- Joined
- Mar 5, 2008
- Messages
- 112,990
- Reaction score
- 60,557
- Location
- Sarasota Fla
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
| Moderator's Warning: |
Last edited:
| Moderator's Warning: |
Were the death panels ruled constitutional? :lol:
The law upheld in it's entirety, yet at the end of the day it seems as if conservatives gain more political clout and enthusiasm than the victors in all their glory.
You are absolutely correct, my mistake.No, it wasn't upheld in it's entirety. Federal medicaid coercion on the states was deemed unconstitutional.
If this bill isn't repealed then yes
HC will be rationed. It's economics.
Elderly patients dying of thirst: Doctors forced to prescribe drinking water to keep the old alive, reveals devastating report on hospital care | Mail Online
It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated....
It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated. It may be that Chief Justice put his fears about the institution of the Supreme Court over his duty to interpret the Constitution. If this is true, Chief Justice Roberts breached his duty to the Constitution.
HC is always being rationed in one manner or another. It's economics.
Honestly, I think a lot of conservative politicians are relieved by the decision. They talk big about how much they hate health care, but they didn't want to have to campaign to people who can't get medical care because of what they did. Republicans have all kinds of crazy rhetoric they're into, but it's better left as rhetoric, not reality.
Which is why a Free Market HC system like the United States had before Obamacare is vastly superior to the Socialized system the ACA is trying to force us into
The elderly in the UK hospitals are dying from starvation and thirst because there is no money left, yet people like you amazingly believe that the quality and availability of HC in the US is going to improve because of Obamacare. :lol:
Can you please provide specific and detailed sources to back up your claim that "Republicans Hate Health Care"?
Thank you
Which is why a Free Market HC system like the United States had before Obamacare is vastly superior to the Socialized system the ACA is trying to force us into
The elderly in the UK hospitals are dying from starvation and thirst because there is no money left, yet people like you amazingly believe that the quality and availability of HC in the US is going to improve because of Obamacare. :lol:
intimidation...from whom?
got any evidence for this conspiracy?
intimidation...from whom?
got any evidence for this conspiracy?
It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated....
Albert Di Salvo said:If you actually know which provisions of the legislation were passed through the Budget Reconciliation please refer me to them by reference to the specific sections in the legislation. That would save me a great deal of time. Thanks.
1. Increasing the tax credits to buy insurance
2. Eliminates several of the special deals given to senators, such as Ben Nelson's "Cornhusker Kickback"
3. Lowers the penalty for not buying insurance from $750 to $695
4. Closes the Medicare Part D "donut hole" by 2020 and gives seniors a rebate of $250.
5. Delays the implementation on taxing "Cadillac health-care plans" until 2018
6. Requires doctors who treat Medicare patients be reimbursed at the full rate
7. Sets up a medicare tax on the unearned incomes of families that earn more than $250,000 annually.
8. Offer more generous subsidies to lower income groups. Households below 150% of the federal poverty level would pay 2% to 4% of their income on premiums. Health plans would cover 94% of the cost of benefits.[SUP][19][/SUP] Households with incomes from 150% to 400% of the federal poverty level ($88,200 for a family of four) would pay on a sliding scale from 4% to 9.8% of their income on premiums, rest will be covered by government advanceable, refundable tax credit. Health plans would cover 70% of the cost of the benefits.[SUP][19][/SUP][SUP][20][/SUP]
9. In 2014, if a company with more than 50 workers does not offer coverage, they will be obligated to pay $2,000 for each full time worker in the company, exempting the money due for the first 30 employees. For example, an employer with 53 workers will pay the penalty for 23 workers, or $46,000.[SUP][19][/SUP]
10. Would increase Medicaid payment rates to primary care doctors to match Medicare payment rates, which are higher, in 2013 and 2014.[SUP][19][/SUP]
11. The federal government would pay all of the costs of expanding Medicaid under the reform until 2016, 95% in 2017, 94% in 2018, 93% in 2019, and 90% thereafter. Some states that already insure childless adults under Medicaid would receive more federal money for covering that group through 2018.
12. The Medicare patients will receive 50% discount on brand-name drugs would begin in 2011. By 2020, the government would pay to provide up to 75% discount on brand-name and generic drugs, eventually closing the coverage gap.[SUP][19][/SUP]
13. Would extend the ban on lifetime limits and rescission of coverage to all existing health plans within six months after signing into Law
The law upheld in it's entirety, yet at the end of the day it seems as if conservatives gain more political clout and enthusiasm than the victors in all their glory.
No, you don't understand. He was worried that the court would be delegitimized in the public eye if it was too blatantly partisan. It isn't like somebody was threatening to delegitimize it, it just is what would have happened if it disregarded the constitution to achieve right wing policy results that they couldn't achieve in the actual Congress. Roberts is indeed keenly aware of that risk. He has given many lectures on it lately.
[/COLOR]
Per Wikipedia, the specific provisions of the reconciliation bill for the PPACA (actually the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) which dealt with health care were the items listed below. For the most part, the reconciliation act didn't establish any major new provisions (those are in PPACA); it just tweaked the dollar amounts and the timetables a bit. All other items not listed below were part of the PPACA and passed Congress without the need for reconciliation.
Isn't it a fact that the Budget Reconciliation process was used after Scott Brown took away the 60th vote from Obamacare?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?