Would the Supreme Court eliminating the Affordable Care Act be a "big win for the USA"?

[calamity]

Trump helpfully reminds the voters this morning he's going to court the week after the election to ask the Supreme Court to eliminate the entire Affordable Care Act. Things like pre-existing condition protections, tax credits to help people afford premiums, Medicaid expansion, Medicare reforms, funds for training health care providers and investing in public health, all gone.

Is he right that winding the clock back a decade plus would be a "big win" for the U.S.?

Trump says elimination of Obamacare would be a ‘win for the USA’

It'll be one final "hurrah" for the racists dead set on erasing Obama.

 

[calamity]

It doesn't matter, once the Affordable Care Act has been abolished, so will any pre-existing condition it covered. The entire unconstitutional law will be gone. It will be exactly like it was in before March 2010. Also, by definition, if they have a pre-existing condition then it cannot be insurance. Insurance only covers what might happen, not what already has happened. It would be like trying to buy fire "insurance" AFTER the house has already burned down. A monumentally stupid idea.

Funny how all the Right Wingers liked the ACA when a white guy proposed it long ago. But, of course, once the black guy enacted it, the racists all lost their shit and called it "unconstitutional."

 

[Greenbeard]

It doesn't matter, once the Affordable Care Act has been abolished, so will any pre-existing condition it covered. The entire unconstitutional law will be gone. It will be exactly like it was in before March 2010.

It matters all the more whether the voters want a president and Congress who would reinstate pre-existing condition protections or ones that would not. That will be one of the central questions put to the voters this fall.

Also, by definition, if they have a pre-existing condition then it cannot be insurance. Insurance only covers what might happen, not what already has happened. It would be like trying to buy fire "insurance" AFTER the house has already burned down. A monumentally stupid idea.

Health insurance doesn't retroactively cover expenses incurred prior to the effective date of the coverage.

 

[Glitch]

The GOP held the house, senate and presidency for the first two years of Trump’s term. Why did they not vote to eliminate it then?

A very good question. Clearly the 39 votes to repeal ObamaCare by the Republican House while Obama was President, which they knew would never pass, was an intentional lie. The GOP never had any plans to repeal the unconstitutional law. They are just as leftist as the Democratic Party. So is Trump. After all, Trump was a Democrat until 2012. A fact that you conveniently overlook.

It is reasonable to conclude that neither the leftist Republican Party, nor the Democrats (obviously), nor leftist Trump, wish to abolish the Affordable Care Act now that Democrats have illegally usurped that power from the States. Which is why it remains in the States hands to finish their suit against ObamaCare with the Supreme Court. With 6 conservative justices and only 3 leftist freaks, the decision to rule the Affordable Care Act of 2010 unconstitutional will be an easy one.

 

[Montgomery]

Ha ha ha Canada!

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/07/15/american-health-care-treats-canadians-who-cannot-wait/

I am sure you have a very fine system. I don't intend to knock it, as I don't USE it or know much about it.

But IMHO, people who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Nearly two and a half many Americans leave their country for health care than do Canadains. (adjusted per capita) you don't want to fk with any of the first world countries' informed opinions on health care!

Compare yours to Cuba's which is rated as one place down from yours.

And why would you be bothered anyway when you DON'T CARE?

 

[Taylor]

It matters all the more whether the voters want a president and Congress who would reinstate pre-existing condition protections or ones that would not. That will be one of the central questions put to the voters this fall.

Given Pelosi doesn't want to do anything should Obamacare be overturned, it seems we'll need to get rid of Democrats to make it happen.

 

[Montgomery]

He is right. The federal government is only permitted the powers the US Constitution specifically grants them. If the US Constitution does not specifically grant the federal government the power, and the US Constitution does not specifically prohibit that power to the States, then that power belongs to the States and/or the people. Or in the words of the 10th Amendment:

That includes powers like education and healthcare. These are powers exclusively reserved to the States.

Which is why 18 States have sued to abolish the unconstitutional Affordable Care Act of 2010 and why 28 States refuse to support it.

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is an illegal usurpation of power by Democrats.

I really hope you're right and the ACA is eliminated completely!

