Published: Wednesday, Oct. 9 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Except that he as the executive branch is the one who choses how to enforce
things. You can't force him to enforce it. Just like he can't force
Congress to fund it.
Except republicans don't want that to happen... "they might like green
eggs and ham" and they will see how all the lies and misinformation being
passed around are just that.
Sure, because the GOP has offered a offered a detailed, workable, superior
alternative to our existing healthcare financing system... haven't they?I mean, it's not like the Affordable Care Act is based on
"Romneycare" in Massachusetts or was originally the brainchild in the
1990's of the conservative Heritage Foundation.Oh... right.Dang you, reality! You always mess everything up for conservatives!
I kinda agree. Republicans should change tactics and enforce EVERY LINE of the
2000 page law to the hilt (including removing the delay Obama requested for big
businesses). Enforce every part of it until people are so miserable with it
that they see what Republicans were talking about and DEMAND that it be
changed.The obvious risk with that approach is... You can never
take what people perceive as their government benefits away from them
(that's 100% political suicide). So realize there's no going back.
But you can make changes to it. But every change has to be carefully presented
as not touching anybody's government benefits (or Democrats will stop it,
and use it in their campaign to get all Republicans removed from Washington).The other risk is that the misery index skyrocketing (which is pretty
much inevitable even staunch Democrat's expect it)... so will push people
to want change... but they are so afraid of losing their healthcare (and you
can't go back)... so the only alternative is Socialized Medicine. Oh
wait... that's just what Democrats what!
Blue wants a "detailed, workable, superior alternative" to Obamacare
from the GOP.How about we "Don't try to take over all
health insurance for the whole country!", as a solution?We
don't need to create another huge government program that disrupts the
lives of nearly every American and a wasteful bureacracy to go with it, just to
solve a problem that only affects a small minority.Help those who
can't afford health insurance and have huge medical bills directly without
making it hard to hire new workers or forcing everyone in the country to buy
stuff they don't want.Instead with Obamacare we get yet another
"redistribute the wealth" program that liberals love so much.
What's next, force everyone to live in a 4 bedroom house in a neighborhood
they don't want to live in, just to solve the homeless problem?
Joe, doubling-down on the status quo is not a viable alternative.BTW, how is possible to conclude that enrolling Americans in _private_
insurance plans constitutes taking over "all health insurance for the whole
country!" ??Don't get me wrong - given my druthers
we'd adopt a national single-payer system and be done with private health
insurance companies once and for all. But that's just me. Where
was the conservative outrage over this plan when it was "Romneycare" in
Massachusetts or when it came out of the Heritage Foundation in the 1990's?
Uh...yeah...except that enforcing ACA as written was the House's final bill
put on Senator Reid's desk prior to the shutdown. Already been tried and
rejected by Senator Reid and the POTUS.
We call that malicious compliance. Seldom works because there is always some
new or repeatable excuse for something not working. What we really need are
adults elected into government.
BLue, I wasn't outraged over "Romneycare" because I don't live
in Massachusetts and it didn't affect me. That was a state program that had
NOTHING to do with Obamacare. I have to laugh every time the left tries to
suggest that Obamacare was somehow the brainchild of Romney, the GOP, the Tea
Party or any other conservative group.I know that you would love a
single-payer (i.e. total government control) health care system and that many
like you on the left think that Obamacare was a big compromise because it still
includes private insurance companies. But let's be clear, Obamacare is not
a free-market solution. It FORCES everyone to participate and dictates what
kinds of policies you must have. It regulates the whole industry to death all
the way from the worker who pays in to the doctors who provide the actual
service.I guess the government has to actually own the hospitals and
force all the doctors to be government employees before it constitutes
"taking over" for you.
Blue,You don't think very far ahead do you? If we did as you want
and, "did away with private health insurance companies once and for
all"... do you know what the consequences would be?How many
Americans work for Insurance companies today? Close them and you have hundreds
of thousands of unemployed Americans. Do you think Obama wanted credit for
THAT... right before a mid-term election?Do you really want them
closed and applying for unemployment? Back in 2011 Obama didn't (because
he was trying to get re-elected and no President has won re-election with over
8% unemployment and we were right around 8% at the time). So do you see why
Obama couldn't do what the radical-left wanted?Like Obama
said... it will take about a decade. Then people will be so miserable and self
centered that they don't care if unemployment goes over 15%... and you will
get what you REALLY want.It will work. It's inevitable.
Socialism looks so good to so many until government grows so large it collapses
on itself and you have to go back to the "Participation Society" like
they are now in Norway.
Mr. Brown, A tempting proposition. Reinstate the employer mandate.
Do away with every exemption. It is truly what democrats deserve. But the problem is that this program will sink the whole country, and we are
all in that ship together. People like Lee are trying to keep us ALL afloat. I
guess we conservatives are just kind that way. We look out for everyone, not
just our own selves and our big business buddies.
