Published: Tuesday, Oct. 29 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Over the years, your Republicans devised several "free market" fixes for
our healthcare problems. Every single one of them featured an individual
mandate. That's why I think that your opposition to Obamacare is completely
fraudulent. Obamacare was your idea.
Part of the reason we have Obamacare is because we've been robbed of the
single payer system we actually should have gotten. Tea party republicans, who
have managed to hijack the situation, have effectively derailed any voice of
reason in the republican party, and are doing harm to the nation in the process.
We do need a unified coalition, free from the extreme.
Perhaps the GOP will "rise again" as many after the Civil War hoped for
the old South... the GOP stood for abolishing slavery and rebuilding the South
back then. Today, those goals would probably be too liberal for the TEA Party.
Perhaps the GOP will rise again to take away people's health
care and prevent the country from rebuilding its roads, bridges, power lines,
and infrastructure... That will attract voters -- NOT!
Too funny, Ron, since the ACA is exactly what the Republicans came up with. The
only problem they have with the plan is that it was implemented by a Democrat
instead of a Republican. Too darn funny.
I don't think you understand what really happened. The problem was never
health insurance. Over the last several years, insurance company profits have
been running in the neighborhood of 4%. That's not egregious. In fact,
you'd be hard-pressed to find investors for a company with such a low rate
of return.No, the problems were government regulations driving
medical costs, the constant threat of lawsuits against medical professionals,
the extremely punitive awards given by judges and juries, the inability to
provide inexpensive medicines due to FDA oversight, etc. Virtually every problem
was the result of bad legislation, not high insurance rates.So what
does the government do? Decides to take over the one area operating on marginal
profits; health insurance. If the government really wanted to help, they would
have treated the disease instead of the least significant symptom.But, see, the government was never about helping. They weren't even about
claiming the monies for themselves. The government is all about control.
Controlling every aspect of your life and mine is their ultimate objective.
Obamacare is only a symptom, an indicator. Bondage is the disease that needs to
be treated before it becomes fatal.
The tea party is not going to work with anyone. There way of shut down the
government. A free market solution would use the insurance companies like the
Republicans put in place in Massachusetts.
The ACA IS a free market system based on plans floated by by the ultra
conservative, Coors family funded, Heritage Foundation! It also has much in
common with the successful Massachusetts Romney care.The biggest
problem with the ACA is that it is endorsed by President Barack Obama. If Obama
embraced the entire Republican Party Platform the whole platform would
immediately be rejected by the GOP as a "liberal" scheme to bring down
Liberal Larry is correct. The basic concept of the individual mandate is
conservative. It requires you to take full responsibility for yourself. No
freeloading on the system.People say "but I don't want ANY
insurance". Ok. Sign a binding and enforceable contract that says you will
refuse any and all public or charitable support (ever) for anything related to
illness and I will let you go without insurance. You want your family to go
without insurance? They sign too. That means you can NEVER go to a public or
charitable hospital or plead your case on TV or radio for help. Why? Because
you could have been responsible and gotten insurance.Simply put, the
mandate requires you to be responsible for yourself. A conservative principle
if ever there was one. Don't like the current implementation? No problem.
But that is another issue entirely.
CBS News) "CBS News has learned more than two million Americans have been
told they cannot renew their current insurance policies -- more than triple the
number of people said to be buying insurance under the new Affordable Care Act,
commonly known as Obamacare." Next up? Watch for Demos up for reelection try
to hide under their desks. Demos, YOU own this mess! Ted Cruz and Mike Lee were
absolutely right about Obamacare!
So Mountanman, you believe that only around 700,000 people will sign up for
insurance on the exchanges. Wow! In addition everyone knew there would be a
"small" percentage of people who would have to upgrade their coverage.
Key here is small. It's 2 million against the backdrop of 180 or so million
with coverage that is adequate. Continuing on with the fantasy
world of the right..it was "liberal" Democrats that gave us the ACA.
Folks if you really see the world this way it's no wonder you think the
world is slipping from your grasp. It has. It doesn't look anything like
you believe it does.
@ Pragmatist. Call CBS news and complain to them! They are the ones who reported
this, not me!
A Pragmatist. Obama called the governor of Kentucky (a Democrat) who had
reportedly a high number of people signing up for Obamacare insurance and
congratulated him. Later it was learned that 87% of the people had signed up for
Medicaid, not health care insurance. OPPS!
Some people think that the Constitution is dead. They have buried it. They
refuse to refer to it when they demand that the Federal level of government
"give" them more "soup". They have already traded their freedom
for a bowl of soup and now they want everyone to join them as psuedo slaves.Is that harsh? I don't think so. The Constitution enumerates 17
duties that the Federal level of government is allowed to tax us for. ObamaCare
is not on that list. The Constitution has a provision to handle ALL things that
are not on that list. The 10th Amendment clearly states that ALL things outside
the scope of authorized duties are to be left to the States or to the People;
therefore, ObamaCare, if the Constitution is respected, is a duty that is to be
left to the States or to the People. It is not an authorized duty of the
Federal level of government.The Court declared that ObamaCare is a
tax. They have not addressed the legality of the ObamaCare tax. ObamaCare is
not on the list of authorized taxes.
Mountanman,I think Medicaid expansion is part of the program.Mike Richards,Seriously? You think the Supremes said it was
a tax and was therefore okay but did not bother to look and see if they thought
it was a constitutionally legal tax?
@Semi-Strong,If you were more familiar with the Court, you would
know that the Supreme Court is an appellate court. An appellate court can only
rule on cases that lower courts have already judged. Lower courts CANNOT rule
on a tax until that tax is implemented and DAMAGES can be proven. At the time
that the Supreme Court ruled on ObamaCare, no lower court had ruled on whether
the TAX caused damages because that part of ObamaCare was not yet functional.Do you think that the Supreme Court would rule outside its authorized
sphere? If there is anyone in America who should understand the law, it would
be those justices who sit on the Supreme Court. Although, in reality, everyone
of those justices "judges" according to his political ideology, they
correctly refused to declare the ObamaCare TAX unconstitutional until a lower
court first ruled.
Mountanman, not complaining, just saying first of all no enrollment numbers have
been released, secondly you're a month in to an admittedly slow three month
enrollment period, and you have at least 50 million people being mandated to
sign up. The 700,000 number could be right for the first month but is
ridiculous as a final number. However the 2 million number is probably pretty
accurate as a final number because the insurance companies had to purge their
noncompliant plans by Oct. 1. So put your party horns back in the box your
timing is way off. It's still the law. It's not going
anywhere. Will there be changes certainly, and my guess is one of the first
will be coverage requirements. BTW Medicaid expansion is part of
the plan, and if a substantial number of the 50 million uninsured can qualify
for Medicaid we've got real economic problems that will have stretched back
decades. So If I were a Republican I'd be very hesitant to talk too loudly
pragmatist: *sigh* Let's assume for a minute that you're right that
ACA is a good plan, that people will sign up for it in droves, and that only a
small percentage of people will be hurt with either worse coverage or higher
rates or both.If that is true, the:- Why are so many,
including those in liberal strongholds such as unions, trying to get excepted
from ACA?- What are even liberal bastions of the media (such as MSNBC)
openly and vigorously criticizing it?- Why is the Democratic Senate
talking about delaying it for another year?It seems to me that you
are right: Some people do still live in a fantasy world. We just disagree on who
Mike Richards,Here is what the Supremes said:"In
this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as
increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go
without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress's power to
tax."Sounds to me like they think it is okie-dokie.
"CBS News has learned more than two million Americans have been told they
cannot renew their current insurance policies."They were told that
because their policies don't meet the new standard for coverage. That is
not outrageous.For example, look at auto insurance. The State of
Utah requires that you carry liability insurance in the amount of (at least)
$25K bodily injury/$65K per accident/$15K property.Can you buy auto
insurance with lesser coverage? Yes.Will that auto insurance meet the
legal standard in Utah? No.Answer: Buy the correct auto insurance.Same thing with health insurance. The point of all this is to ensure
that a person can pay their medical bills. If a person carries insurance that
is below standard and won't pay the bills, then we've gained nothing.
Setting an insurance standard is not new.
@joe5 – “No, the problems were government regulations driving
medical costs.”You’re misinformed on this
issue…Regulations do not drive medical costs (which over the
long run are ~3 times higher than inflation), and the medical malpractice issue
is smaller than many believe. There have been numerous studies done on this and
the percent of increase to overall medical costs are typically in the 1-2% range
(which is still too high but nowhere near the main cost driver).The
main driver of healthcare costs is simply the inherent (economic) nature of the
healthcare industry and the fact that producers (not insurance companies - they
are just the middle man) have pricing power far in excess of most industries
– and monopolistic industries typically deliver some mix of lower quality
and higher costs. In the case of U.S. healthcare, the quality is very good but
the costs are disproportionate.This is the reason no developed
country in the world has a purely free market healthcare system… they just
don’t work very well.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments