The Obama Healthcare Law Will Not Be Repealed

[shintao]

You cannot mandate people or states to pay for a service they cannot afford.

And this is the very best argument item. If State doesn't want to participate, they can give up all federal aid, and still be forced to pay federal taxes. If a person cannot afford to pay, they will be helped anyway. Can you mandate people to pay? No. If you don't want to pay for mandated car insurance, no one says you have to. If you don't want to pay taxes, you don't have to work in America, you can go support yourself somewhere else that doesn't have taxes. If you don't work, you can stay and get the free medical.

 

[JFK_USA]

Now where are the intended consequences you ask?

It's all the Republican incumbents that won't be returning to the General Election this year for an encore performance...

The one think you can rely on from politicians of all stripe, whether Democrat or
Republican, is their finely honed survival
instinct. They all now know that not doing
what they say they're going to do will earn
them a primary loss with a complimentary
non-stop ticket out of the marble halls of
power.

This above all others is the most important gift the Tea Party has bestowed...a message delivered by ballot that no ones seat is a safe seat

---------------------------

Oh it will stand. I am sad you are from Missouri. Embarrassing but I digress

Their is alot of good in this bill. People will see if I get sick, my insurance company cannot use their death panels to stop giving me care.

But as a liberal, the bill isn't single payer. I mean liberals don't like it and conservatives don't like it. You do the best you can. At the end of the day, the bill isn't going to be repealed and when you take away the popular parts, people will turn on republicans again.

 

[Ragnar]

Democrats guess wrong on health care - Carrie Budoff Brown - POLITICO.com

Rarely have so many political strategists been so wrong about something so big.

But when it comes to the health care bill, everyone from former President Bill Clinton on down whiffed on some of the more significant predictions.

Democrats would run aggressively on the legislation? Nope. Voters would forget about the sausage-making aspects of the legislative process? Doesn’t seem that way, as the process contributed to the sense that the bill was deeply flawed.

And Clinton’s own promise to jittery Democrats that their poll numbers would skyrocket after the bill finally passed also didn’t pan out, as the party is fighting for its life in the midterms.

At the six-month mark, the law remains a riddle for political analysts, lawmakers and the White House. Here’s a look at some of the predictions that have proved off the mark.

{More at link}

The free market always wins (or has it's revenge). Put simply, you can't cheat reality.

As was noted before, repeal is not needed when defunding WILL take place. That's based on 50+ wins in the House and four or five in the Senate for Republicans in November. (that will happen, no doubt about it)

"Obamacare" is dead. It does not matter what the courts say except that they have a small window of a chance to kill it before anyone else. They may take it and they may not but in any case we will see more freedom in the health care market long before any Statist "solutions" stomp away our rights. America is awake now... even if still a bit groggy. For that I have just two words for Obama/Pelosi?Reid... "thank you".

 

[Flopper]

It would very interesting situation if the Supreme Court struck down the mandate requiring everyone to have insurance. This would not strike down the law. It would be up to Congress to fix the law or repeal. Assuming there were not enough enough votes to repeal which is likely, then Congress would have to fix it. The most practical fix would be a single payer system which would be ironic. But what would probably emerge would be some weird hybrid system.
What Would Happen if the Supreme Court Struck Down Health Care Reform? - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic

There is no fixing and not only because there is no severance clause. The case could be made that the severability is implied. But if the Supreme Court strikes down the mandate, Obamacare cannot function in the manner it was intended. The mandate is integral to funding the exchanges and the larger pool of young people purchasing insurance is requisite to spreading the risk and managing cost.

If the mandate is struck down, the case can be made that the ACA was never intended to be enacted without the mandate...ESPECIALLY due to the lack of a severance clause which would allow the high court to void the entire law.

PLUS...with a new speaker, the lack of a mandate will likely trigger a repeal regardless. The unconstitutionality of the mandate will give the moderate Democrats the cover they need to extract themselves from this albatross around their political necks, and place the blame squarely on deposed Speaker Pelosi and Former Senator Reid.

I can hear it now, it's win/win for them..."I so much wanted to reform healthcare, but this flawed law pushed on us by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid is not feasible without the mandate...yada, yada, yada..."