Re: "doubling-down on the status quo is not a viable alternative."Sure it is. It's working now. It has been working for years.
It's only disingenuous liberal bleating about health care that insists we
have something other than the best health care delivery system in the world.
The Misery Index is a real thing. It played a pivotal role when government
entitlements were out of control, taxes inflation and the price of living were
skyrocketing, and America was so weak we had to give up the Panama Canal and
nobody respected our military so we couldn't even get our embassy employees
back from Iran.It's a real thing. It can swing elections. I
think Republicans need to get off the pot and let ACA become fully implemented
in time for the affects of it to be known and fully accounted for in the
misery-index by the next election. The longer they hold out, the less chance
there is people will even know what the full impact of the ACA is on them before
then.Obama was able to delay implementation of most of ObamaCare
till he doesn't have to face the electorate again. Now Republicans are
playing into the NEXT Democrat candidate's hands by delaying it so nobody
knows, and we have to "wait and see", and Democrats will have a good
case that Republicans are taking away your healthcare... which makes people vote
The delayed implementation of the employer mandate was requested by the business
community, and is a very minor part of the ACA. The individual mandate, though,
had to be coordinated with the roll out of the exchanges. Come on, folks, the
implementation of almost any legislation requires a certain flexibility.
Another talking point worried to death by GOP attack dogs.
Move along, folks, nothing constructive here.
Joe: " I have to laugh every time the left tries to suggest that Obamacare
was somehow the brainchild of Romney, the GOP, the Tea Party or any other
conservative group."Laugh all you want, but the indisputable
fact is that the core elements of the ACA, especially the individual mandate,
originated with the Heritage Foundation.procuradorfiscal:Re:
"doubling-down on the status quo is not a viable alternative.""Sure it is. It's working now. It has been working for years."The facts say otherwise. Tens of millions of Americans either can't
afford or can't buy health insurance due to pre-existing condition, and the
number growing rapidly. Medical costs are the #1 cause of personal bankruptcies.
The claim that the status quo is serving us well is completely disconnected
Re: "The facts say otherwise."Actually, they don't.No American is today refused medical care. Most have insurance or
qualify for one or another government/subsidized plan.The rest
receive care in emergency rooms. Their care is paid by increasing costs to
covered patients.No one is turned away. That's reality.Under Obamacare, illegal aliens and 30 million Americans remain
uncovered. They'll continue to receive treatment as they do now, and
it'll be paid, as it is now.Obamacare changes nothing for 40+
million.But for the rest of us? Well first off, our premiums will
immediately increase by 40 to 60%, and they'll keep going up, since
Obamacare does nothing to control costs.Secondly, millions lose
coverage they now have, as it becomes too expensive for them or their employers.
They'll revert to treatment in emergency rooms, driving costs and premiums
even higher, forcing more and more of us out of coverage.Finally,
Obamacare collapses the system, as it was designed to do, giving liberals new
crises to exploit, politically.Obama wins. But we lose.
Re:procuradorfiscalIf you walk into many Drs. Offices or call to
make an appt. and you have no insurance, they will require you to pay up front.
And what about prescriptions? If you have no insurance you will pay full price.
Deseret News Sept 2013:"More than 370,000 Utahns are
uninsured, and about 123,000 would be eligible for state and federally funded
Medicaid programs under a full expansion of the program, which is an option
under the Affordable Care Act."What is going to happen to those
123,000 if Gov Herbert doesn't expand Medicaid? Bart Combe
doesn't look sick. He hardly even looks his age.But Combe, 53,
is sick enough that he lost his job as an industrial electrician due to an
inability to work. And since losing his job, he's also lost his South Ogden
home and his health insurance.A kind friend has taken him in, but
Combe has yet to find a way to cover necessary medical expenses for the
progressing multiple sclerosis he suffers."The state has no
option for single men without insurance," Combe said Thursday.
"There's no program for us."
The people who couldn't afford health insurance before (many because they
had other priorities), will be shocked when they login to the website and find
out they still have to pay for it... and now it costs more than it did
before.It costs more because rates must go up because people can
come to them AFTER they have been diagnosed with an expensive problem and the
insurance company has no recourse but to accept them and pay (even if they drop
the insurance the day after treatment).If you couldn't afford
it before... you probably can't afford it NOW (with the higher
premiums)?I know SOME will get government help, but most are just
REQUIRED to buy it now (by law). Whether they think they NEED it or not, or
THINK they can afford it or not (it's up to the government now to decide if
you can afford it or not, and if they will give you at tax credit or not). But
you have to pay the premiums for 18 months before you see one dime back from the
Government (if you ever see a cent from the government).
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments