• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

What happens to the states that don't have exchanges?

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm curious I remember a big deal being made about some states refusing to set up exchanges but now it doesn't seem to matter what's the deal?
 

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
I'm curious I remember a big deal being made about some states refusing to set up exchanges but now it doesn't seem to matter what's the deal?

They have to go through the federal exchange
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I'm curious I remember a big deal being made about some states refusing to set up exchanges but now it doesn't seem to matter what's the deal?
When Obamacare was created, it was done so with the idea the state would create their own exchange, and the federal website would basically be a portal to the state sites. You'll notice how the state exchanges have worked relatively well. However, due mostly (I believe) to politics, a large number of states refused to create their own and instead forced the federal government to build their exchange for them. This is one of the reasons (I believe) the federal website has had so many problems.

To make a short answer shorter, the deal is the states which did not set up their own use the federal site.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
When Obamacare was created, it was done so with the idea the state would create their own exchange, and the federal website would basically be a portal to the state sites. You'll notice how the state exchanges have worked relatively well. However, due mostly (I believe) to politics, a large number of states refused to create their own and instead forced the federal government to build their exchange for them. This is one of the reasons (I believe) the federal website has had so many problems.

To make a short answer shorter, the deal is the states which did not set up their own use the federal site.

I knew there was a good reason for the amount of egg on Obama's vest.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
When Obamacare was created, it was done so with the idea the state would create their own exchange, and the federal website would basically be a portal to the state sites. You'll notice how the state exchanges have worked relatively well. However, due mostly (I believe) to politics, a large number of states refused to create their own and instead forced the federal government to build their exchange for them. This is one of the reasons (I believe) the federal website has had so many problems.

To make a short answer shorter, the deal is the states which did not set up their own use the federal site.
But I thought the bill was worded that the states had to set up their own exchanges with no provision for a federal exchange.
 

Perotista

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
25,987
Reaction score
18,710
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm curious I remember a big deal being made about some states refusing to set up exchanges but now it doesn't seem to matter what's the deal?

I think it boils down to those state who have not set up their exchanges feel the federal government doesn't have the right to force someone to buy health insurances. The SCOTUS has ruled otherwise. But that is their convection and by not setting them up they are staying true to those convictions. It was like them saying, Alright, it is constitutional but we still think it is wrong, so do it on your own. we are not going to help you do something we think is wrong. My opinion.

So now the federal government has to set up a federal exchange to encompass everything that a state exchange was suppose to do along with the federal exchange. The ACA has become an abortion battle all over again. Abortion is legal, but people will continue to fight it until the world is no more.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
But I thought the bill was worded that the states had to set up their own exchanges with no provision for a federal exchange.
I'm not sure if it was required for the states to set up their own or not. I remember another poster who said it was required, but the Supreme Court overturned that provision, meaning it was optional for states to set them up.

I did a brief look for that on Google, but I didn't see anything which confirmed or denied it.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
But I thought the bill was worded that the states had to set up their own exchanges with no provision for a federal exchange.

They had to and expand medicaid or their residents couldn't get the subsidy and the state lost all medicaid funding, but the SCOTUS reined in that hammer.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
They had to and expand medicaid or their residents couldn't get the subsidy and the state lost all medicaid funding, but the SCOTUS reined in that hammer.

So they changed the law?
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So they changed the law?

Fischer is completely confused between the issue of expanding Medicaid and the establishment of state exchanges for insurance

ACA contained a provision that made fed financing of Medicaid contingent upon the states expanding Medicaid coverage. That provision was struck down by the Supreme Court

ACA contained other provisions which offered grants to states that agreed to set up their own exchanges. Some states took advantage of those grants and set up their own exchanges. Others did not, so the fed set up an exchange for them under provisions of the ACA.
 

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
14,494
Reaction score
6,230
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
To my understanding it is like pension plans in Canada, states can have one if they want one but they do not have to.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Fischer is completely confused between the issue of expanding Medicaid and the establishment of state exchanges for insurance

ACA contained a provision that made fed financing of Medicaid contingent upon the states expanding Medicaid coverage. That provision was struck down by the Supreme Court

ACA contained other provisions which offered grants to states that agreed to set up their own exchanges. Some states took advantage of those grants and set up their own exchanges. Others did not, so the fed set up an exchange for them under provisions of the ACA.
See I thought only the states could create these exchanges is there a provision allowing the Feds to make a exchange for the states?
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
To my understanding it is like pension plans in Canada, states can have one if they want one but they do not have to.

