Richard Davis: Like it or not, Obamacare is here to stay

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 5, 2013 10:01 p.m.

    @Mike in Cedar City:
    "But one thing I don't agree is his suggestion that single payer systems are somehow socialized medicine. Government paying the bills hardly makes for socialism."

    It may not be socialism, but it's a giant step in that direction.

    "For the county to turn to socialized medicine, the government would have to be far more involved."

    Don't worry, it will happen. For example, the government will soon tell you what healthcare you are entitled to... especially as you age. And whether you will be able to live or just go home and take a painkiller before you die (Obama's own words - roughly).

    "Creating a public insurance option, as for example, could be one of those tweeks (Medicare for all rather than COBRA or Medicaid)."

    True. And, as to Medicare, many doctors will not accept patients on Medicare... because the government tells the doctor how much of his/her fee will be allowed.

    "The ACA is, at a minimum, a serious attempt to get medical costs under control."

    We know, we know... See above.

  • Miss Piggie Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 5, 2013 7:14 p.m.

    @Daniel Leifker:
    "I blame both parties and a legislative process that fails to prevent stalemates like this."

    The founding Fathers set this government up to be run by men and women of good will who would work together for the good of the nation. Harry Reid's intransigence is the antithesis of what they set up.

    @Doug P:
    "There is no more debate or negotiations. It is the law of the land..."

    Immigration Laws are also the laws of the land... Laws that guy in the White House deliberately chooses to ignore. Ask yourself, why is he not enforcing those laws?

    "... and the Supreme Court put its iron stamp on it as well..."

    Not so. What the Court did was affirmed that the government cannot require anyone to buy anything. And the Court ruled that the government can levy/collect taxes in lieu of 'penalties.' We already knew that.

    "We have in Congress a group of extremists who are needlessly peddling doom and refuse to negotiate."

    You're correct. Harry Reid has stated over and over that the House funding bill is dead on arrival unless it had funding for Obamacare.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 5, 2013 6:42 p.m.

    "As expected, the Senate voted down the House's latest version of a temporary budget bill Monday afternoon in a straight party-line vote."

    Per the US Constitution, the Senate can't vote down any funding bill. All that's allowed is to accept or amend the House funding bill.

    "Okay--so we're just waiting for the House to come up with a bill that will pass in the Senate."

    No, no. We're waiting for the Senate to approve the House bill or amend it. If the Senate has issues, the two houses are obliged to sit down and come to an agreement.

    "The ball is in the 'House.'"

    The ball is in the Senate.

    "Republicans own the shutdown and everybody knows it."

    The Democrat controlled Executive Branch (White House) is who's shutting down the government. Because the government is controlled and operated by the Executive Branch. The White House is who's giving the shutdown orders. They say what to shut down. And they're picking agencies to shut down that will look the most egregious to the public... such as the War Veteran's memorial exhibit, Washington Mall, and the national parks.

  • Alfred Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 5, 2013 6:26 p.m.

    "Why is he (Obama) allowed to change things...?"

    Because he's an autocrat... A tzar in his own mind. He doesn't need rules and laws. In fact, if there are laws that stand in his way, he simply ignores them... such as the immigration laws. With his great socialistic visionary capacity he can see millions of Democrat votes out there as they march across our borders illegally. And he's not alone. Most Democrats see the same vision. We have in front of us the very process that will eventually sink our nation and a man in our White House pushing it along.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Oct. 5, 2013 8:35 a.m.

    I love when professors talk theory without understanding the real world. How is it fostering competition when three major health insurance companies are pulling out of California. All of their insureds are losing thier health insurance and now must go purchase health insurance on the exchanges at a much higher price.

    As health care premiums skyrocket, more businesses are dropping health insurance. Not only is the $ 2000 penalty cheaper than insurance ( it is about 1/4 what I pay for my employees), there is an easy way around the $ 2000, simply cut hours to 29 a week. How many people are going to lose thier employer based insurance and then have to buy it from the exchangesnon what they earn on 29 hours a week.

    Even the unions that supported Obamacare are now realizing the real world implications of this bill and are calling for its repeal.

    Of course, I don't have space to go into the medical device tax's effectbon jobs and the added costs to doctors.

  • Pete1215 Lafayette, IN
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:23 a.m.

    Poor people, being human, will prefer to have as much health care services as rich people. But there are a few rich people and a lot of poor. So the expense will balloon; and the non-poor will be faced with the bill. Am I missing some sort of intervening magic?

  • kfbob SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 3, 2013 10:16 p.m.

    Yes Obamacare is the law of the land and we will probably never get rid of it. However, if you watch how social security has been run you will see the template for Obamacare. Here are a few facts about SS. 1. The fund is broke. All the money that you paid in is not in a lock box. 2. It is a ponzi scheme similar to Bernie Madoffs ponzi scheme which means that those who receive are paid from those who are paying in now not from their original investment. In the SS trust fund there is a ledger of IOU's from the General Fund saying that they have spend all the SS funds and they they owe the SS fund trillions of dollars. The only way that Obamacare will work is through massive tax increase and/or massive printing of money, there is no other option. Either way we know that Social Security is Broke. The post office is broke. Medicare is broke. Amtrak is Broke (runs on subsidies) What business can the federal gov't run without running it into the ground?

  • NC Rick Chapel Hill, NC
    Oct. 3, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    It doesn't take a genius to discern that this was a commentary piece (i.e., it is intended to come from a particular POV), and for some of us, seeing that POV in a DesNews published commentary is certainly a breath of fresh air given the kind of crazy-train stuff exemplified in most of these comments. Note that the professor's viewpoint is simply a moderate, pragmatic one, which must look quite lefty I suppose when one is perched so far out there on the extreme right.

  • logicguy TUCSON, AZ
    Oct. 3, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    Re: walkrrrr - "Obamacare resolves all this."
    Really? My employer-subsidized health insurance premiums went up quite a bit last year. A letter from the company's HR department stated that it was because of the early initial effects of the ACA. Then, just two months ago, that same big international company I had worked for for more than 33 years laid off 26% of its US employees ... including me. So, now I am living off of, and paying for this mandated health insurance, from my retirement savings. And, with the Federal Reserve holding interest rates to near zero, my savings accounts are paying something like 0.1% interest, about enough interest each month to buy a couple of hamburgers.

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Oct. 3, 2013 5:12 a.m.

    Why use the term "Obamacare" so much in the article, I like to think of it as Romneycare, he was the pioneer in this, he should get more credit.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:35 p.m.

    Why doesn't the Dnews have the honesty to call it the Affordable Care Act in the headline? This wasn't Obama's first plan, this plan was created and presented by conservatives.

  • Fareed San Francisco, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:10 p.m.

    Makes no difference, or does it?

    1.) Fund the Government.
    2.) Fund the Debt Ceiling.
    3.) Fill in the Blank(s). _____________________

  • Massresident TOPSFIELD, MA
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:36 p.m.

    Obama Care is only here to stay if it reduces health care costs and it is hard to see how it could fail to do the opposite. If you had a cancer that had grown to 18% of your body weight, you would be dead. Our economy is on life support because of the burden imposed by our overpriced healthcare.

  • skiplee7 ironton, OH
    Oct. 2, 2013 8:02 p.m.

    Like it or not...this is what learning and growing in democracy try something but later see its going to cause suspend it until you can thoroughly examine ALL the consequences...this allowed....why are you acting as if the republicans are doing something wrong...your premise completely ignores how democracy works....all the republicans want is a one year extension...the same one year extension Obama gave to big businesses....give it to them and if they find out something is really horribly wrong with Obama care then it SHOULD be exposed....if they don't find will shut them up....My God,like it or not, Republicans ARE part of America and personally attacking them and trying to sway public opinion by closing places like the Lincoln memorial, which by the way has NEVER EVER been closed before during scores of government shut downs, is at best Petty and your efforts to punish the people so the people will turn on the republicans isn't working....small minded tactics.....where are are leaders?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 5:49 p.m.

    My hunch is - Republicans will SAY they will repeal Obamacare for the next 50 years, and then, even when they control the House, the Senate, AND the WhiteHouse, and even appointing Supreme Court judges....will still do NOTHING about it to change anything.

    Just like they have with using abortion as a political Red Herring to win votes for the last 40 years.


  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 4:30 p.m.


    What is it you think you pay for that you don't use? The only things you pay for that you don't use (maybe) are government social programs. This is another social program. Interesting that you think "society thing"s gives you the right to force people to do certain things and to buy certain things.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 4:25 p.m.