 

[CLAX1911]

Trump helpfully reminds the voters this morning he's going to court the week after the election to ask the Supreme Court to eliminate the entire Affordable Care Act. Things like pre-existing condition protections, tax credits to help people afford premiums, Medicaid expansion, Medicare reforms, funds for training health care providers and investing in public health, all gone.

Is he right that winding the clock back a decade plus would be a "big win" for the U.S.?

Trump says elimination of Obamacare would be a ‘win for the USA’

I'm not sure the damage might already be done. My health insurance with no pre-existing conditions went from $140 a month to $360 a month. Now that insurance companies know they can get that and people will pay it they'll probably still charge that. If people get tax credits for the health insurance everyone should I'm not against that at all the government's stealing less of our money is a good thing but it should be across the board.

I'm not too keen on government reforming things because they destroy everything they touch, and I really don't want them involved in training.

 

[Glitch]

It matters all the more whether the voters want a president and Congress who would reinstate pre-existing condition protections or ones that would not. That will be one of the central questions put to the voters this fall.

No it doesn't, because voters don't elect Presidents, the States do. Congress has already demonstrated that they support the unconstitutional law and have no intention of revoking their illegal usurpation of power.

Which is why it is up to the States to have the Supreme Court restore their power.

Health insurance doesn't retroactively cover expenses incurred prior to the effective date of the coverage.

Then it cannot be construed as pre-existing. Make up your mind. If they are only being covered from the effective date of the policy going forward, then nothing prior to that effective date is covered. There is no "pre-existing" condition. If they are receiving payments for a condition that existed prior to the effective date of the policy, then it cannot be insurance.

In other words, insurance can never cover a pre-existing condition, and pre-existing conditions can never be insured. They are mutually exclusive of each other.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

A very good question. Clearly the 39 votes to repeal ObamaCare by the Republican House while Obama was President, which they knew would never pass, was an intentional lie. The GOP never had any plans to repeal the unconstitutional law. They are just as leftist as the Democratic Party. So is Trump. After all, Trump was a Democrat until 2012. A fact that you conveniently overlook.

It is reasonable to conclude that neither the leftist Republican Party, nor the Democrats (obviously), nor leftist Trump, wish to abolish the Affordable Care Act now that Democrats have illegally usurped that power from the States. Which is why it remains in the States hands to finish their suit against ObamaCare with the Supreme Court. With 6 conservative justices and only 3 leftist freaks, the decision to rule the Affordable Care Act of 2010 unconstitutional will be an easy one.

We will have M4A. It’s immoral to tie healthcare to a paycheck. The american people favor it, and that’s only going to become more apparent as more die and get sick from TRump’s bungling of our covid response.

We are too wealthy a country to allow Americans to die over a petty ideology that loves taking advantage of our resources but when the bill is due starts caterwauling about personal responsibility.

 

[Greenbeard]

No it doesn't, because voters don't elect Presidents, the States do.

Super.

Make up your mind. If they are only being covered from the effective date of the policy going forward, then nothing prior to that effective date is covered. There is no "pre-existing" condition. If they are receiving payments for a condition that existed prior to the effective date of the policy, then it cannot be insurance.

Are you for real? "Pre-existing conditions" are not about the effective date of an insurance policy (which is always prospective for commercial plans), they're about the rules governing issuance and premium rating for an insurance policy. Nor do you as the enrollee "receive payments for a condition" when you buy an insurance policy, health insurance provides the financing for health services obtained (again, prospectively). The date you receive the service that needs to be paid for matters, not the day you were diagnosed with a condition. Health insurance only pays for services obtained after the effective date of the policy. If you're going to opine, at least brush up on the basics of the topic.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Trump helpfully reminds the voters this morning he's going to court the week after the election to ask the Supreme Court to eliminate the entire Affordable Care Act. Things like pre-existing condition protections, tax credits to help people afford premiums, Medicaid expansion, Medicare reforms, funds for training health care providers and investing in public health, all gone.

Is he right that winding the clock back a decade plus would be a "big win" for the U.S.?

Trump says elimination of Obamacare would be a ‘win for the USA’

I just spoke to my son who has shopped the ACA for his healthcare needs and he blew it off saying the limits for income are only $37,000 per year.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Nearly two and a half many Americans leave their country for health care than do Canadains. (adjusted per capita) you don't want to fk with any of the first world countries' informed opinions on health care!

Citation please. Naked statements have little merit in such a discussion.

Compare yours to Cuba's which is rated as one place down from yours.

Rated by whom? Again, citations please.

And why would you be bothered anyway when you DON'T CARE?

An open-ended "emotional appeal?" I see you are pretty new to the Forum, so I can't fault you for responding like you have to my posts.

Here is a "blog" that explains my processes:

Sadly, My Ignore List is Growing.

As of this blog entry I am coming up on six years of membership (06/22/19) in this Forum. In the past I was happy with the fact that aside from two short-term additions (literally weeks between adding two people before removing them) during my first six months of membership, my ignore list was...

debatepolitics.com

And here is a blog that explained my political views:

Time To Re-Introduce Myself.

I've been a member of this Forum now for a little over 4 years. Back in 2013 I posted the following in a "Hi, I'm New" statement. I repost this to help both old and new members who question my motives based on my recent responses both in support of the current administration, and other...

debatepolitics.com

Enjoy.

 

[Greenbeard]

I just spoke to my son who has shopped the ACA for his healthcare needs and he blew it off saying the limits for income are only $37,000 per year.

Sounds like you're talking specifically about the Medicaid expansion. Families with incomes above the Medicaid eligibility limit can receive affordability tax credits to defray the costs of commercial plans sold in your state's marketplace.

 

[Glitch]

Super.

Are you for real? "Pre-existing conditions" are not about the effective date of an insurance policy (which is always prospective for commercial plans), they're about the rules governing issuance and premium rating for an insurance policy. Nor do you as the enrollee "receive payments for a condition" when you buy an insurance policy, health insurance provides the financing for health services obtained (again, prospectively). The date you receive the service that needs to be paid for matters, not the day you were diagnosed with a condition. Health insurance only pays for services obtained after the effective date of the policy. If you're going to opine, at least brush up on the basics of the topic.

If you were diagnosed with a condition prior to the effective date of the policy then it is by definition a "pre-existing condition" and no insurance payments should be made to cover that condition. You are receiving payments for a condition, they are just being sent directly to your healthcare provider instead of to you. That also helps prevent insurance fraud by paying the healthcare provider directly.

If you are diagnosed with a terminal disease, for example, and then attempt to get health insurance, you should either be denied or required to pay exorbitant premiums to cover the cost of treatment. And that decision should be made by the company providing the service, not by government. At no time should any business be required to cover the cost of your medical care. That is your responsibility.

 

[Glitch]

We will have M4A. It’s immoral to tie healthcare to a paycheck. The american people favor it, and that’s only going to become more apparent as more die and get sick from TRump’s bungling of our covid response.

We are too wealthy a country to allow Americans to die over a petty ideology that loves taking advantage of our resources but when the bill is due starts caterwauling about personal responsibility.

The Supreme Court already held your socialist dream of "MediCare for All" to be unconstitutional in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012).

You will need to develop another national socialist plot to destroy the US Constitution, because your "M4A" scam has already been busted.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

The Supreme Court already held your socialist dream of "MediCare for All" to be unconstitutional in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012).

You will need to develop another national socialist plot to destroy the US Constitution, because your "M4A" scam has already been busted.

Sorry, but that’s not what that decision stated. I won’t have to do a damn thing but vote in the right folks.

We’re gonna use *your* tax dollars to make sure poor people get medical care.

 

[Nickyjo]

He is right. The federal government is only permitted the powers the US Constitution specifically grants them. If the US Constitution does not specifically grant the federal government the power, and the US Constitution does not specifically prohibit that power to the States, then that power belongs to the States and/or the people. Or in the words of the 10th Amendment:

That includes powers like education and healthcare. These are powers exclusively reserved to the States.

Which is why 18 States have sued to abolish the unconstitutional Affordable Care Act of 2010 and why 28 States refuse to support it.

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is an illegal usurpation of power by Democrats.

