamaphones

Well no. no they don't. But liberals think it means carte blanche to justify any entitlement program they want. It's like fairy dust to them. Just read all the liberal arguments at USMB alone invoking the clause. You know this is true.

It's almost like the chorus to a song.