    I'm dismayed, but not really surprised, by the number of lierals who can't or won't tell the difference between the House of Representative's exercising its Constitutional power of the purse, and either insurrection (Mr. Kayser) or some kind of constitutional violation.

    Typo entirely intended.

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 4:15 p.m.

    @yes Obamacare......Yes I have been to the exchanges......and I like the entire state of Louisana failed to get access! Not one person is registered today in Obamacare here! So that looks like a NO to Obamacare! Takers vrs. Makers!

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 3:29 p.m.

    @tators. Don't buy insurance and pay the tax. There are plenty of things I get taxed for but I do not use. Why should I be forced to pay for something I do not use. Maybe it is a Society thing.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 3:04 p.m.

    @ Kent DeForrest:

    What exactly are the Republicans doing that is against Constitutional law... and how are such actions unconstitutional? They are doing the same things in Congress that ultimately allowed women to vote in this country.

    @ Owl:

    That is why Republicans want to defer Obamacare for a year... so the obvious flaws can be worked out before people are then forced to buy in.

    @ NC Rick:

    The article wasn't really such a breath of fresh air, since the stink of being so biased was evident. The other side of the coin was not examined... which is something necessary for any article to be good.

  • Mikhail ALPINE, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    Single Payer is preferable when the single payer is the person getting the service. Insurance, is a type of "socialism" in that it collects money from the masses to pay the claims of the few. Obama did a market grab by requiring those who chose not to be insured to purchase insurance or be fined (oops, I mean "taxed").

    Wake up America, the train is coming down the tracks and it ain't the Freedom Train.

  • Mikhail ALPINE, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 2:07 p.m.

    Was DOMA the law of the land? When the executive department chose not to defend it in the courts, but rather to attack it, was the executive department defending "the law of the land?" Did the Supreme Court uphold the constitution when it twisted the logic of legal precedent and rules of law to reach the conclusion that the ACA was "the law of the land?"

    I believe that Senator Lee is correct when he says that he is trying to prevent a train wreck. The truth of this article is that once established - no matter how horrible the long term consequences - it is hard to get people off of the train. ACA is a disaster. Trying to defend the entire atrocity by pointing out the logic of minor provisions is twisted logic.

  • kiva Brea, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    "what Obamacare really does is set regulations on the health care insurance industry that did not exist previously"; if that is true, why has Obama said he ultimatly wants a single payer plan? Government being the payer! Which servers two purposes - government in charge and insurance companies out of business/employees out of jobs. Can't wait

  • NC Rick Chapel Hill, NC
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    Thank-you, Professor Davis, for your very well-stated commentary. Your reasonableness is a breath of fresh air, particularly as it resides on the pages of Deseret News. While I think a single-payer system would be far superior to ACA on every level, I agree that it is the law of the land now and we should all work to make it better. Maybe in the future making it better will be to move toward a single payer system (e.g., perhaps re-inserting the government option that had to be taken out in order for ACA to pass).

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:48 p.m.

    I am most concerned that neither party is working to eliminate the flaws in the ACA. Republicans want to throw the baby out with the bath water and Democrats are committed to ignore the problems. For both sides it's either all or nothing. The rigid political posturing on both sides is antithetical to a better America.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:46 p.m.

    It's interesting to see how the conservatives are trying to twist the Republican sabotage of the constitutional system of government into the Democrat's fault. If they succeed, we will see constitutional government come to an end in this country. What will it be next? Give us a national gun registry or we'll shut the government down. Repeal Roe vs. Wade or we'll shut the government down. Outlaw same-sex marriage or we'll shut the government down. Doesn't really matter which side is blackmailing the other and holding the American people hostage. If this method of "governance" succeeds, you can kiss America goodbye. Thanks, Mike Lee. And you claim to be a constitutional scholar? You just flunked your biggest test.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:34 p.m.

    @ Shaun:

    If it looks like a duck, smells like duck and quacks like a duck... But regardless of whether Obamacare is technically socialistic or not, the majority of people in this country have now started seeing it for it is, and are now opposed to it. There is a good reason for that.

    BTW: What exactly do you call it when people are forced by the federal government to purchase a privately sold product... regardless if the they want it, need it, or can even afford it? It may not follow the exact definition of socialism, but it's certainly socialistic in nature.

  • E Sam Provo, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:31 p.m.

    Outstanding editorial. And as a supporter of Obamacare, I'm also aware of its flaws. But it's one thing to say 'it's a bill that will help millions of Americans, but one with a few minor problems,' and to say 'worst bill ever! Hitler, Stalin, Mao!'

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 1:12 p.m.

    Obamacare is only "here to stay" so long as a majority of the people want it to stay. Davis is making the usual "argumentam ad inevitableum": "We won, get used to it, you'll never beat us, you might as well stay home."

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 12:58 p.m.

    If we put richard davis's "logic" into our arguments then obamacare should have never come into being at all. Rember it was defeated almost 20 years ago when clinton tried it. Based on that socialized healthcare advocates should have just given up based on richards "logic".

    You see richard appears to believe that just because obamacare now exists we should all just accept it and move on, but how come when clintoncare was defeated the richard davis's of the world didn't just accept it and move on? Why did they come back, and keep on coming back, until they got obamacare passed? And why isn't richard davis editorializing and telling them they should have just accepted it and quit trying?

    Double standards in support of your own biases probably are not the smartest things to put on public display richard.

  • ronnie sandy, utah
    Oct. 2, 2013 12:47 p.m.

    Will someone please make Mike Lee read this article.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 12:42 p.m.

    @tator. Look up the definition of socialism. Obamacare does not fit the description of socialism. Even the leader of the American socialist party says Obama is not a socialist.

    As far as the government is in control of my healthcare choices I do not see that. I can still go see the same family doctor i have always seen and I can still see my dentist or go to the hospitals that are in my network. This may all change but I think people are seriously over reacting to Obamacare.

    @bandersen. I do not think I am ignorant. The definition of Socialism is the state owns the means and production. The government doesn't own either.

    I'm compelled to have liability insurance on my cars that i have. I know I have a choice not to drive but in regards to compelling people to have health insurance I think it is the same principle except everybody will need healthcare at some point.

    Maybe they should of done test programs with obamacare in different states to test it out. But that would never happen politically.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 12:24 p.m.

    @ Yes_Obamacare:

    Now you're being silly. The top rated comments on this article are mixed. It's usually the left-wingers who jump on board first and so garner a few more "likes". But even then, hardly any of the top rated comments are more than single digits. Consequently, it represents hardly anything at all compared to the general populous.

    What is notable is that not so long ago, a majority of people did favor and want Obamacare. But has time goes on and more things come to light about it, more and more people are now opposing. There is a reason that many of those who initially thought Obamacare was a good idea (and perhaps a few ideas behind it are), are now opposed to it. In fact a solid majority of the entire country is now opposed to it, as shown in literally every major recent poll.

    It has already cost thousands of jobs, turned tens of thousands into part-time jobs and upped the costs of anything now available to many others. The red-tape behind it is a real cost killer. And now the CBO has said it will cost twice it's original estimate.

  • tesuji St. George, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 12:18 p.m.

    Finally, a reasonable article on Obamacare. Thanks

  • YES_Obamacare Oakland, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 11:58 a.m.

    It's interesting that while a handful are still screaming that "Americans don't want Obamacare!", the top rated comments on this article are from those who are in favor of it.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 11:53 a.m.


    You sound incredibly desperate. Most people that want to live off of the sweat and wealth of others are desperate.

  • glendenbg Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 11:49 a.m.

    @Windsor - according to the Economic Policy Institute, the percentage of Americans covered by employer sponsored insurnace fell from 69% in 2000 to 58% in 2011. The steepest decline occurred during the Great Recession (not surprising).

    Liljenquist's editorial was not entirely correct. Current regulations allow employers to be fined $2000 per covered member, not per employee; a family of five will easily cost an employee $10,000. While total insurance payments might be more, employees contribute to their insurance and employers are able to deduct the cost of insurance on their taxes so the math won't be simple. Employers can avoid the fine by offering insurance to employees only, not their families, which greatly reduces insurance costs.

    When it is up and running, I suspect the ACA will work well enough. As with any major legislation, it will require adjustments and tweeks over time. Creating a public insurance option, as for example, could be one of those tweeks (Medicare for all rather than COBRA or Medicaid). The ACA is, at a minimum, a serious attempt to get medical costs under control. It's something we've needed as a nation for decades.