You got a lot ifs and assumption in your argument. But putting aside the ifs and assumptions without the Healthcare bill we would turn the clock by to 2008 which wold mean:
. The 50% discount on brand name drugs for senior would disappear along with closure of the donut hole.
. The extended dependent coverage is gone
. Preexisting conditions are back in
. 40 million people expecting to have healthcare in 2014 would hold Republicans responsible.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It would very interesting situation if the Supreme Court struck down the mandate requiring everyone to have insurance. This would not strike down the law. It would be up to Congress to fix the law or repeal. Assuming there were not enough enough votes to repeal which is likely, then Congress would have to fix it. The most practical fix would be a single payer system which would be ironic. But what would probably emerge would be some weird hybrid system.
What Would Happen if the Supreme Court Struck Down Health Care Reform? - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic

There is no fixing and not only because there is no severance clause. The case could be made that the severability is implied. But if the Supreme Court strikes down the mandate, Obamacare cannot function in the manner it was intended. The mandate is integral to funding the exchanges and the larger pool of young people purchasing insurance is requisite to spreading the risk and managing cost.

If the mandate is struck down, the case can be made that the ACA was never intended to be enacted without the mandate...ESPECIALLY due to the lack of a severance clause which would allow the high court to void the entire law.

PLUS...with a new speaker, the lack of a mandate will likely trigger a repeal regardless. The unconstitutionality of the mandate will give the moderate Democrats the cover they need to extract themselves from this albatross around their political necks, and place the blame squarely on deposed Speaker Pelosi and Former Senator Reid.

I can hear it now, it's win/win for them..."I so much wanted to reform healthcare, but this flawed law pushed on us by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid is not feasible without the mandate...yada, yada, yada..."

You got a lot ifs and assumption in your argument. But putting aside the ifs and assumptions without the Healthcare bill we would turn the clock by to 2008 which wold mean:
. The 50% discount on brand name drugs for senior would disappear along with closure of the donut hole.
. The extended dependent coverage is gone
. Preexisting conditions are back in
. 40 million people expecting to have healthcare in 2014 would hold Republicans responsible.

Do you live in an alternate universe?

I have one simple question for you, lets see if you can give me a straight answer.

If this law is such a great thing, and everyone will eventually end up loving it, why did they write in such a way that it is not fully implemented until after Obama would be out of office if he wins a second term?

My personal experience is that Congress usually waits forever to get everything going so that all the people who are responsible have time to either retire, or convince everyone that they never actually supported the bad idea in the first place.

 

[Sarah G]

Well everyone is welcome to their own opinion, however that does not make it fact. 59 million people are without health insurance this year. That's an increase of 20 million people over the last 10 years and the Republicans did nothing.

1. They don't have to do anything because it's not the government's responsibility to see to it that you have health insurance. That's your responsibility and only you.

2. To say they did nothing is a lie. They offered up several alternative health care proposals and the Democrats wouldn't allow a vote on them.

3. Republicans don't control Congress and haven't for the past three years.

They weren't "offering up" anything, they were attempting to block, obstruct and say no.

I did see them waving around their version of health reform but did we ever get to see what they were proposing completely? A couple of points in the end but nothing that was going to help anyone needing health coverage for any reason.

 

[shintao]

[As was noted before, repeal is not needed when defunding WILL take place. That's based on 50+ wins in the House and four or five in the Senate for Republicans in November. (that will happen, no doubt about it)

"Obamacare" is dead. It does not matter what the courts say except that they have a small window of a chance to kill it before anyone else. They may take it and they may not but in any case we will see more freedom in the health care market long before any Statist "solutions" stomp away our rights. America is awake now... even if still a bit groggy. For that I have just two words for Obama/Pelosi?Reid... "thank you".

I wish you luck with that pipe dream, but you have a serious lack of voting meat for your chopping block. Fact is you would need 2/3rds to overcome an Obama veto, and that isn't going to happen. The t-Party ripped the GOP a new hole to stick their heads in, as they split the party and the direction of voters. That was a GOP gain.

The GOP has messed with the Spanish voters, from a supreme court nominee, illegals health care, and Arizona's laws to oust them. Sorry, Obama gets the Spanish voters and the black voters.

The GOP went after the College grants and education, so there goes you Asian voters who are already leaning left with the educators of America.

Forget the Union!

Forget the workers of America. They were not on the GOP list when it came to dolling out to Wall street, giving them medical assistance for their families, or keeping them in their homes, or helping them to get by in the Replugs depression. Then Bush thought trashing truck drivers jobs for Mexicans, cutting disability for workers, out sourcing, etc. was a good thing for corporations.

