GOP may "leverage" debt ceiling against de-funding Obamacare

[dblack]

1) The GOP has never threatened to shut down the government to defund Obamacare. In fact, they've been quite clear that they will fund everything but Obamacare.

2) The GOP will never leverage the debt ceiling into defunding Obamacare. Why? Because it involves using wise political negotation skills and they don't have the political will do to what is right.

This is indeed a turning point for the GOP. They need to either stand up for real principles, or just throw in the towel and admit they got nuthin.

 

[Redfish]

EMTALA is only a tiny portion of the Free health care provided to uninsureds in this country.

Right. And all of these 'cost' us, in one form or another. If we aren't willing to accept the unintended consequences of these policies, we should change them. Again, we should fix the problems we have before creating more.

ACA does, in fact, solve this problem, by making free health care at taxpayers expense unnecessary.

are illegals going to be paying for their medical care under obamacare? how exactly do you plan to collect from them?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

1) The GOP has never threatened to shut down the government to defund Obamacare. In fact, they've been quite clear that they will fund everything but Obamacare.

2) The GOP will never leverage the debt ceiling into defunding Obamacare. Why? Because it involves using wise political negotation skills and they don't have the political will do to what is right.

This is indeed a turning point for the GOP. They need to either stand up for real principles, or just throw in the towel and admit they got nuthin.

let's hope we turn.....however we've got alot of weaklings....they just go along to get along with DC politics.....

notice how congress and their staff quickly 'exempted' themselves from the ACA rules...

 

[JakeStarkey]

ScreamingEagle is wrong: Congress and staff are under the same ACA rules as are other Americans.

 

[Redfish]

1) The GOP has never threatened to shut down the government to defund Obamacare. In fact, they've been quite clear that they will fund everything but Obamacare.

2) The GOP will never leverage the debt ceiling into defunding Obamacare. Why? Because it involves using wise political negotation skills and they don't have the political will do to what is right.

This is indeed a turning point for the GOP. They need to either stand up for real principles, or just throw in the towel and admit they got nuthin.

let's hope we turn.....however we've got alot of weaklings....they just go along to get along with DC politics.....

notice how congress and their staff quickly 'exempted' themselves from the ACA rules...

yes, and notice how the MSM ignored that? If we had an honest media, obama would still be hustling drugs in the ghetto of chicago.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You fabricators should post some evidence: oh, that is it, you can't.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I would not object if the tea party types were given the opportunity to opt out of the insurance coverage requirments, if , at the same time, congress and the states eliminated madatory treatment by hospitals in emergencies, as well as Medicaid, and dozens of other free health coverage grant programs that are currently funded by taxpayers.

The problem is that is not practical. How does a hospital determine if someone has opted out? Especially if that person is unconscious and/or does not have identification with them? That would mean people who have opted in may be denied by hospitals unable to establish they have opted in before its too late to save them.

 

[bendog]

This is indeed a turning point for the GOP. They need to either stand up for real principles, or just throw in the towel and admit they got nuthin.

let's hope we turn.....however we've got alot of weaklings....they just go along to get along with DC politics.....

notice how congress and their staff quickly 'exempted' themselves from the ACA rules...

yes, and notice how the MSM ignored that? If we had an honest media, obama would still be hustling drugs in the ghetto of chicago.

it's ignored because it's bs. I don't like obamacare, but when a party lacks the political muscle to "delegislate" a law, it's never been an apporpriate political strategy for a minority to simply not fund a law they don't like. What the gop is possibly attempting to do is say "we will fund stuff other than obamacare, but if you dems refuse our refusal to fund a properly enacted program, we will allow the country to default."

you complain the MSM doesn't treat them like adults .... well maybe they should grow the ef up and maybe they'd get the political power back to improve the situation.

 

[dblack]

I would not object if the tea party types were given the opportunity to opt out of the insurance coverage requirments, if , at the same time, congress and the states eliminated madatory treatment by hospitals in emergencies, as well as Medicaid, and dozens of other free health coverage grant programs that are currently funded by taxpayers.

The problem is that is not practical. How does a hospital determine if someone has opted out? Especially if that person is unconscious and/or does not have identification with them? That would mean people who have opted in may be denied by hospitals unable to establish they have opted in before its too late to save them.

Why would that be any more complicated than checking to see if someone has insurance? A: It wouldn't.

The real reason this isn't "practical" (from the statist point of view) is that it leaves people free to decide for themselves how to finance their health care. It doesn't chain us to corporate insurance. Where's the fun in controlling health care if people can just ignore you?

 

[dblack]

What the gop is possibly attempting to do is say "we will fund stuff other than obamacare, but if you dems refuse our refusal to fund a properly enacted program, we will allow the country to default."

