• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alaska Governor Refuses to Enact 'ObamaCare'


This President of ours just can't catch a break. He's only got grumpy States to deal with between Alaska now refusing Obamacare, 21 other states suing the Fed over it, another 7 which already have, Florida giving back billions for a high speed rail Florida doesn't want, Arizona suing the Fed over the border, Congressional Republicans threatening to shut down the government if cuts to the 2012 budget isn't enacted. Obama's having a tough year so far.

Regarding the OP, the best summary was this line:

He said the state will pursue options of its own instead.

That's what should have happened in the first place!
 
Alaska now refusing Obamacar
Alaska needs to bring the case to the State Supreme Court, if they want to be excluded. Just "saying it" doesn't help.

Either Congress repeals it and the President signs, or the U.S. Supreme Court repeals it or every State repeals it in State Supreme Court. The same issue is happening with DOMA, because it violates the 14th Amendment and takes away State power to define legal, civil marriage.
Congressional Republicans threatening to shut down the government if cuts to the 2012 budget isn't enacted.
The President's proposed cuts and the Congressional Republican proposed cuts are for the exact same amount: about a trillion dollars.

So, I think Republican's are just playing games with the voters.
 
Last edited:
Alaska needs to bring the case to the State Supreme Court, if they want to be excluded. Just "saying it" doesn't help.
As of today, the Florida ruling is the ruling for the United States. Until a higher court over turns the Florida ruling, another court case, the way I understand it, is not needed. If you have different facts, please post the links.

Either Congress repeals it and the President signs, or the U.S. Supreme Court repeals it or every State repeals it in State Supreme Court. The same issue is happening with DOMA, because it violates the 14th Amendment and takes away State power to define legal, civil marriage.
The SCOTUS does not have to rule, they can punt, in which case the lower courts ruling stands.

The President's proposed cuts and the Congressional Republican proposed cuts are for the exact same amount: about a trillion dollars.
The Presidents cuts are over a 10 year period, of which the debt would increase by 13 Trillion dollars (per his 2012 budget). Save 1 Trillion to increase national debt to 13 Trillion doesn't seem very good. The Congressional Republicans have not proposed a budget yet, and will in March 2011 for the 2012 Budget.

So, I think Republican's are just playing games with the voters.

That may be, but what we DO know is the President is playing political games with the budget for and has again show no leadership. That's change we can believe in isnt' it?
 
If they want to be excluded, then I think they need to have a concrete plan that is as good as or better than the federal one.
 
If they want to be excluded, then I think they need to have a concrete plan that is as good as or better than the federal one.

Why?

Seriously, why do they need a Gov't run plan for Medical care?
 
If they want to be excluded, then I think they need to have a concrete plan that is as good as or better than the federal one.

They do it's call the Free Market Plan.
 
Alaska needs to bring the case to the State Supreme Court, if they want to be excluded. Just "saying it" doesn't help.
They're not "just saying" anything. Until there's Supreme Court review, the state of the law right now is that it's been ruled unconstitutional. Why should Alaska, or any state, be enforcing an unconstitutional law?
 
Why?

Seriously, why do they need a Gov't run plan for Medical care?
Because I see access to basic medical care for all people that live in a country as a fundamental responsibility of the state.
 
Because I see access to basic medical care for all people that live in a country as a fundamental responsibility of the state.
And I see it as a responsibility of the individual. Did I just make your head explode? Regardless, we cannot enforce unconstitutional laws just because they mean well. The good intent behind this or any law is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
And I see it as a responsibility of the individual. Did I just make your head explode? Regardless, we cannot enforce unconstitutional laws just because they mean well. The good intent behind this or any law is irrelevant.
It's obvious that our prior system of healthcare is unworkable. I dont think anyone can effectively argue that the healthcare system we had prior to any sort of reform was in any way acceptable.

We may need to consider making exceptions for the greater good. Stubbornly clinging to a broken system because our laws are not flexible enough is not acceptable.
 
It's obvious that our prior system of healthcare is unworkable. I dont think anyone can effectively argue that the healthcare system we had prior to any sort of reform was in any way acceptable.
Actually it was acceptable to about 80% of the US.

We may need to consider making exceptions for the greater good. Stubbornly clinging to a broken system because our laws are not flexible enough is not acceptable.
How glibly you state that, as if blowing off the Constitution is no big deal.
 
Actually it was acceptable to about 80% of the US.
As costs rose, that number was shrinking rapidly. Additionally, the economic impact of having tons of medical debt around the working poor is pretty serious. People dont spend money when they're fighting off thousands of dollars of un-preventable debt.

How glibly you state that, as if blowing off the Constitution is no big deal.
I'm sorry to burn your toast, but the Constitution is a piece of paper, nothing more and nothing less. It is not a holy relic, it is not the word of a divine being, it was not given to us as a holy charter. Like any other document that details instructions, it should be followed until it has been found at serious fault. If it has been found at serious fault, it should be changed. If it cannot be changed, then it should be discarded.

Tradition is not an acceptable excuse for staying on a sinking ship.
 
As costs rose, that number was shrinking rapidly. Additionally, the economic impact of having tons of medical debt around the working poor is pretty serious. People dont spend money when they're fighting off thousands of dollars of un-preventable debt.


I'm sorry to burn your toast, but the Constitution is a piece of paper, nothing more and nothing less. It is not a holy relic, it is not the word of a divine being, it was not given to us as a holy charter. Like any other document that details instructions, it should be followed until it has been found at serious fault. If it has been found at serious fault, it should be changed. If it cannot be changed, then it should be discarded.

Tradition is not an acceptable excuse for staying on a sinking ship.


The constitution is what has put the good in this country. The "piece of paper" you are referring to has given you your rights and freedoms. It kinda funny when the constitution is only working in "your favor" but when you see fault it must be discarded.
 
The constitution is what has put the good in this country. The "piece of paper" you are referring to has given you your rights and freedoms. It kinda funny when the constitution is only working in "your favor" but when you see fault it must be discarded.
It makes a certain sort of sense, though, doesn't it? Although, it does "burn my toast" some, I give Hoplite credit for honesty.
 
The constitution is what has put the good in this country. The "piece of paper" you are referring to has given you your rights and freedoms. It kinda funny when the constitution is only working in "your favor" but when you see fault it must be discarded.
Erm...that...was my whole point. If something works, great, keep it. Once it STOPS working, then we need something else.

There is no reason we cant have something that outlines our rights AND makes provisions for the welfare of the citizenry.
 
Erm...that...was my whole point. If something works, great, keep it. Once it STOPS working, then we need something else.

There is no reason we cant have something that outlines our rights AND makes provisions for the welfare of the citizenry.

Thats the thing, no one is ever going to elect to get rid of the constitution. It doesn't have to favor your opinion for it to be working.
 
Erm...that...was my whole point. If something works, great, keep it. Once it STOPS working, then we need something else.

There is no reason we cant have something that outlines our rights AND makes provisions for the welfare of the citizenry.
Of course, I disagree with you that it has "stopped working". Peach's point, I believe, is that, if it wasn't for the Constitution, we wouldn't even have a country where the standard of living is so high for everybody. To me, it seems it's you who want to get away from what obviously works.
 
Of course, I disagree with you that it has "stopped working". Peach's point, I believe, is that, if it wasn't for the Constitution, we wouldn't even have a country where the standard of living is so high for everybody. To me, it seems it's you who want to get away from what obviously works.

But if they're getting away from the Constitution, it's in favor of what to replace it?
 
But if they're getting away from the Constitution, it's in favor of what to replace it?
Whatever it is they think is best for everybody else.
 
Thats the thing, no one is ever going to elect to get rid of the constitution. It doesn't have to favor your opinion for it to be working.
I'd say that if the constitution is preventing the state from providing the basic necessities to those that need them but cannot access them, then it isnt working.

Of course, I disagree with you that it has "stopped working". Peach's point, I believe, is that, if it wasn't for the Constitution, we wouldn't even have a country where the standard of living is so high for everybody. To me, it seems it's you who want to get away from what obviously works.
Ok, I know low-standards is great for feeling accomplished, but let's focus on something a little more productive. If your only standard for success or failure is anarchy, I dont think we can really have a conversation on this point.
 
If they want to be excluded, then I think they need to have a concrete plan that is as good as or better than the federal one.

That would be easier than picking up dirt in a garden as Obama's HCR SUCKS.
 
That would be easier than picking up dirt in a garden as Obama's HCR SUCKS.

Where is it then? I get that you're pissed off but sayin finding a solution to what you consider to be one the worst laws ever created would be that simple, but then having no solution, makes you look pretty silly as an individual.
 
As costs rose, that number was shrinking rapidly. Additionally, the economic impact of having tons of medical debt around the working poor is pretty serious. People dont spend money when they're fighting off thousands of dollars of un-preventable debt.

There are two major reasons that health care costs have risen. 1: Federal government regulations. 2: Sue happy idiots.

I'm sorry to burn your toast, but the Constitution is a piece of paper, nothing more and nothing less. It is not a holy relic, it is not the word of a divine being, it was not given to us as a holy charter. Like any other document that details instructions, it should be followed until it has been found at serious fault. If it has been found at serious fault, it should be changed. If it cannot be changed, then it should be discarded.

Tradition is not an acceptable excuse for staying on a sinking ship.

Not surprised.

You do know that the Constitution has legal ways of changing the very thing that you are putting down right? There is nothing wrong with the Constitution. There is PLENTY wrong with self entitlement idiots.
 
Back
Top Bottom