You want to take away womens right to their body, so forget women, including republican women and the college crowd females.


I just don't get this fairytale mythical magic World of Oz these republicans are living in. They will be lucky to still have a seat in congress by 2012.

Putting lipstick on the Contract for America, still make the replugs piggies.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The new Obama healthcare legislation has a number of problems. At the top of list is inadequate Medicaid funding. There are also a number of other problems. Republicans and Teabaggers promise if elected they will repeal the law. This is simply not going to happen. It will be amended, probably more than once either by the Democrats or Republicans but not repealed.

If the Republicans gain control of the House, which is definitely a possible, the Senate, which will probably remain under Democratic control, will block any repeal. Even if Republicans control the Senate, Obama would certainly veto any repeal bill.

To override a presidential veto in the House, Republicans would have to pick up 109 seats. The lowest estimates are around 25 seats. The highest I have seen is a hundred. Most estimates are around 35 to 40. Picking up 109 is extremely unlikely. If a miracle occurred and the Republicans picked up sufficient seats in the House to override a presidential veto, they would still need to pick up 26 Senate seats, which would be nearly impossible. Lowest estimates are 4 to 5. 13 is the highest estimate I have seen, certainly no where near the 26 seats needed to override a veto.

The best hope for a Republican repeal is the election of a Republican president along with a Republican congress. If this happened, the Republican president and Congress would be seated in 2013 only months before the bulk of the healthcare bill would go into effect. With the entire healthcare industry and insurance industry geared up for the change, it would be too late to repeal it.
Congress by the numbers, 111th Congress, 2nd Session. From TheCapitol.Net,
Veto override - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If it can't be handled in 2011 then we have 2013 to take care of the mes obama created.

 

[skookerasbil]

SCOTUS will find it unconstitutional 5-4.

Adios

indeed..........and when it does, my Photobucket factory will be in high gear = lots of gay MSPAint Photobucket classics, maticulously designed to pwn the k00ks.

 

[Greenbeard]

2. To say they did nothing is a lie. They offered up several alternative health care proposals and the Democrats wouldn't allow a vote on them.

Odd, because I can actually call up the results of the roll call vote on the Republican substitute proposal (it failed 176-258 in the House).

Those poor mistreated Republicans. Here they are being shut out of the process during the Senate HELP committee health care bill markup:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz5AmhI9g7o]"Unique Position"[/ame]

If this law is such a great thing, and everyone will eventually end up loving it, why did they write in such a way that it is not fully implemented until after Obama would be out of office if he wins a second term?

My personal experience is that Congress usually waits forever to get everything going so that all the people who are responsible have time to either retire, or convince everyone that they never actually supported the bad idea in the first place.

How long would you guess it would take 49 states to design and implement health insurance exchanges?

 

[RDD_1210]

The whole damn thing was a scam from the start..................

Who didn't already know that? (well, except for the loser Obamabots.)

You're smarter than this. At least I thought you were.

 

[Flopper]

There is no fixing and not only because there is no severance clause. The case could be made that the severability is implied. But if the Supreme Court strikes down the mandate, Obamacare cannot function in the manner it was intended. The mandate is integral to funding the exchanges and the larger pool of young people purchasing insurance is requisite to spreading the risk and managing cost.

If the mandate is struck down, the case can be made that the ACA was never intended to be enacted without the mandate...ESPECIALLY due to the lack of a severance clause which would allow the high court to void the entire law.

PLUS...with a new speaker, the lack of a mandate will likely trigger a repeal regardless. The unconstitutionality of the mandate will give the moderate Democrats the cover they need to extract themselves from this albatross around their political necks, and place the blame squarely on deposed Speaker Pelosi and Former Senator Reid.

I can hear it now, it's win/win for them..."I so much wanted to reform healthcare, but this flawed law pushed on us by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid is not feasible without the mandate...yada, yada, yada..."

You got a lot ifs and assumption in your argument. But putting aside the ifs and assumptions without the Healthcare bill we would turn the clock by to 2008 which wold mean:
. The 50% discount on brand name drugs for senior would disappear along with closure of the donut hole.
. The extended dependent coverage is gone
. Preexisting conditions are back in
. 40 million people expecting to have healthcare in 2014 would hold Republicans responsible.

Do you live in an alternate universe?

I have one simple question for you, lets see if you can give me a straight answer.

If this law is such a great thing, and everyone will eventually end up loving it, why did they write in such a way that it is not fully implemented until after Obama would be out of office if he wins a second term?

My personal experience is that Congress usually waits forever to get everything going so that all the people who are responsible have time to either retire, or convince everyone that they never actually supported the bad idea in the first place.

I think you know my response. This is a huge change to healthcare and it takes time. Procedures at both federal and state level have to be worked out, insurance companies have to adjust, risk pools have to be setup, and Medicaid has to change in ever state. I suspect that budgetary concerns were the major reason for delaying several parts of the bill. From the list below you see a lot of the changes will be implemented well before 2014.


-Children can not be denied by health insurers for pre-existing conditions (the adults get this perk in 2014)
-Small businesses (less that 50 employees) will be able to receive tax credits covering 50% of the employees premiums in 2014
-Seniors will get a rebate to fill the so-called "donut hole" in Medicare drug coverage in 2010, which severely limits prescription medication coverage expenditures over $2,700. Starting in 2011, those that fall in the donut hole pay 50% less for brand name drugs.
-Children may stay on their parents health insurance until they are 26 starting in Sept 2010
-Annual caps on the amount of insurance of insurance disappears in 2014
-Adults with pre-existing conditions will be put in the "high-risk" pool until insurance companies will be forced to take them on in 2014
-Insurance plans must include preventative care such as check-ups (will affect all plans in 2018)
-Insurance companies can no longer cut people when they become ill. 2010 and 2011.
-Indoor tanning services tax goes into effect in 2010
-enhanced fraud abuse screening procedures in 2014
-Medicare expansion to rural hospitals in 2010
-Chain restaurants will be required to put a Nutrient Content Disclosure next to their items in 2011
-Better coverage for people who retire early
-New website to help americans seek out affordable health insurance options in 2010
-Mandatory Health Insurance and subsidies in 2014
-Encouraging investment in new therapies that will prevent people from getting sick in ?

 

[taichiliberal]

Well everyone is welcome to their own opinion, however that does not make it fact. 59 million people are without health insurance this year. That's an increase of 20 million people over the last 10 years and the Republicans did nothing.

1. They don't have to do anything because it's not the government's responsibility to see to it that you have health insurance. That's your responsibility and only you.

2. To say they did nothing is a lie. They offered up several alternative health care proposals and the Democrats wouldn't allow a vote on them.

3. Republicans don't control Congress and haven't for the past three years.

1. It's the government's job to protect the citizens from unfair business practices...as the insurance companies were found doing.

2. The offered proposals were essentially to let the insurance companies themselves continue along the same vein....only difference was that they would be allowed to monopoloize across state lines. It was an interesting proposal, given that the neocon driven GOP's mantra were always about states rights vs. federal gov't mandates.

3. And where were you during the 2000-2008 administration?

 

[Charles_Main]

The new Obama healthcare legislation has a number of problems. At the top of list is inadequate Medicaid funding. There are also a number of other problems. Republicans and Teabaggers promise if elected they will repeal the law. This is simply not going to happen. It will be amended, probably more than once either by the Democrats or Republicans but not repealed.

If the Republicans gain control of the House, which is definitely a possible, the Senate, which will probably remain under Democratic control, will block any repeal. Even if Republicans control the Senate, Obama would certainly veto any repeal bill.

To override a presidential veto in the House, Republicans would have to pick up 109 seats. The lowest estimates are around 25 seats. The highest I have seen is a hundred. Most estimates are around 35 to 40. Picking up 109 is extremely unlikely. If a miracle occurred and the Republicans picked up sufficient seats in the House to override a presidential veto, they would still need to pick up 26 Senate seats, which would be nearly impossible. Lowest estimates are 4 to 5. 13 is the highest estimate I have seen, certainly no where near the 26 seats needed to override a veto.

The best hope for a Republican repeal is the election of a Republican president along with a Republican congress. If this happened, the Republican president and Congress would be seated in 2013 only months before the bulk of the healthcare bill would go into effect. With the entire healthcare industry and insurance industry geared up for the change, it would be too late to repeal it.
Congress by the numbers, 111th Congress, 2nd Session. From TheCapitol.Net,
Veto override - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Execellent points. We should add though, it is highly unlikely it will pass constitutional muster. The mandate will be thrown out. So a change in the name of the bill would be appropriate.

That's not going to happen either.

Legal experts do not agree. The Majority of Lawyers and legal experts believe the Supreme court would rule 5 to 4 that the mandate is unconstitutional.

 

[taichiliberal]

[As was noted before, repeal is not needed when defunding WILL take place. That's based on 50+ wins in the House and four or five in the Senate for Republicans in November. (that will happen, no doubt about it)

"Obamacare" is dead. It does not matter what the courts say except that they have a small window of a chance to kill it before anyone else. They may take it and they may not but in any case we will see more freedom in the health care market long before any Statist "solutions" stomp away our rights. America is awake now... even if still a bit groggy. For that I have just two words for Obama/Pelosi?Reid... "thank you".

I wish you luck with that pipe dream, but you have a serious lack of voting meat for your chopping block. Fact is you would need 2/3rds to overcome an Obama veto, and that isn't going to happen. The t-Party ripped the GOP a new hole to stick their heads in, as they split the party and the direction of voters. That was a GOP gain.

The GOP has messed with the Spanish voters, from a supreme court nominee, illegals health care, and Arizona's laws to oust them. Sorry, Obama gets the Spanish voters and the black voters.

The GOP went after the College grants and education, so there goes you Asian voters who are already leaning left with the educators of America.

Forget the Union!

Forget the workers of America. They were not on the GOP list when it came to dolling out to Wall street, giving them medical assistance for their families, or keeping them in their homes, or helping them to get by in the Replugs depression. Then Bush thought trashing truck drivers jobs for Mexicans, cutting disability for workers, out sourcing, etc. was a good thing for corporations.

You want to take away womens right to their body, so forget women, including republican women and the college crowd females.


I just don't get this fairytale mythical magic World of Oz these republicans are living in. They will be lucky to still have a seat in congress by 2012.

Putting lipstick on the Contract for America, still make the replugs piggies.

But as long as you have Fox News, Disney, Clear Channel, Murdoch, WND and the plethora of neocon punditry bullhorning the fantasy, the willfully ignorant and easily led will gulp the Kool-Aid and march right off the cliff with a smile on their face.

 

[WillowTree]

Have we figured out who's gonna pay for all this shit yet? 50% of you losers still don't pay any Federal Income tax.

 

[taichiliberal]

Execellent points. We should add though, it is highly unlikely it will pass constitutional muster. The mandate will be thrown out. So a change in the name of the bill would be appropriate.

That's not going to happen either.

Legal experts do not agree. The Majority of Lawyers and legal experts believe the Supreme court would rule 5 to 4 that the mandate is unconstitutional.

Are these the same experts that approved of the SCOTUS decision that allows corporations to be treated as individual citizens, and thereby pour countless millions into dummy political action groups for upcoming campaigns?

Gee, where's all the conservative/new conservative/tea party angst about "activist judges"?

 

[Charles_Main]

That's not going to happen either.

Legal experts do not agree. The Majority of Lawyers and legal experts believe the Supreme court would rule 5 to 4 that the mandate is unconstitutional.

Are these the same experts that approved of the SCOTUS decision that allows corporations to be treated as individual citizens, and thereby pour countless millions into dummy political action groups for upcoming campaigns?

Gee, where's all the conservative/new conservative/tea party angst about "activist judges"?

Just because you do not agree with a decision, does not mean it was not constitutionally sound my friend.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Well everyone is welcome to their own opinion, however that does not make it fact. 59 million people are without health insurance this year. That's an increase of 20 million people over the last 10 years and the Republicans did nothing.

1. They don't have to do anything because it's not the government's responsibility to see to it that you have health insurance. That's your responsibility and only you.

2. To say they did nothing is a lie. They offered up several alternative health care proposals and the Democrats wouldn't allow a vote on them.

3. Republicans don't control Congress and haven't for the past three years.

They weren't "offering up" anything,

Try again

GOP to Obama: We have health plans, too State News The Picayune Item

 

[taichiliberal]

Legal experts do not agree. The Majority of Lawyers and legal experts believe the Supreme court would rule 5 to 4 that the mandate is unconstitutional.

Are these the same experts that approved of the SCOTUS decision that allows corporations to be treated as individual citizens, and thereby pour countless millions into dummy political action groups for upcoming campaigns?

Gee, where's all the conservative/new conservative/tea party angst about "activist judges"?

Just because you do not agree with a decision, does not mean it was not constitutionally sound my friend.

Nice try at side stepping my points....a typical neocon ploy when faced with their own hypocrisy or self created contradictions (not that YOU are a neocon)