Under-rated fact: Obamacare is brilliant

Page 2 of 4 [ 64 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

06 Jul 2012, 7:23 pm

simon_says wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

simon_says wrote:

He'd need 60 votes to repeal it. For Republicans, that's as rare as can be.

Reconciliation takes only 51 votes but you can't use reconciliation if it increases the deficit (Byrd rule). Eliminating the mandate would remove the financing mechanism. And the CBO says eliminating PPACA entirely would increase the deficit. But they couldnt use reconciliation on the whole thing anyway.

Don't confuse political rhetoric with things that will actually happen.

This is not true, they absolutely can use reconciliation. CBO projection mean very little, they are merely an estimate on the information given to them and nothing else. That's how Obamacare was able to come out 'budget neutral' to begin with. The Senate parliamentarian is the one who determines what can be used in the reconciliation process but the parliamentarian can be replaced by the Senate Majority Leader or just overruled by the Vice President as the President of the Senate. All that is really needed to repeal is a simple majority in both houses and the presidents signature. Senate rules can be bended as we all saw with the passing of this bill.

The only thing could really stop this from happening would be public opinion turning and the GOP/Romney chickening out. There is precedent for these procedures but they haven't been used very often because of the political fallout. However, if Romney wins the presidency and the GOP takes over the senate then the writing is pretty much on the wall. I imagine you'd see Democrats abandoning ship on this legislation very quickly if it sunk a presidency and supermajorities in both houses.

That's certainly your opinion.

From everything Ive read, including from rw sources, to make reconciliation work they'd need to target specific budget related provisions (not the whole PPACA) and offset the lost revenue with spending cuts or tax increases. With 51 votes and the Presidencey that might work for portions of the law but it has to be deficit neutral per the byrd rule.

And in the end they'd just be creating some kind of unfunded frankenstein law. The kind that was feared if the SC dismantled portions of the law. To fix the mess after they created it would require a proper bill and Democratic votes to get to 60. That would be an interesting meeting. I would bet on a fillibuster and letting the GOP own the resulting mess.

If you think it's easy, you are kidding yourself.

The parliamentarian could rule against reconciliation but the Senate Majority leader can replace the parliamentarian and the VP as President of the Senate has the power to overrule the parliamentarian if they so choose. Senate rules can be bended as I said.

The CBO score can be manipulated as well, they just need to provide the CBO with different assumptions about the law and it would be projected differently. They could also put in a bigger bill with other cuts as you said. That's just a dog and pony show tho really, they can do what they want. The Democrats could of done the same thing and passed a public option if they so choose to but they didn't want to spend that political capital.

Even if they had to only target certain provisions of the law, the only one that really matters is the individual mandate. If they repeal the individual mandate, democrats know that the whole law would need to be repealed. That's why they argued to the Supreme Court that if they did throw out the mandate that the whole law needed to be thrown out. Democrats wouldn't not filibuster a repeal of the rest of the law if the mandate was struck down, likely you'd see it repealed with near unanimous support. I wouldn't be surprised if a few dems voted for repeal if Obama loses in November, they're not going to stick their neck out for a former President.

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

06 Jul 2012, 7:44 pm

Quote:

"Obamacare Killing Affordable Student Insurance"

Caps are being phased out altogether by 2014. And students will have several new options. Staying on their parents insurance until 26, accepting medicaid, or an exchange policy if they can bring down $15k a year while studying. That's a classic right wing scare story that doesnt really want to inform people.

More people will be covered, not less. But that doesnt guarantee that their coverage won't change.

Quote:

The CBO has already revised their cost estimates for what Obamacare will cost. Originally they thought 900 billion. Now they are saying Obamacare will cost us 1.8 trillion dollars the first 10 years. My guess is even that estimate is wrong. With the way Washington works times that by 2 or 3 and that is what likely costs will be

This is a distortion based on the perception of a larger number.

It appears to have increased because the 10 year estimate window now includes more years of spending. The first estimate included 2010 and 2011, which saw little PPACA spending by design. The full report shows a difference of 50 billion over previous estimates, not 800. The CBO has still estimated that it will save trillions over time. Of course RWers hate the CBO for that But now they've got something to distort and will forgive CBO for a week or two so they can run with it. Character first, eh?

Quote:

Even if they had to only target certain provisions of the law, the only one that really matters is the individual mandate. If they repeal the individual mandate, democrats know that the whole law would need to be repealed. That's why they argued to the Supreme Court that if they did throw out the mandate that the whole law needed to be thrown out. Democrats wouldn't not filibuster a repeal of the rest of the law if the mandate was struck down, likely you'd see it repealed with near unanimous support. I wouldn't be surprised if a few dems voted for repeal if Obama loses in November, they're not going to stick their neck out for a former President.

