• 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!

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

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


  • Total voters
    61
During WW II, and into the early 1950s the national socialist fascist Democrats (Truman and FDR) illegally froze all wages in the US. In order to offer potential employees incentives, companies began offering non-wage compensation - like health insurance. Prior to WW II very few people had any kind of health insurance. It has only been since the late 1940s and 1950s when health insurance became a thing that people wanted. Then Democrats destroyed that in 1965 when they created the unconstitutional MediCare/MedicAid that deliberately uncut the healthcare market.
We can discuss this further.

Since I was then a child, I have the memories of my childhood as a child. Mom was the family bookkeeper and was not a whiner. My first dad was in short, a bum.

Mom was not a silent mom. I recall when she discussed a large for the time, hospital bill Dad (2) paid to get her out of the hospital.

She was headed to Sacramento on a heavy traveled road and a state legislator hit her car from the rear and she was hospitalized for 3 weeks.

Dad earned maybe $6,000 per year and the bill he paid was $10,000 appx, or more than a years income.

She sued the congressman of CA and the ruling by the court favored the lawmaker.

Anyway, though she did not discuss with me the payments to the hospital for my surgery (Tonsils and Adenoids removed) she did discuss the huge bill.

When you can get hurt severely by a state lawmaker and he is deemed innocent, it says medical care is only cared for Democrats who do not understand the philosophy of Ayn Rand.

 
Trump should sign the Biden Plan! Take that issue off the table for Biden. That would show him.
I am still waiting to read the Biden plan. Single payer is what I want.

I want my doctor to tell me what I need not a board of directors from an insurance company in it for nothing but how much money they can make off of my health care.
 
Anyone that thinks djt has a plan should look to his Executive Order on preexisting conditions. He put forth an Executive Order for something that is already legal! This tells us two things, (1) there is no R healthplan and (2) djt is a complete idiot that has zero clue as to what the President actually does.
Post for us the precise wording of the EO you are using.
 
If you have an offer of affordable coverage from an employer, you can't get financial assistance to strike out on your own. But if you don't have an offer of affordable coverage, you can. Depending on how low your income is you can potentially either be eligible for Medicaid or eligible for tax credits to defray premiums for commercial insurance in the marketplace.

Family SizeMedicaid Eligibility CutoffPremium Affordability Tax Credits Cutoff
1​
$17,600​
$51,000​
2​
$23,800​
$69,000​
3​
$30,000​
$86,900​
4​
$36,200​
$104,800​
5​
$42,300​
$122,700​
6​
$48,500​
$140,600​

If you don't think there should be a cutoff for tax credits at some arbitrary income or you don't believe that people with affordable employer plans should be eligible for getting help to shop on their own, then perhaps you're for the Biden Plan which gets rid of both those things.



Trump has filed his brief with the SCOTUS, we know what he wants. He's on the wrong side of protecting people with pre-existing conditions.
Your chart is not for the ACA, it is for Medicaid. That goes back many years, prior to Obama.

Get back to the ACA law.
 
Let's say I am a 40 year male who is health and hasn't been to the doctor in years. i drop my heath insurance since I see this as a waste of money. Two years after dropping my health insurance, I start feeling bad and decide to go see a doctor and am diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer. Obviously this is going to be expensive so i rush out to buy health insurance and Trump passed a law saying I have to be covered. Any guesses what a premium would cost?
I am hoping you have the correct figure. Tell us.
 
Cruz is lying. His contribution during the GOP's 2017 health care fiasco was an amendment to, you guessed it, bring back pre-existing conditions.

How the Cruz Amendment Might Affect the Marketplace: Applying Different Rules to Competing Health Plans


They'll tell you they're going to protect those with pre-existing conditions. They are not.
Democrats created the fiasco.

From your own link.


Karen Pollitz and Anthony Damico
Published: Jul 21, 2017
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Print
As the Senate considers the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA), a proposal to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA), amendments have been discussed to further change private health insurance market rules that apply under current law. Under the BCRA, current law health insurance market rules would still apply: Insurers in the non-group health insurance market are prohibited from turning applicants down or charging higher premiums based on health status and from excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions. In addition, all policies must provide major medical coverage for 10 categories of essential health benefits and must limit the annual out-of-pocket cost sharing (deductibles, co-pays and coinsurance) that people must pay for covered services in network (although states can alter those requirements through waivers).
However, one discussion draft amendment to the BCRA, suggested by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) as part of the July 13 version of the bill, would allow insurers in the non-group market to also sell some policies that would not be required to follow all of the ACA market rules. These noncompliant policies could turn people down or charge them more based on health status and could exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions. In addition, noncompliant policies would not have to meet ACA essential health benefit and cost sharing standards.
 
This is true, a better plan and cheaper plan will be a plus. It must contain pre-existing conditions, which Trump has promised. Cost is a big issue as well as coverage. At least half the country doesn't want single payer so the plan has to offer options.
Why is the Federal Government in the insurance business?

Why make the Feds the snoops of your personal life?
 
I am still waiting to read the Biden plan.

Get your gear and follow me!



Your chart is not for the ACA, it is for Medicaid. That goes back many years, prior to Obama.

Get back to the ACA law.

Medicaid was never a program of universal coverage for low-income prior to the Affordable Care Act. Those listed income caps for it (and their universal applicability to any American in a state that has expanded Medicaid under the ACA) exist specifically due to the ACA. And the affordability tax credits for premiums are, of course, similarly a product of the ACA.
 
We can discuss this further.

Since I was then a child, I have the memories of my childhood as a child. Mom was the family bookkeeper and was not a whiner. My first dad was in short, a bum.

Mom was not a silent mom. I recall when she discussed a large for the time, hospital bill Dad (2) paid to get her out of the hospital.

She was headed to Sacramento on a heavy traveled road and a state legislator hit her car from the rear and she was hospitalized for 3 weeks.

Dad earned maybe $6,000 per year and the bill he paid was $10,000 appx, or more than a years income.

She sued the congressman of CA and the ruling by the court favored the lawmaker.

Anyway, though she did not discuss with me the payments to the hospital for my surgery (Tonsils and Adenoids removed) she did discuss the huge bill.

When you can get hurt severely by a state lawmaker and he is deemed innocent, it says medical care is only cared for Democrats who do not understand the philosophy of Ayn Rand.


I was born in 1954. While my first memories were of the late 1950s, I was only 9 years old when JFK was assassinated. I did not become "financially aware" of things until age 10, when I got my first job. I recall my parents buying a nice four-bedroom home in Fremont, Nebraska in 1968 for $12,500. Which was about 75% of my father's annual income at the time.

Prices started to skyrocket during the 1970s. I still remember Ford's 1976 campaign slogan was "W.I.N" ("Whip Inflation Now"), which was really stupid. No wonder Carter won. We went from $0.25/gallon for gasoline in 1970 to $1.25/gallon for gasoline by 1980. The US dollar effectively lost 80% of its value during the 1970s.
 
Post for us the precise wording of the EO you are using.
“It has been and will continue to be the policy of the United States to give Americans seeking healthcare more choice, lower costs, and better care and to ensure that Americans with pre-existing conditions can obtain the insurance of their choice at affordable rates.”
Now, post for us the precise meaning of how R's interpret this...
 
“It has been and will continue to be the policy of the United States to give Americans seeking healthcare more choice, lower costs, and better care and to ensure that Americans with pre-existing conditions can obtain the insurance of their choice at affordable rates.”
Now, post for us the precise meaning of how R's interpret this...
That is not the actual EO and my interpretation is as Trump says, preexisting stands protected.
 
I was born in 1954. While my first memories were of the late 1950s, I was only 9 years old when JFK was assassinated. I did not become "financially aware" of things until age 10, when I got my first job. I recall my parents buying a nice four-bedroom home in Fremont, Nebraska in 1968 for $12,500. Which was about 75% of my father's annual income at the time.

Prices started to skyrocket during the 1970s. I still remember Ford's 1976 campaign slogan was "W.I.N" ("Whip Inflation Now"), which was really stupid. No wonder Carter won. We went from $0.25/gallon for gasoline in 1970 to $1.25/gallon for gasoline by 1980. The US dollar effectively lost 80% of its value during the 1970s.
I graduated from high school in 1956 and recall precisely what you are talking of. Carter was my final vote for any Democrat and I switched to Reagan in time to elect him.
 
