Will dems bring back Obamacare penalty?

Viktor

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
2,144
Reaction score
2,152
Points
1,930
Location
Southern California
You can’t have mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions without requiring that everyone be insured
Horsedung. I had 2 private plans in the 1980s-90s and both covered pre existing conditions.
at what cost?
I don't know. My employer paid the premiums. Listen, jackass. Most private plans will cover pre existing conditions. What they do is install a waiting period for collecting benefits. That means you can't get medical care for them for 30, 60 or 90 days after you begin the plan. You obviously know nothing about private industry.
(sigh) Individual Plans NEVER covered PE's. Group plans did but it varied by company, some took them right away others wee able to put temp waivers that varied from 6 months to 2 years.
Wrong. I had an individual plan with Kaiser Permanente and it covered my high blood pressure, my allergies, and bowel problems. It was not a group plan because I paid the premiums myself. There was no waiting period.
 

JustAGuy1

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2019
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
4,712
Points
1,940
You can’t have mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions without requiring that everyone be insured
Horsedung. I had 2 private plans in the 1980s-90s and both covered pre existing conditions.
at what cost?
I don't know. My employer paid the premiums. Listen, jackass. Most private plans will cover pre existing conditions. What they do is install a waiting period for collecting benefits. That means you can't get medical care for them for 30, 60 or 90 days after you begin the plan. You obviously know nothing about private industry.
(sigh) Individual Plans NEVER covered PE's. Group plans did but it varied by company, some took them right away others wee able to put temp waivers that varied from 6 months to 2 years.
Wrong. I had an individual plan with Kaiser Permanente and it covered my high blood pressure, my allergies, and bowel problems. It was not a group plan because I paid the premiums myself. There was no waiting period.
LOL. Wrong. If you had Cancer they wouldn't have taken you. None of what you listed would be a declined condition.
 

JustAGuy1

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2019
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
4,712
Points
1,940
By the way I am in Insurance and I do it everyday. You won't win this. Kaiser was SO good that I was forced to tell my mom that her Cancer was inoperable. Her Dr told me and never came back.
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
5,607
Points
280
Location
Washington
I was happy the reps got rid of the penalty for not being able to afford Obamacare. I think the dems will bring it back. That is their solution for USA healthcare.

Someday a job may offer to pay your penalty as your healthcare bonus. The actual insurance will be unaffordable and few will offer it as healthcare costs will only keep skyrocketing.

As was said on TV by one dem senator. We can't afford Medicare for some let alone Medicare for all.

I guess the dems are trying to let their supporters down easy. The poor idiots thought they would get everything for free. All they will get is a return of the Obamacare penalty.

If you want socialized healthcare it must be in addition to fee for service healthcare. You need both. The rich people don't want socialized and the poor can't afford the rich version.

But you will never get it. The greedy healthcare system does not want one penny taken from them.

View attachment 414380
They cannot bring it back. The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional
Of course they can bring it back if congress passes a law requiring it.
The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional. You are ignorant.

Here is the definition Illegal means that a given activity by a person, group, or organization violates a law. Unconstitutional means that a law violates conditions laid down in the constitution, and therefore is not a law and is not enforceable... as applied by the independent judiciary, all the way up to the supreme court.
Actually I think a Federal Judge in Texas declared it illegal thus the reason it's in the SCOTUS. Scotus said it was a tax a few years back and kept it in at that time.
I'm not sure if they'll specifically try to reinstate the mandate, but there's no doubt Democrats will push for more state control of healthcare. It's what they do. They're going after social media next.
Part of Trump's tax bill removed the mandate penalty in 2017 . A Texas Judge in 2018 ruled the ACA could not stand the without the mandate penalty. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether the the Texas judge is right. They have already ruled that the mandate is constitutional so it seems unlikely they will reverse that ruling. It also seems unlikely they would restore the mandate penalty that congress removed as that is the responsibility of congress.

In the event, the ACA is overturn, the Court would specify a date for congress to make changes or replace the law.
 

JustAGuy1

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2019
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
4,712
Points
1,940
I was happy the reps got rid of the penalty for not being able to afford Obamacare. I think the dems will bring it back. That is their solution for USA healthcare.

Someday a job may offer to pay your penalty as your healthcare bonus. The actual insurance will be unaffordable and few will offer it as healthcare costs will only keep skyrocketing.

As was said on TV by one dem senator. We can't afford Medicare for some let alone Medicare for all.

I guess the dems are trying to let their supporters down easy. The poor idiots thought they would get everything for free. All they will get is a return of the Obamacare penalty.

If you want socialized healthcare it must be in addition to fee for service healthcare. You need both. The rich people don't want socialized and the poor can't afford the rich version.

But you will never get it. The greedy healthcare system does not want one penny taken from them.

View attachment 414380
They cannot bring it back. The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional
Of course they can bring it back if congress passes a law requiring it.
The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional. You are ignorant.

Here is the definition Illegal means that a given activity by a person, group, or organization violates a law. Unconstitutional means that a law violates conditions laid down in the constitution, and therefore is not a law and is not enforceable... as applied by the independent judiciary, all the way up to the supreme court.
Actually I think a Federal Judge in Texas declared it illegal thus the reason it's in the SCOTUS. Scotus said it was a tax a few years back and kept it in at that time.
I'm not sure if they'll specifically try to reinstate the mandate, but there's no doubt Democrats will push for more state control of healthcare. It's what they do. They're going after social media next.
Part of Trump's tax bill removed the mandate penalty in 2017 . A Texas Judge in 2018 ruled the ACA could not stand the without the mandate penalty. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether the the Texas judge is right. They have already ruled that the mandate is constitutional so it seems unlikely they will reverse that ruling. It also seems unlikely they would restore the mandate penalty that congress removed as that is the responsibility of congress.

In the event, the ACA is overturn, the Court would specify a date for congress to make changes or replace the law.
Losing the mandate didn't hurt aything, our enrollments are hrough the roof.
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
5,607
Points
280
Location
Washington
You can’t have mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions without requiring that everyone be insured
Horsedung. I had 2 private plans in the 1980s-90s and both covered pre existing conditions.
at what cost?
I don't know. My employer paid the premiums. Listen, jackass. Most private plans will cover pre existing conditions. What they do is install a waiting period for collecting benefits. That means you can't get medical care for them for 30, 60 or 90 days after you begin the plan. You obviously know nothing about private industry.
Without the ACA, most group plans will cover you. However, the question would be whether your employer would want to hire you.

Without the ACA, individual plans would turn you down for most anything that might put you in the hospital. I remember applying for a plan in 1998 before Obamacare. I completed a 23 page medical questionnaire and was turned down because I had asthma and chronic bronchitis, neither of which required ongoing treatments. My options were to either go into a high risk pool, where the state assigned you a policy or go without insurance. After a 6 month wait, I was given one choice of a policy with limited coverage with a premium higher than most Obamacare plans, with a high deductible and a 20% copay up to $100,000. So I did without insurance for a few years till I got Medicare coverage.

Believe me this is something few people would want today.
 

debbiedowner

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
9,871
Reaction score
1,795
Points
275
I was happy the reps got rid of the penalty for not being able to afford Obamacare. I think the dems will bring it back. That is their solution for USA healthcare.

Someday a job may offer to pay your penalty as your healthcare bonus. The actual insurance will be unaffordable and few will offer it as healthcare costs will only keep skyrocketing.

As was said on TV by one dem senator. We can't afford Medicare for some let alone Medicare for all.

I guess the dems are trying to let their supporters down easy. The poor idiots thought they would get everything for free. All they will get is a return of the Obamacare penalty.

If you want socialized healthcare it must be in addition to fee for service healthcare. You need both. The rich people don't want socialized and the poor can't afford the rich version.

But you will never get it. The greedy healthcare system does not want one penny taken from them.

View attachment 414380
They cannot bring it back. The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional
Of course they can bring it back if congress passes a law requiring it.
The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional. You are ignorant.

Here is the definition Illegal means that a given activity by a person, group, or organization violates a law. Unconstitutional means that a law violates conditions laid down in the constitution, and therefore is not a law and is not enforceable... as applied by the independent judiciary, all the way up to the supreme court.
Actually I think a Federal Judge in Texas declared it illegal thus the reason it's in the SCOTUS. Scotus said it was a tax a few years back and kept it in at that time.
I'm not sure if they'll specifically try to reinstate the mandate, but there's no doubt Democrats will push for more state control of healthcare. It's what they do. They're going after social media next.
Part of Trump's tax bill removed the mandate penalty in 2017 . A Texas Judge in 2018 ruled the ACA could not stand the without the mandate penalty. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether the the Texas judge is right. They have already ruled that the mandate is constitutional so it seems unlikely they will reverse that ruling. It also seems unlikely they would restore the mandate penalty that congress removed as that is the responsibility of congress.

In the event, the ACA is overturn, the Court would specify a date for congress to make changes or replace the law.
Losing the mandate didn't hurt aything, our enrollments are hrough the roof.
No, it didn't do much if anything last year was great and this year is going to be.
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
5,607
Points
280
Location
Washington
I was happy the reps got rid of the penalty for not being able to afford Obamacare. I think the dems will bring it back. That is their solution for USA healthcare.

Someday a job may offer to pay your penalty as your healthcare bonus. The actual insurance will be unaffordable and few will offer it as healthcare costs will only keep skyrocketing.

As was said on TV by one dem senator. We can't afford Medicare for some let alone Medicare for all.

I guess the dems are trying to let their supporters down easy. The poor idiots thought they would get everything for free. All they will get is a return of the Obamacare penalty.

If you want socialized healthcare it must be in addition to fee for service healthcare. You need both. The rich people don't want socialized and the poor can't afford the rich version.

But you will never get it. The greedy healthcare system does not want one penny taken from them.

View attachment 414380
They cannot bring it back. The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional
Of course they can bring it back if congress passes a law requiring it.
The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional. You are ignorant.

Here is the definition Illegal means that a given activity by a person, group, or organization violates a law. Unconstitutional means that a law violates conditions laid down in the constitution, and therefore is not a law and is not enforceable... as applied by the independent judiciary, all the way up to the supreme court.
Actually I think a Federal Judge in Texas declared it illegal thus the reason it's in the SCOTUS. Scotus said it was a tax a few years back and kept it in at that time.
I'm not sure if they'll specifically try to reinstate the mandate, but there's no doubt Democrats will push for more state control of healthcare. It's what they do. They're going after social media next.
Part of Trump's tax bill removed the mandate penalty in 2017 . A Texas Judge in 2018 ruled the ACA could not stand the without the mandate penalty. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether the the Texas judge is right. They have already ruled that the mandate is constitutional so it seems unlikely they will reverse that ruling. It also seems unlikely they would restore the mandate penalty that congress removed as that is the responsibility of congress.

In the event, the ACA is overturn, the Court would specify a date for congress to make changes or replace the law.
Losing the mandate didn't hurt aything, our enrollments are hrough the roof.
I never expected it would. The number of people that carried insurance because the government required it was exaggerated. However, many people seem to think that if you don't carry insurance and you get very sick, then you just sign for insurance anytime and all is well. The fact is health insurance companies have open enrollment periods that allows people without insurance to sign up. For Obamacare it's in November. For private insurance it varies and it may not happen every year. What this means is if you decide not to carry health insurance, and your doctor diagnoses a serious disease such as cancer that needs immediate attention, you may have to wait as long as a year before you get coverage. A year paying all your medical bills for a serious illness is not affordable for most people. When I had cancer, my total medical bills for the 1st year was about $100,000. Today it would be a lot higher.
 
Last edited:

JustAGuy1

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2019
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
4,712
Points
1,940
I was happy the reps got rid of the penalty for not being able to afford Obamacare. I think the dems will bring it back. That is their solution for USA healthcare.

Someday a job may offer to pay your penalty as your healthcare bonus. The actual insurance will be unaffordable and few will offer it as healthcare costs will only keep skyrocketing.

As was said on TV by one dem senator. We can't afford Medicare for some let alone Medicare for all.

I guess the dems are trying to let their supporters down easy. The poor idiots thought they would get everything for free. All they will get is a return of the Obamacare penalty.

If you want socialized healthcare it must be in addition to fee for service healthcare. You need both. The rich people don't want socialized and the poor can't afford the rich version.

But you will never get it. The greedy healthcare system does not want one penny taken from them.

View attachment 414380
They cannot bring it back. The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional
Of course they can bring it back if congress passes a law requiring it.
The Supreme Ct declared it unconstitutional. You are ignorant.

Here is the definition Illegal means that a given activity by a person, group, or organization violates a law. Unconstitutional means that a law violates conditions laid down in the constitution, and therefore is not a law and is not enforceable... as applied by the independent judiciary, all the way up to the supreme court.
Actually I think a Federal Judge in Texas declared it illegal thus the reason it's in the SCOTUS. Scotus said it was a tax a few years back and kept it in at that time.
I'm not sure if they'll specifically try to reinstate the mandate, but there's no doubt Democrats will push for more state control of healthcare. It's what they do. They're going after social media next.
Part of Trump's tax bill removed the mandate penalty in 2017 . A Texas Judge in 2018 ruled the ACA could not stand the without the mandate penalty. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether the the Texas judge is right. They have already ruled that the mandate is constitutional so it seems unlikely they will reverse that ruling. It also seems unlikely they would restore the mandate penalty that congress removed as that is the responsibility of congress.

In the event, the ACA is overturn, the Court would specify a date for congress to make changes or replace the law.
Losing the mandate didn't hurt aything, our enrollments are hrough the roof.
I never expected it would. The number of people that carried insurance because the government required it was exaggerated. However, many people seem to think that if you don't carry insurance and you get very sick, then you just sign for insurance anytime and all is well. The fact is health insurance companies have open enrollment periods that allows people without insurance to sign up. For Obamacare it's in November. For private insurance it varies and it may not happen every year. What this means is if you decide not to carry health insurance, and your doctor diagnoses a serious disease such as cancer that needs immediate attention, you may have to wait as long as a year before you get coverage. A year paying all your medical bills for a serious illness is not affordable for most people. When I had cancer, my total medical bills for the 1st year was about $100,000. Today it would be a lot higher.
We're in the middle of it, Nov 1 to Dec 15th. A few years back I went into anaphylactic shock, 168,000. It's insane :(
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,231
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
I was happy the reps got rid of the penalty for not being able to afford Obamacare. I think the dems will bring it back. That is their solution for USA healthcare.

Someday a job may offer to pay your penalty as your healthcare bonus. The actual insurance will be unaffordable and few will offer it as healthcare costs will only keep skyrocketing.

As was said on TV by one dem senator. We can't afford Medicare for some let alone Medicare for all.

I guess the dems are trying to let their supporters down easy. The poor idiots thought they would get everything for free. All they will get is a return of the Obamacare penalty.

If you want socialized healthcare it must be in addition to fee for service healthcare. You need both. The rich people don't want socialized and the poor can't afford the rich version.

But you will never get it. The greedy healthcare system does not want one penny taken from them.

View attachment 414380
They can't as it was ruled illegal
 

Polishprince

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
27,186
Reaction score
13,132
Points
1,100
You can’t have mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions without requiring that everyone be insured

Why not? Those are two separate issues entirely.

Further, it would be a real advantage for citizens to be able to skip having medical insurance when they are in good health, and only have to pony up for premiums when they need medical care.

Imagine the convenience of being able to sign up for a 5 Star medical plan when you are in the ambulance being transported because you were shot in the back or had a heart attack?
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
5,607
Points
280
Location
Washington
You can’t have mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions without requiring that everyone be insured

Why not? Those are two separate issues entirely.

Further, it would be a real advantage for citizens to be able to skip having medical insurance when they are in good health, and only have to pony up for premiums when they need medical care.

Imagine the convenience of being able to sign up for a 5 Star medical plan when you are in the ambulance being transported because you were shot in the back or had a heart attack?
Imagine what it will cost insurance companies who will pass those cost on to their customers.

There is a problem with doing that. It can drive you to the poor house and end up killing you. If you don't carry health insurance and develop a serious medical problem, you will have to wait till the first of November and the insurance will not take effect till January 1. You face the same problem trying to buy insurance directly from the company or through your employer. You will have to wait for an open enrollment and many companies don't offer open enrollment every year. So if you get a cancer diagnosis or any other serious disease or accident, you may have to wait a year before you get any coverage and that is a long time to put off life saving treatments. People that do this sort of thing will often build up a lot of medical bills before they find insurance and when they do it's usually not what they want. And if you try to change to another plan during the year you start with a new deductible.
Speaking from personal experience, it's not a good time to go shopping for health insurance when you're facing a lot of very serious medical treatments.
 
Last edited:

The Irish Ram

LITTLE GIRL / Ram Tough
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
17,510
Reaction score
5,502
Points
350
Location
diagonally parked in a parallel universe
There is nothing affordable about the Affordable Care Act. If you have an affordable plan, would you reveal it here, because my daughter has been looking and can't find anything close to affordable, and she makes good money.

Did you know that the UN told Trump that repealing the ACA would violate international law?
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
217,387
Reaction score
43,608
Points
2,190
Did you know that the UN told Trump that repealing the ACA would violate international law?
Really?

Which “International law“ would that be?
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
5,607
Points
280
Location
Washington
There is nothing affordable about the Affordable Care Act. If you have an affordable plan, would you reveal it here, because my daughter has been looking and can't find anything close to affordable, and she makes good money.

Did you know that the UN told Trump that repealing the ACA would violate international law?
You say she makes good money which means she will not find low cost (affordable) individual healthcare. The ACA makes healthcare coverage affordable for the most needy. The purpose was to also make it affordable for the middle class. That didn't happen. The more money you make, the less affordable the plan. Democrats have been trying to modify the law for many years to make it more affordable but Senate republicans have blocked it. Instead, they focused on repealing the ACA and replacing it with nothing which would be a disaster.
 

22lcidw

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
5,337
Points
345
The cost of purchasing healthcare insurance or single payer or anything else does nothing to stop the increases of getting the care. So that means care will be legislated at some point. And individuals will have to wait for their appointments and operations. The easy stuff is the simple stuff and that will be heralded greatly by the promoters of government healthcare.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
65,682
Reaction score
16,453
Points
2,220
Listened to a good discussion about this on NPR yesterday. Apparently the effect of repealing the individual mandate and fine was...well...nothing.
So no, I don't expect Democrats to bring it back. No reason to. The SC looks like they are going to let the law stand.
I wondered about that. So nobody died. Someone tell Nancy.
 

task0778

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
6,544
Reaction score
3,829
Points
1,065
Location
Texas hill country
As a symbolic gesture I guess the Dems could try to bring back the penalty in some new way that isn't a tax, assuming they have the votes in the Senate to do so. Can't imagine how they would do that and avoid being ruled unconstitutional. In 2017, Congress made the penalty for not carrying health insurance zero dollars. Because the mandate was upheld in 2012 only under Congress's taxing power, the new penalty-less mandate—which raises no revenue—can't be a tax. Can the 2021 Congress reinstate the penalty (tax) and claim that it's not a tax and is now constitutional? Would that be allowed to pass muster in the SCOTUS? That's how they allowed the ACA to be enforceable in 2012, they said the penalty was a tax.

Well, to do that (reinstate the penalty) the Dems would have to win both Senate runoff races in Georgia, and then they'd have to abolish the filibuster so they could pass whatever they want with a simple majority vote, which Manchin and others have said they won't support. Or could they then make up their own one-time good-deal rule just for this once? I dunno. I'm sure they'll try though.
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
5,607
Points
280
Location
Washington
The cost of purchasing healthcare insurance or single payer or anything else does nothing to stop the increases of getting the care. So that means care will be legislated at some point. And individuals will have to wait for their appointments and operations. The easy stuff is the simple stuff and that will be heralded greatly by the promoters of government healthcare.
If you look at healthcare cost growth vs GDP growth, the two are coming closer and closer together:
1970's GDP = 9.3% Healthcare Spending= 12.1%
1980's GDP = 6.6% Healthcare Spending= 9.9%
1990's GDP = 4.5% Healthcare Spending= 5.5%
2000's GDP = 2.5% Healthcare Spending= 5.6%
2010-2018 GDP = 3.3% Healthcare Spending= 3.6%
The major factors in the increase in healthcare spending has been increasing fees and increase usage in about equal proportions. Americans are using more healthcare services and the cost of those services has been rising however the rate of increase relative to GDP is decreasing.


The idea that utilization of healthcare is solely dependent on cost is not true. People do not go to the doctor because the fees are lower. They go to the doctor because they have a healthcare problem. With Single payer we may well expect more people unitizing healthcare which is good thing. The idea that lower costs of healthcare services will create a shortage and thus rationing is not necessarily true. Today, with the exception of emergency services, people generally have to wait days or weeks depending on the service. In some specialties that can be months.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top