  • YES_Obamacare Oakland, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    catseye, do you even realize that YOU TOO can now CHOOSE from MANY plans
    that were not prevously available to you?

    Daniel Leifker, whomever first put forth the plan of shutting down the government in an
    illegal attempt to get what they wanted by bypassing the checks and balances created by
    our Founding Fathers is at fault for screwing our economy and "taking the nation into default
    to stop Obamacare". Which side was that again?

    bandersen, AGAIN...educate yourself before spouting. You can now CHOOSE from MANY
    plans, and MANY peoples' costs are going DOWN DOWN DOWN. (Like the Republican party,
    but that's a difefernt story). Were you this irate when they told you that if you drive a car you must
    have liability inurance so the rest of us don't get screwed whern YOU crash? Also again, if the
    Repos could get a better plan together and get enough votes to make itpass, nothing is stopping them
    from doing that. But they haven't succeeded.

    Tekakaromatagi, if it turns out to be such a failure, the people will elect Republicans next time around
    and will be changed by LEGAL means, not by extortion.

  • esodije ALBUQUERQUE, NM
    Oct. 2, 2013 11:28 a.m.

    Obamacare was never intended to foster a functioning healthcare system. It had precisely one aim: to create enough inertia to make it an easy matter to arrive at a full-blown single-payer system. Create the basis for government control (preventing any backward "slippage" toward free markets), let the system fail, and then make the jump to national healthcare. Before long, we too will be rationing care and importing most of our doctors from the developing world.

  • YES_Obamacare Oakland, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 11:05 a.m.

    TRUTH, when you say "When you have a party who is acting I contrary to the will of the people ...anarchy will arise!", would that include Republicans drawing on taxpayer's money for refusing to do their jobs and screwing a great many working people out of money which is OWED to them for doing government work? Wrecking the US economy which *was* on the verge of a recovery? Do you honestly believe "the will of the people" is to pay these pigs for nothing, and allow a great percentage of taxpaying citizens to die or go bankrupt due to insurance companies's refusal to cover them, or monopolistic extortions, using our HEALTH as a commodity to pad their fat wallets? Do you even have the first CLUE about what Obamacare actually does? have you gone to your state's exchange yet to see what tax crefdits YOU may even be eligible for and what options YOU now have for coverage?

  • YES_Obamacare Oakland, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:52 a.m.

    Neuro1, that hasn't occurred yet. I wonder why that would be?


    Shaun, very true. However, what your insurer is not telling you is that you don't *have* to do anything, but if you sign up for that same plan through the exchange, you may then be eligible for tax credits to be applied to your premiums, (depending on your incoime level) so the same plan you're already on could cost you substantially less.


    Clark D, that's what happens in an election. The votes are counted and only one candidate wins. Yours lost.

    bandersen, your comment is the height of ignorance. Obamacare gives people the RIGHT to CHOOSE from MANY health care plans which were not previously available to them. Why don't you educate yourself before posting nonsense?

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:42 a.m.

    @ Shaun:

    It is socialism because the government will now be controlling the major decisions of people's healthcare, and also using Obamacare to redistribute people's wealth. Take from the haves and give it to the have nots, who then lose some of their incentive to push forward. Socialism.

    @ One Vote:

    Reality shock is when people finally find out the full extent of the train-wreck that Obamacare is in process of creating.

    @ Roland K:

    Or president Lincoln could've been well been addressing current day Democrats, who now refuse to compromise concerning a terrible bill that the majority of the people no longer want. Obama is picking and choosing who now needs to follow the law.

    @ Doug P:

    Yes, it's the law of the land. But slavery once was, too. Thank goodness there was continued debate then... just like there needs to be now. Many of those who initially fought slavery were also called extremists. Bad laws should be fought and changed.

    And to those who think Obama is funded... Not anymore. The Congressional Budget Office announced recently that Obamacare is going to cost at least twice as much as originally thought. It's now massively under-funded.

  • Clark D Houston, TX
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    So some say you cannot beat them so lets just roll over and make the best of it. Is that the American way. The nation as a whole say that Obma won so we need to just go along with them so Richard says that writes articles in the Deseret. The election of presidency in the last election would have been different if the republican party had not frowned on the fact that Romney was a Mormon. The nation is split almost down the middle as to what the values should be in this country. So, even though he won the election we still have our values to protect and I personally appreciate those that are willing to fade the heat in the battle against Obama Care or this socialist program as I see it.

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:30 a.m.

    When you have a party who is acting I contrary to the will of the people ...anarchy will arise! Obamacare is a disaster and will eventually be unwound if it doesn't unwind itself due to its own failures........Takers vrs. Makers......

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    To spin the ACA as not Socialistic is the height of ignorance. If you take away the right of someone to choose their health care; If everyone is compelled to have insurance; then what is it, if not Socialism? Free Enterprise? ACA is nothing more or less than the welding of government and big business. The common man is the loser. For those who want to drag the Red herring across the map of ignorance with arguments such as: 'internet...FCC airwaves, etc.' is foolish talk. Go study the writings of Ezra Taft Benson if you want to understand his perspective about socialism. Most citizens are such drones they will gladly fit into the slot that government wants to place them, ACA just the latest example. Those who think that the ACA created more freedom and didn't damage other segments of our 'free' society are absolutely naive.

  • walkrrrr Berkeley, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:26 a.m.

    VickieB, because Congress is on strike.

  • walkrrrr Berkeley, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:24 a.m.

    windsor, when you say "We have employee sponsored health care now", that does not include

    1.those of us who DON'T. Many employers currently do NOT offer any group plan, and you have not considered

    2.those who are self-employed or who are owners of small businesses, who are not required to offer a group plan, so

    3.their emnployees do not have access to a group plan, and not to mention

    4.the many who are unemployed now (and the multitudes more thanks to the Republican walkout!), who do not qualify for COBRA coverage, or

    5.the many people who have "preexisting conditions" such as being a cancer survivor, having had a miscarriage, or having taken a prescription medication at some point in their life.

    So it's a small percentage of lucky people who currently have access to coverage through their employer, and the coverage is frequently offered to the employee ONLY, and is frequently still not affordable, as employers whop DO offer a plan are only required to pay in a small minimum towards the employee's premium.

    Obamacare resolves all this.

  • walkrrrr Berkeley, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:17 a.m.

    RDD1931, it actually does cover all mental health and counseling. But apparently most of the wingnuts haven't done their homework enough to know that yet.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:14 a.m.

    @banderson. It is not socialism because the state does not own anything. The government doesn't own the insurance companies and the government doesn't own the hospitals.

    As far as the lies that you stated I haven't experienced any of those yet. I can still keep my insurance, I can still go to the doctors in my network, and my cost have not gone up yet. This may all change but I think you may have jumped the gun with those accusations. I even got a letter from my insurance company stating I didn't have to do anything because I was covered.

  • walkrrrr Berkeley, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:13 a.m.

    RDD1931, just like "Romney 2012", right?

  • Neuro1 sunol, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 10:02 a.m.

    . . . until it get repealed.

  • windsor City, Ut
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    I hope Richard Davis monitors comments to his story as I have a question.

    I will FREELY admit I have NO IDEA WHO TO BELIEVE in regard to Obamacare.

    Will it be a train wreck?
    Will it be all wonderful?

    We have employee sponsored health care now, but have I have seen several insinuations that big employers see $$ to be made by dropping that and paying the penalty.

    From a DesNews story by Dan Liljenquist Sept 26:

    "employers who don't provide health care insurance will pay the federal government a “tax” or penalty, beginning in 2015..up to $2,000 per employee.
    Employers, whose finance personnel are usually pretty good at math, are realizing that they can save a bunch of money if they (1) stop providing health care to their employees, (2) push their employees to the federal insurance exchanges, and (3) pay the per employee “tax.” Since most companies that currently offer health insurance as part of their benefits package pay a whole lot more than $2,000 per employee per year for health care, the economic incentives to push their employees to the...subsidized exchanges are quite powerful."

    Your thoughts please.

  • cval Hyde Park, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    Wow! What a one sided-biased editorial.

    Ignoring the points being made by those who disagree does not make them wrong, nor will it make them go away. Taking care of the poor is a good idea, but everybody can see that this is fiscally unsustainable. Cost estimates have already quadrupled, and their have been no ideas brought forth on how to fund it.

    Our economy cannot sustain it and return to health! I guess if we are all equally poor, at least we will all be equal.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:48 a.m.

    And Mr Davis, whether you like it or not, Congress has the power to add, change, or remove laws. That "remove" portion regarding Obamacare is what is upsetting to you. I suggest that you follow your own counsel and live with the fact that Congress may at some point get rid of it.

    And further, it wasn't the House of Representatives that shut down the government. It was the Senate. Nice spin by the media, but it was expected since they are deeply in the pockets of the Democratic Party. I have no doubt that were this a different issue and the shoes were changed, the media would be applauding the tough House of Reps.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    Rather the solution is to reform it to correct those flaws. Obamacare is here to stay. So let’s work together to make it better."



    Next step,
    Get rid of the FOR-profit leeches of Insurance, and go to a Single Payer System.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:44 a.m.

    This country allow freedoms of speech and thinking. To condem others because of their choice is wrong. A person covinced against their will is of the same opinion still

    Home schooling has been shown to be a much better method of education yet public schools continue to placate the masses. As a coluntry we do not always agree or vote for the best.

    Now the country is having to swallow the bitter pill it voted for. It is law, regardless of who you voted for. It is like a 45 mph speedlimit on I 15, it may not be the most pleasant thing but we will survive.

    I feel bad that our state is represented by Senator Lee as he has grown to be a headline hound and is more concerned with getting his name in the headlines than helping the people of Utah. Even money bags Orrin is backing away from this latest round of Senator Lee hunting a microphone. Were anyone else to act like that and not be an elected official they would be arrested.

  • Samson01 S. Jordan, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:40 a.m.

    I thought the tea party was greatly diminished?

    A coalition of a few congressmen cannot hold anything up. It is the sum total of the GOP that has given the house of representatives the power they are exercising. That would be the house, elected by the people, that has a Republican majority.

    This isn't a tea party thing, this is a Republican thing. Just like the ACA is a Democrat thing.

    If we don't like it, then we have an election cycle that is just beginning and again the will of the people will be exercised. Just like last time.

    So many of the posters on this forum are predicting doom and gloom for the GOP. They may be right. They were not last time. We'll see. The GOP has not lost my vote yet as there is not a viable alternative. Certainly not the Democrats.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    Excellent editorial, Richard. I would invite all the conservative commenters here to read E.J. Dionne's editorial in the Trib this morning. Mike Lee and our House sheep ought to read it too. There is no way to spin this government shutdown as anything other than a Tea Party attack on the Constitution they give lip service to.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 9:11 a.m.

    Work together to make it better. Please.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Oct. 2, 2013 8:50 a.m.

    I agree with most of what the Professor says in this editorial. But one thing I don't agree is his suggestion that single payer systems are somehow socialized medicine. Government paying the bills hardly makes for socialism. For the county to turn to socialized medicine, the government would have to be far more involved. It would have to own and run the hospitals, employee medical service providers, make all purchases of medical supplies and drugs and control their distribution. It would have to have the power to determine who could become a medical provider and who could not.

    A single payer where the government just pays the bills to privately run or to non profit hospitals and to independent physicians and other health providers who are not employed by the government hardly qualifies as "socialized medicine".

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Oct. 2, 2013 8:48 a.m.

    The Republicans should go ahead and do their best to implement it, or rather to support the administration to implement it. Then when it is incredibly messed up, they can say, "We did our best." It is possible right now that someone in the White House is saying, "Wow! We really messed up! No one will ever vote Democratic ever again. How do we conceal this?" And then Pres. Obama says, "I know! I will tell the Repubs I won't negotiate. Lee and Cruz will get mad and do everything to stop Obamacare. Even shut down the government. No one will ever find out how bad we messed up and we can blame the Republicans. (Evil laugh). I am a sinister genius! (Some more evil laughter.)."

    (OK, I am stretching things a bit with the evil laughter, but Dems are playing chess and the Republicans are playing checkers.)

  • pmacdee newbury Oark, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 8:24 a.m.

    bandersen, I would prefer to follow the Constitution when creating or changing laws. If you are against your definition of socialism, then stop using the internet, roads and bridges and watching BYU football on FCC controlled airwaves.

  • Doug P cape coral, u.s.a., FL
    Oct. 2, 2013 8:19 a.m.

    The reason the Affordable Healthcare Act was passed by Congress was because the majority of Americans felt and still believe costs related to healthcare in the U.S. are skyrocketing out of control and were unaffordable or unavailable for a significant percentage of citizens and their families.