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’
Your question, as usual, is biased. You leave no room whatsoever for any other options such as the ACA will be eliminated but something better will eventually take it's place. Your mind can't think outside of your preconceived biases. First of all, Trump signed an executive order on pre-existing conditions, so that they would still be in place if the ACA was ruled invalid. And, your side partisanly tries to claim that if the ACA was gone there would be no healthcare. We had healthcare before the ACA and we will have it again after the ACA. Before the ACA healthcare was cheaper for Americans. And, the poor got free healthcare. What if the ACA getting voted down by the SC actually leads to MFA? Wouldn't that be better in your mind? There has already been talk that if Biden wins and gets both Houses they can just pass a "tax" mandate of a token $1 and the ACA would be right back in business. Now, admit it, you are blowing this thing way up out of proportion to help yourselves win in the election, just as you have been claiming for decades that Republicans will take social security away, which you have been at that yet again too. It's all about instilling fear to get out the vote.
 
First of all, Trump signed an executive order on pre-existing conditions, so that they would still be in place if the ACA was ruled invalid.

This is an absurd statement. Not only can pre-existing conditions not be banned via executive order, the EO you're referencing doesn't even pretend to do so. If the ACA goes away, those protections are gone.

And, your side partisanly tries to claim that if the ACA was gone there would be no healthcare. We had healthcare before the ACA and we will have it again after the ACA. Before the ACA healthcare was cheaper for Americans. And, the poor got free healthcare. What if the ACA getting voted down by the SC actually leads to MFA? Wouldn't that be better in your mind?

The negative impacts of a potential decision against the ACA have been well documented. "Maybe if we take tens of millions of people's coverage away things will work out somehow someday" is not convincing.

There has already been talk that if Biden wins and gets both Houses they can just pass a "tax" mandate of a token $1 and the ACA would be right back in business. Now, admit it, you are blowing this thing way up out of proportion to help yourselves win in the election, just as you have been claiming for decades that Republicans will take social security away, which you have been at that yet again too. It's all about instilling fear to get out the vote.

Sounds like you're saying as long as the Dems get unified control of government, we'll probably be okay. Can't argue with that.
 
This is an absurd statement. Not only can pre-existing conditions not be banned via executive order, the EO you're referencing doesn't even pretend to do so. If the ACA goes away, those protections are gone.



The negative impacts of a potential decision against the ACA have been well documented. "Maybe if we take tens of millions of people's coverage away things will work out somehow someday" is not convincing.



Sounds like you're saying as long as the Dems get unified control of government, we'll probably be okay. Can't argue with that.
It is the left who want to take away the healthcare of over 100 million Americans.
 
I'm absolutely, positive without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt that we'll see his marvelous plan in 2 weeks. I can hardly wait!
As soon as trump says in two weeks you know it's a lie. lol believe me.
 
It is the left who want to take away the healthcare of over 100 million Americans.
It's statements like this why people don't take you seriously. Ten years the gop has been trying to kill the aca and not a single soul has anything to replace it with. Ten years, show us your plan or is this too also top secret?
 
It's statements like this why people don't take you seriously. Ten years the gop has been trying to kill the aca and not a single soul has anything to replace it with. Ten years, show us your plan or is this too also top secret?
Your plan (MFA) would take away the health insurance that over 100 million Americans have right now.
 
Can't tell if this is meant to be an argument that destroying the ACA would be good for America or bad.
I was responding to YOUR post that said Republicans want to take away healthcare of over 100,000 Americans when the left want to take away the healthcare of over one million Americans.
 
I was responding to YOUR post that said Republicans want to take away healthcare of over 100,000 Americans when the left want to take away the healthcare of over one million Americans.

I don't recall saying anything about "100,000 Americans," the GOP strategy of eliminating the Affordable Care Act would strip coverage from tens of millions of Americans immediately. And since it would also eliminate pre-existing condition protections, during a pandemic that's creating new ones in millions of Americans, the long-term consequences may dwarf the immediate carnage.

Anyway, your beef seems to be with "the left," so take it up with them. The topic is whether eliminating the ACA would be a "big win" for Americans.
 
Back
Top Bottom