Hmm... I suppose everyone fighting ACA has different reasons, but in my view it will do serious, fundamental damage to our nation. Anything we can do to turn this thing around non-violently should be tried. To look at it another way, if the corporatists succeed, I'll want to see the US default.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

let's hope we turn.....however we've got alot of weaklings....they just go along to get along with DC politics.....

notice how congress and their staff quickly 'exempted' themselves from the ACA rules...

yes, and notice how the MSM ignored that? If we had an honest media, obama would still be hustling drugs in the ghetto of chicago.

it's ignored because it's bs. I don't like obamacare, but when a party lacks the political muscle to "delegislate" a law, it's never been an apporpriate political strategy for a minority to simply not fund a law they don't like. What the gop is possibly attempting to do is say "we will fund stuff other than obamacare, but if you dems refuse our refusal to fund a properly enacted program, we will allow the country to default."

you complain the MSM doesn't treat them like adults .... well maybe they should grow the ef up and maybe they'd get the political power back to improve the situation.

and it's never been an appropriate political strategy for a majority party to pick and choose which parts of the law they want to implement.....advantageously according to their political schedule.....

 

[Vandalshandle]

Right. And all of these 'cost' us, in one form or another. If we aren't willing to accept the unintended consequences of these policies, we should change them. Again, we should fix the problems we have before creating more.

ACA does, in fact, solve this problem, by making free health care at taxpayers expense unnecessary.

are illegals going to be paying for their medical care under obamacare? how exactly do you plan to collect from them?

This thread is not about illegals. ACA has nothing to do with illegals. it is about giving people who are otherwise uninsurable a chance to buy insurance, and receive the health care they need in order to have the same opportunity as those of us who are insurable, or have insurance already, through our employer, or other source. I am sure that you can find a thread about illegal aliens. It is one of the conservative wing's favorite talking points.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I would not object if the tea party types were given the opportunity to opt out of the insurance coverage requirments, if , at the same time, congress and the states eliminated madatory treatment by hospitals in emergencies, as well as Medicaid, and dozens of other free health coverage grant programs that are currently funded by taxpayers.

The problem is that is not practical. How does a hospital determine if someone has opted out? Especially if that person is unconscious and/or does not have identification with them? That would mean people who have opted in may be denied by hospitals unable to establish they have opted in before its too late to save them.

Exactly!

 

[Zoom-boing]

ACA does, in fact, solve this problem, by making free health care at taxpayers expense unnecessary.

are illegals going to be paying for their medical care under obamacare? how exactly do you plan to collect from them?

This thread is not about illegals. ACA has nothing to do with illegals. it is about giving people who are otherwise uninsurable a chance to buy insurance, and receive the health care they need in order to have the same opportunity as those of us who are insurable, or have insurance already, through our employer, or other source. I am sure that you can find a thread about illegal aliens. It is one of the conservative wing's favorite talking points.

According to this, the ACA will not be verifying much until 2015. But by then it will be too late.

As part of this “seamless,” one-stop shopping approach that President Obama has boasted about in speeches at the White House and around the country, applicants will have to enter some basic information about themselves -- their annual incomes, residency status and citizenship. Once that information has been entered, applicants will be presented with a number of potential plans and their premiums. After clicking one, a new window will open, routing the customers to the insurance company that offers the plan.

This process is a red flag for opponents of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, which was enacted in March 2010 Earlier this month, the Washington Post reported that health insurance marketplaces will not be required to verify consumer claims. The Obama administration said “it would significantly scale back the health law’s requirements that new insurance marketplaces verify consumers’ income and health insurance status. Instead, the federal government will rely more heavily on consumers’ self-reported information until 2015, when it plans to have stronger verification systems in place.”

Read more at Obamacare Glitch No. One: Verifying Eligibility

 

[Vandalshandle]

I would not object if the tea party types were given the opportunity to opt out of the insurance coverage requirments, if , at the same time, congress and the states eliminated madatory treatment by hospitals in emergencies, as well as Medicaid, and dozens of other free health coverage grant programs that are currently funded by taxpayers.

The problem is that is not practical. How does a hospital determine if someone has opted out? Especially if that person is unconscious and/or does not have identification with them? That would mean people who have opted in may be denied by hospitals unable to establish they have opted in before its too late to save them.

Why would that be any more complicated than checking to see if someone has insurance? A: It wouldn't.

The real reason this isn't "practical" (from the statist point of view) is that it leaves people free to decide for themselves how to finance their health care. It doesn't chain us to corporate insurance. Where's the fun in controlling health care if people can just ignore you?

You have never been "free to determine how you want to finace your health care". I live in a community of people over age 55. If 10% of these people were insurable by non-guaranteed issue indiviidual health insurers, I would be amazed, having spent my life in the health insurance business. Got glaucoma, history of alcohol or drug abuse, cancer, heart disease, COPD, been operated on for arthritis, have diabetis, high blood pressure, high chloseterol, treated for depression, MS, mental and nervous disorder, spinal problems, including chronic back pain, history of falling or dizzy spells, psoriasis, kidney or liver disease, gall bladder trouble, uirinary tract infections, erectile dysfunction, skin disorders, chronic migraines, or any of at least 50 other conditions that I could name, and you are SOL!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

ACA does, in fact, solve this problem, by making free health care at taxpayers expense unnecessary.

are illegals going to be paying for their medical care under obamacare? how exactly do you plan to collect from them?

This thread is not about illegals. ACA has nothing to do with illegals. it is about giving people who are otherwise uninsurable a chance to buy insurance, and receive the health care they need in order to have the same opportunity as those of us who are insurable, or have insurance already, through our employer, or other source. I am sure that you can find a thread about illegal aliens. It is one of the conservative wing's favorite talking points.

what a dodgy answer...

so then that CBO figure of about 30 million who will be left uninsured.....should really be more like 60 million uninsured if you include all the illegals....?

what happens when they get sick....?

 

[Kondor3]

"...This thread is not about illegals..."

It also has nothing to do with denying healthcare to people whose political views (Tea-Party'ers) differ from yours, but yet, you did not see me serve-up THAT counterpoint when you first mentioned Tea Party folk, did you?

Indeed, I merely built upon your own Tea Party'ers sidebar to interject an important point about one of the major reasons WHY Emergency Care has gotten so expensive in recent decades and WHY so many ER's are not getting paid and why they go into Financial Distress...

And, of course, astronomical increases in the cost of healthcare in recent decades, as well as declining access, are all part of the underlying range of causes that brought ObamaCare into existence in the first place...

Any aspect of ObamaCare is 'fair game' (including its underlying basis and causes) as a modest sidebar in such a thread, so long as it doesn't sidetrack folks overly much or for too long from the OP's topic...

And ONE of the reasons why the cost of Emergency Healthcare has soared into the stratosphere and necessitated some sort of need for so-called reform is the large numbers of Illegal Aliens flooding the nation's Emergency Rooms...

A permissible gambit, under the circumstances, and one that you opened the door for, yourself, in using Opposition to ObamaCare as a launch-point for a cheap-shot at some of the Opposition Folk...

Then, when somebody turns the tables just a wee bit, and counterpoints with a reference to Illegal Aliens (a subject near-and-dear to most Liberals and supporters of ObamaCare), all of a sudden, we're supposed to rigidly conform to Topical Issues, rather than straying briefly to wrap-up your own sidebar...

Sorry... no sale... Goose and Gander, and all that...

Consistency and Equity... dialogue is two-sided... not one...

But you know that already...

And the remark still stands...

If you hypothetically (and humorously) propose to allow Tea Party Opposition to opt-out of ObamaCare, but bar them from Emergency Room care afterwards...

Then you must take the (good-natured) flak that comes back at you in return, in insisting that Illegal Aliens be barred from Emergency Rooms, before you start barring our own people...

We take care of our own, before we take care of others...

 

[Vandalshandle]

are illegals going to be paying for their medical care under obamacare? how exactly do you plan to collect from them?

This thread is not about illegals. ACA has nothing to do with illegals. it is about giving people who are otherwise uninsurable a chance to buy insurance, and receive the health care they need in order to have the same opportunity as those of us who are insurable, or have insurance already, through our employer, or other source. I am sure that you can find a thread about illegal aliens. It is one of the conservative wing's favorite talking points.

what a dodgy answer...

so then that CBO figure of about 30 million who will be left uninsured.....should really be more like 60 million uninsured if you include all the illegals....?

what happens when they get sick....?

...which is the reason that the USA should have adopted universal health care, like every other industrialized nation in the world, but ACA was the only thing that the Right would tolerate, so we had to settle for that.

And again, this thread is STILL not about illegal aliens, Wonder Woman. Your magic braclets will not deflect ACA issues, no matter how fast you move them around.

 

[bendog]

The problem with dialogue is that dialogue requires a degree of honestly. I don't like Obamacare, and apparantly a maj have concerns as well. But, a solid maj favor govt doing something to make sure people have access, and most large employers and medical assocs do too. The desire to "defund" Obamacare has nothing to do with legit concerns that particular elements of the law won't work. Of course they won't work. But, problems can be addressed. I'd have preferred we addressed this when BushI was in office, but we didn't. I'd have preferred Bill Clinton, for that matter, but we didn't.

Ted Cruz is at least honest about the fear that people will like subisidies. Once govt gets a foot in the door with insuring access, people aren't gonna let it go. (it might have been better had we just allowed access without demanding all participate, and having financial disencentives to getting sick w/o insurance) But, be clear, defunding is not about Obamacare, or it's merits or demerits. It's an ideological position that the govt doesn't have a legit role in healthcare access. And that position cannot win elections. Thus, it's really tryanny by a minority.

 

[dblack]

You have never been "free to determine how you want to finace your health care".

Sure we have. Until ACA was passed that is.

I live in a community of people over age 55. If 10% of these people were insurable by non-guaranteed issue indiviidual health insurers, I would be amazed, having spent my life in the health insurance business. Got glaucoma, history of alcohol or drug abuse, cancer, heart disease, COPD, been operated on for arthritis, have diabetis, high blood pressure, high chloseterol, treated for depression, MS, mental and nervous disorder, spinal problems, including chronic back pain, history of falling or dizzy spells, psoriasis, kidney or liver disease, gall bladder trouble, uirinary tract infections, erectile dysfunction, skin disorders, chronic migraines, or any of at least 50 other conditions that I could name, and you are SOL!

... and I'm not sure what all that has to do with anything. It certainly doesn't support your claim that we've never been free to decide how to finance our own health care.