    There is no more debate or negotiations. It is the law of the land and the Supreme Court put its iron stamp on it as well when it was challenged. The article clearly spells out the benefits of the law.

    We have in Congress a group of extremists who are needlessly peddling doom and refuse to negotiate. Shutting down government and blackmailing the American people as the Tea Party Republicans have done, will eventually not work and will backfire come election time.

    Remember that folks next elections.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 8:11 a.m.

    So, according to the author, let's keep something that has been a lie. It was promised to reduce cost (lie), promised to allow choice for your doctor (lie), to make health care better (lie), and, of course, the biggest one of all, this isn't 'socialism'. This is the most bizarre claim of all. If this isn't socialism, someone please inform me what it is then. Socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. To state that Obomacare is not Socialism is amazing, particularly coming from a professor at a major university, and BYU! Perhaps he has never read the writings of Ezra Taft Benson. Well, of course, he's a dead prophet and was living in a different day and age. Indeed. I'm sure he would have a few things to say about the ignorance of those who want to view Socialism positively. NO thanks.

  • Daniel Leifker San Francisco, CA
    Oct. 2, 2013 7:38 a.m.

    Claiming that the House Republicans will "try to take the nation into default to stop Obamacare" is only half the story. One could also argue that the Senate Democrats will try to take the nation into default to preserve Obamacare. It's quite mistaken to blame the whole thing on the GOP. I blame both parties and a legislative process that fails to prevent stalemates like this.

    And it's a huge leap of faith to claim that most of the kinks in Obamacare will be worked out by 2017. I am self-employed, and my medical insurance in January 2013 was $277 a month. In January 2014, one year later, it will rise to $567 a month. So I'm leaving. I'm making preparations to move to a Christian medical sharing plan, which (amazingly) survived Obamacare and is a legal way to avoid the Obamacare penalty. Meanwhile, huge numbers of sick persons may flock to Obamacare while young and healthy persons stay away until they get really sick. Maybe the administrative kinks will be worked out, but the premises of Obamacare are still wildly untested and could cause all of Obamacare to collapse without a single GOP vote. I hope not.

  • RDD1931 DELAND, FL
    Oct. 2, 2013 7:33 a.m.

    What Congress givith, Congress can take away! Watch how quickly the Act will disappear when the Republicans get their act together.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 7:20 a.m.

    "Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events."--Abraham Lincoln addressing Southern Secessionists

    He might as well have been addressing Mike Lee and Ted Cruz.

    Oct. 2, 2013 6:41 a.m.

    "Work together to make it better?" The President, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and the Democrats have proven they don't want that. "No negotiations", they say, and their pleas for "compromise" mean only "my way or the highway." Their consistent refusal to talk to the House Republicans demonstrate they don't want any changes--except for those extra-legal, questionably unconstitutional changes President Obama, without congressional approval, has made to the law himself.
    Anybody who doesn't see this is a pathway to constitutional and economical disaster has blinders on.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 6:27 a.m.

    Maybe the Affordable Care Act could give counseling for reality shock. Fantasy politics took a hit when Senator Lee attempted to defund the already funded program.

  • VickieB SLC, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 3:58 a.m.

    The only person to kill part of Obamacare was Obama himself. He gave business until 2015. They are on the honor system this year, you know what that means. Why is he allowed to change things, and not Congress?

  • catseye MAGNA, UT
    Oct. 2, 2013 3:38 a.m.

    As a heartfelt conservative with strong family and faith values, and as one who believes America's greatness lies in the initiative and independence of its people, I have stood dumbfounded and saddened at the mass movement of America toward social liberalism. The possibility of the death of opposing viewpoints to social liberalism in America is very real. With close to 90% of our media -- not just broadcast but also social and blogosphere -- dedicated to social liberalism, where is one to get a true picture of things as they really are? Liberals, dedicated to a great society in which government involvement and intervention make the skies blue and the sun shine, never concern themselves with issues of personal freedom, or the cost involved. In their world as long as big brother takes care of everything from health to employment to what religious and marriage beliefs we're allowed to hold, the world will be a wonderful place. We want our children educated, but America's universities are also filled with people who espouse the same singular point of view, thus furthering the cloudiness of clear understanding for our kids. I fear they don't stand a chance. Where is the balance?