The difference between a ruling of unconstitionality and straight up GOP monkey games isnt small. I don't think you'd find Democrats cooperative. The SC ruling legitimized their efforts and recent polls shows that the public wants to move on.

Last edited by simon_says on 06 Jul 2012, 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

06 Jul 2012, 7:49 pm

Students do not qualify for Medicaid, for the most part, unless they are under 18 and their parents are poor. The states are already balking about expanding Medicaid to cover more people. No one wants to pay for anything.

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

06 Jul 2012, 7:53 pm

Anyone under 65 who makes below 133% of poverty can get it after the expansion, if their state accept the funding. Most will. It's 100% federal for the first few years, then 90%. That is an incredible deal. States like money. You'll see.

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 Jul 2012, 7:56 pm

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

Lord_Gareth
Velociraptor

Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 440

06 Jul 2012, 7:58 pm

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

If you can prove it before the Supreme Court, you're right. In the meantime, the entity empowered by the Constitution to determine what is and is not Constitutional has ruled that it is, after rather persuasive arguments from lawyers who spent their entire careers studying the Constitution on both sides. Excuse me if I hold your opinion on the matter rather in contempt compared to theirs - on both sides of the issue, mind.

_________________
Et in Arcadia ego. - "Even in Arcadia, there am I."

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 Jul 2012, 7:59 pm

Lord_Gareth wrote:

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

Fair enough but I will not denie that I am right-wing on the constitution.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 Jul 2012, 8:03 pm

Lord_Gareth wrote:

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

Justice Marshall usurped the power to judge an act of congress unconstitutional in Marbury vs Madison. No subsequent court has invalidated what Marshall did (I wonder why?). The Constitution gives the Supreme Court in its appelate jurisdiction the power to decide fact and law in specific cases. No power to judge a law unconstitutional was ever granted to the Supreme Court in the Constitution.

ruveyn

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

06 Jul 2012, 8:04 pm

HSAs are worthless for anybody with insufficient income to save any money in them in the first place. the people pushing HSAs therefore are deliberately ignoring this majority working-class element of the uninsured.

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

06 Jul 2012, 8:12 pm

I have an HSA. They are tied to high deductible plans. They have their advantages but yeah, I agree that given the costs of medical care they would be blown to pieces very quickly with a serious problem. It may work in Singapore because they have a different cost structure. Changing our cost structures to that degree would not be trivial.

And talking about it as a vague alternative is a day late and a dollar short at this point.

Lord_Gareth
Velociraptor

Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 440

06 Jul 2012, 8:16 pm

ruveyn wrote:

Lord_Gareth wrote:

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

Eh, if someone wanted to make a deal about it, "fixing the problem," is naught but an amendment away, and once such a thing is written into the Constitution the Court's hands are pretty much tied. This option has always been open if Congress felt all that restricted. Evidently it's not that big a deal.

_________________
Et in Arcadia ego. - "Even in Arcadia, there am I."

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 Jul 2012, 8:40 pm

Lord_Gareth wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Lord_Gareth wrote:

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

Yes it is a big deal our country founding fathers wrote the united states constituion for a reason. It is the law of the land by not going by what they wrote it is. Unconstitutional if it is not in the United States Constitiuion then we are not to allow such things being passed.

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

06 Jul 2012, 8:56 pm

Lord_Gareth wrote:

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

That's not actually true, judicial review is not mentioned in the constitution and was not established until 1803.

edit: bleh, shouldn't of waited until after dinner to post that. Ruveyn beat me.

Last edited by Jacoby on 06 Jul 2012, 8:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 Jul 2012, 8:57 pm

Jacoby wrote:

Lord_Gareth wrote:

Joker wrote:

So it must be me that cares. That Obamacare is Unconstitutional.

That's not actually true, judicial review is not mentioned in the constitution and was not established in 1804.

Yep which means the Supreme Court is wrong.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

06 Jul 2012, 9:32 pm

simon_says wrote:

I heard 15 states are already balking at expanding their Medicaid programs and are planning not to do it. States will not get as much money as you think. The Federal government has this marvelous habit of creating these plans involving tax dollars then either not funding them or cutting the funding after a couple of years to barely nothing leaving the states with the funding burden. This is why these states do not trust the Federal Government.

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 Jul 2012, 9:55 pm

Plus where in the Constitiuion does it say. We are forced to buy Health Insurance?

Page 2 of 4 [ 64 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

Under-rated fact: Obamacare is brilliant Post Reply New Topic

Under-rated fact: Obamacare is brilliant