So, no doubt are Medicare, Social Security, and a host of other programs out of Washington. Your limited government ship sailed a long time ago, courtesy of inaction in the states. But keep your musket primed and readied.

 

[Taylor]

I just spoke to my son who has shopped the ACA for his healthcare needs and he blew it off saying the limits for income are only $37,000 per year.

My sister blew it off too. $25k+/year for a family of four - it's just not doable for them.

 

[trblmkr]

The Affordable Care Act is/was based on a lie: “If you like your health plan, you can keep it.”

Millions of Americans LOST their health plan. We lost ours. Before the ACA, we had very good (and AFFORDABLE) health plans, but our plans didn't meet ACA standards. So we got dumped.

The ACA needs to be repealed. Trump promised to crush the ACA during his 2016 campaign. He's had 4 years - - - he needs to make good on his promise to the people who want our health plans back.

I don't want the government to dictate the terms of my health plan. My doctor and I can figure that out.

When it comes to health care, one size does NOT fit all.

The GOP has had ten years to come up with a replacement they could sell to the American people. They have had no success. I believe this is because all the plans SUCK! And Trump doesn't even have a plan. He's been talking about unveiling his great plan for three and a half years. But we have yet to see a damn thing. You know why? Because health care is hard and DJT doesn't do "hard". He does public appearances in front of people who think he does have a plan and are too stupid to realize doesn't and never will.

 

[Robertinfremont]

My sister blew it off too. $25k+/year for a family of four - it's just not doable for them.

My son sees a doctor a limited number of times. His former insurance firm notified him that a the end of October they quit him. And he was spending around $400,00 per month for essentially nothing in return.

 

[Robertinfremont]

The GOP has had ten years to come up with a replacement they could sell to the American people. They have had no success. I believe this is because all the plans SUCK! And Trump doesn't even have a plan. He's been talking about unveiling his great plan for three and a half years. But we have yet to see a damn thing. You know why? Because health care is hard and DJT doesn't do "hard". He does public appearances in front of people who think he does have a plan and are too stupid to realize doesn't and never will.

Government sucks the huge wang and we all know it does.

 

[Robertinfremont]

So, no doubt are Medicare, Social Security, and a host of other programs out of Washington. Your limited government ship sailed a long time ago, courtesy of inaction in the states. But keep your musket primed and readied.

Obamacare is not a health provider. The others you name collect taxes and deliver an actual service.

 

[iguanaman]

He is right. The federal government is only permitted the powers the US Constitution specifically grants them. If the US Constitution does not specifically grant the federal government the power, and the US Constitution does not specifically prohibit that power to the States, then that power belongs to the States and/or the people. Or in the words of the 10th Amendment:

That includes powers like education and healthcare. These are powers exclusively reserved to the States.

Which is why 18 States have sued to abolish the unconstitutional Affordable Care Act of 2010 and why 28 States refuse to support it.

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is an illegal usurpation of power by Democrats.

We can always depend on you to point out why we have the most expensive and overpriced healthcare in the world and why so many cannot afford coverage. It's because our founders decided 250 years ago that America must always suck eggs and be at a disadvantage compared to other democracies. Thanks again for pointing out why we are screwed.

 

[Glitch]

Sorry, but that’s not what that decision stated. I won’t have to do a damn thing but vote in the right folks.

We’re gonna use *your* tax dollars to make sure poor people get medical care.

You are mistaken. That is precisely what the Sebelius opinion held.

As for the Medicaid expansion, that portion of the Affordable Care Act violates the Constitution by threatening existing Medicaid funding. Congress has no authority to order the States to regulate according to its instructions. Congress may offer the States grants and require the States to comply with accompanying conditions, but the States must have a genuine choice whether to accept the offer. The States are given no such choice in this case: They must either accept a basic change in the nature of Medicaid, or risk losing all Medicaid funding. The remedy for that constitutional violation is to preclude the Federal Government from imposing such a sanction. That remedy does not require striking down other portions of the Affordable Care Act.

Congress cannot force any MediCare/MedicAid mandate on any State. Every State has a choice due to dual-sovereignty. The Supreme Court made that very same decision in Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) as well. Congress cannot impose mandates on any State, including "MediCare for All."