But are the citizens of that state exempt from the taxes associated with it?
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,701
Reaction score
6,259
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
See I thought only the states could create these exchanges is there a provision allowing the Feds to make a exchange for the states?

the states had the option of creating their own exchanges. but if they decided to opt out, the federal government would create one in the state that is run by the federal government.
 

NotreDame

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,630
Reaction score
613
Location
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of Notre Dame
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm curious I remember a big deal being made about some states refusing to set up exchanges but now it doesn't seem to matter what's the deal?

Under the ACA, those states not creating an exchange, necessitating the creation of a federal exchange for the state(s) has the apparent unintended consequence of those people in those states not qualifying for the subsidy. Under the ACA, state exchanges qualified for subsidies to individuals to assist in the purchase price of insurance but the ACA doesn't authorize subsidies for those using the federal exchange to buy insurance. Ooppss!
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Under the ACA, those states not creating an exchange, necessitating the creation of a federal exchange for the state(s) has the apparent unintended consequence of those people in those states not qualifying for the subsidy. Under the ACA, state exchanges qualified for subsidies to individuals to assist in the purchase price of insurance but the ACA doesn't authorize subsidies for those using the federal exchange to buy insurance. Ooppss!

That is not true

There is no federal exchange. There are state exchanges which were built by the feds.
 

NotreDame

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,630
Reaction score
613
Location
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of Notre Dame
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That is not true

There is no federal exchange. There are state exchanges which were built by the feds.

It is true. Read the freaking law! Federal exchanges created on behalf of the states not making their own isn't eligible for subsidies. Read the statute for heavens sake!
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It is true. Read the freaking law! Federal exchanges created on behalf of the states not making their own isn't eligible for subsidies. Read the statute for heavens sake!

I have read it. No exchanges are eligible for subsidies. Individuals are eligible for subsidies
 

NotreDame

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,630
Reaction score
613
Location
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of Notre Dame
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I have read it. No exchanges are eligible for subsidies. Individuals are eligible for subsidies

You should pay better attention to what I said. I reject your strawman argument. I didn't say exchanges were eligible for subsidies. I said "people" wouldn't get the subsidy. I applaud your effort to construe my statement to say something it never did! Bravo you may now exit stage right!

"Under the ACA, those states not creating an exchange, necessitating the creation of a federal exchange for the state(s) has the apparent unintended consequence of those PEOPLE in those states not qualifying for the subsidy." Emphasis mine.
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You should pay better attention to what I said. I reject your strawman argument. I didn't say exchanges were eligible for subsidies. I said "people" wouldn't get the subsidy. I applaud your effort to construe my statement to say something it never did! Bravo you may now exit stage right!

People who buy on the exchange, and meet the eligibility guidelines are eligible for subsidies regardless of who is running the website.
 

274ina

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
641
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
healthcare.gov is being run for them.

We still get real HC, screw the GOP run states.

And when millions of low wage workers leave those states because of no medicaid expansion, then they will have no one
to work for them for $8k year.
 

274ina

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
641
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Under the ACA, those states not creating an exchange, necessitating the creation of a federal exchange for the state(s) has the apparent unintended consequence of those people in those states not qualifying for the subsidy. Under the ACA, state exchanges qualified for subsidies to individuals to assist in the purchase price of insurance but the ACA doesn't authorize subsidies for those using the federal exchange to buy insurance. Ooppss!

Not quite.

The loop hole is employer based coverage for familys that dont get the subsidies.

Fed or state exchange makes no difference. We will still get affordable real HC.
 

NotreDame

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,630
Reaction score
613
Location
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of Notre Dame
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Fed or state exchange makes no difference. We will still get affordable real HC.

This is not correct as this comment relates to subsidies and whether the state or federal government established the exchange.

If this comment is not in regards to what I said about subsidies and exchanges, then ignore.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom