The Unafordable Uncare Act is on life support.
I can feel the vibrations. I will make a dangerous prediction.
The United States Supreme Court will rule that
The Unafordable Uncare Act, AKA The Obama Uncare Act has died of natural causes.
The cause of death was it is unconsitiutional.
May it rest in peace.
I guess we should actually read it before we pass it to see what's in it after all.
I hope you are right, about obama-don't-care.
Thank you
For God and Country
We may be able to kill ObamaCare through other means, but I wouldn't put out even the slightest hope that it will be by getting the Supreme Court to rule against their previous ruling. As a gambler I would lay HUGE odds that they won't revisit the case. Any takers?
I take that bet.
The issue that could gut the uncare act is before the United States Supreme Court
right now. While the issue is different it may chop the head off that act. The issue is the State Exchanges. As a matter of fact, I am sure they have decided the issue and are writing the opinion
right now.
We will know that decision very shortly. This week most likely.
Pray for the people of the USA
As a gambler I would still lay odds against it.
Ok good buddy.
Let's wait and see.
I just hope they are on the correct medications. Maybe Ginsberg can at least stay awake
to sign thepoinion
in the case pending before the Supreme Court. That case is purely a question of statutory interpretation – do you read the subsidy provision out of context (victory or the plaintiffs) or in light of the entire Affordable Care Act. Nor is there any case in the pipeline claiming the entire ACA is unconstitutional. The individual mandate, of course, has already been upheld.
In the unlikely event the Court rules for the plaintiffs, Congress will simply amend the ACA to provide for subsidies everywhere.
If you are looking for a place to use your “life support” analogy, try the Republican Health Care Plan. While specific parts of the ACA (such as the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or the Protection of Second Amendment rights provision) may be struck one day, you can count on the bulk of Obamacare protecting you and the other knuckleheads on this Board for the rest of your life
The issue is not whether the unafordable uncare act is entirely unconsiitutional.
I never even suggested such a thing.
You are correct that is a question of statutory interpretation.
The Supreme Court ruling on the issue of State Exchanges could destroy
the unafordable uncare act.
And yes I read it before I did not pass it to see what's in it.
As for the Republicans, yes they are also on life support as they well should be. They promised, if elected, to alter or abolish that ACT. They, like democrats, lied and have done nothing they promised. Whether we agree or disagree about the Act itself irrelevant. It is the content of their lack of character that is unpardonable. That goes for all parties.
If we elect liers, we deserve what we get.
Which brings to the congressional question you correctly raise. I don't trust any of them.
So, let's wait and see. I still feel the vibrations though.
By the way, from your writing you seem an intelligent and well informed person.
Stop the name calling. It is beneath you.
if I may be permitted to use one of my favorite lines from "Games of Thrones.
Once you satirized the Affordable Care Act, incorrectly claimed it was “unconstitutional,” and even misspelled “afordable,” you invited yourself into the P & R Board club of knuckleheads whose dislike of Obamacare is matched only by their inability to understand how it works.
Having said that, welcome to the Board Kimosabe. May being called a “knucklehead” be the worst thing you have to endure here. LOL
K OK You got me. I am a knucklehead and worse. Believe me, I have endured far worse and far more dangerous situations than these words of wisdom. It is beginning to amuse me and I am having fun around here.
I did not satirize the Unaffordable Uncare Act.
Again, I did not say it was unconstitutional. I won't say it again.
There are 4 words the Supreme Court are confronted with.
Call me all the names you want, I am sorry I misjudged you.
Name calling is not beneath you.
Thank you for your warm welcome by the way
Your words! It's catchy, bumper sticker quality, targets the intellectually challenged on P&R. You're not Steve Jobs or Tim Cook ready, but you're at least Ron Popeil ready. I don't want you thinking Obamacare is the next "New Coke", or the next "Edsel".
And don't worry about Afordable being spelling with one "F". Your target audience can't spell anyways.
By the way, your Jahlil Okafor better be the real deal. It's tough enough watching Ryan Kelly and Carlos Boozer. Duke does produce good teams, but lousy individual players.
In the unlikely event the Court rules for the plaintiffs, Congress will simply amend the ACA to provide for subsidies everywhere.
If you are looking for a place to use your “life support” analogy, try the Republican Health Care Plan. While specific parts of the ACA (such as the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or the Protection of Second Amendment rights provision) may be struck one day, you can count on the bulk of Obamacare protecting you and the other knuckleheads on this Board for the rest of your life.
o lifetime cap, and no pre-existing exclusion is sui generis? You could not buy health insurance like that before Obamacare.
Yet most of these guys want to compare it to their last policy and complain “I’m paying more” than I use to pay. The notion of identifying the proper baseline for comparison seems to be beyond their intellectual ability. Obamacare may ultimately be bad for the economy or others in the industry but, for the insured, there is no argument that it is the best benefit the government ever gave us.
On another topic –congrats on UCLA having the number one recruiting class. No wait, my bad. The number one recruiting class …[drum roll] is Duke. Déjà vu all over again.
Okafor is for real. I’ve never seen post moves like that by an 18 year old. Better than Shaq, better that Hakeem....Shaq sat on the bench his freshman year. If Okafor has any ceiling at all above where he is now, we’re talking All Star. But don’t even think about it – he will not be around at Number 2 for the Lakers.
And he does not "fit"with Julius Randle.
By the way, remember our argument on whether the Steve Nash trade was a bad idea? You’ve been pretty quiet on that one. Talk about flushing money and picks down the drain. Giving Kobe 36 million for his declining years was almost as bad. Need to get rid of the Buss children before the Lakers can rebuild
is/was the problem. None of this had to happen. There were so many missteps alone the way. From the design, to the legislation, communication, implementation, it was embarrassing, irrespective of the some of valuable features you mentioned. What does it say about a product when these valuable features get drowned out in the rhetoric?
But not to worry. It will survive somehow. Why? Because government has the biggest advantage of over the private sector. Time and Money Mari. Time and Money! I believe it was a you and mattradd who said, "you gotta give it 5 years to determine if it's going to work". The Edsel, New Coke, and yes, Bic Underwear for Women, didn't have 5 years.
You do realize most of the rancor could've been avoided, if a little more thought, ingenuity, and better communication were part of the plan.
P.S. I like Jeannie, don't you? The problem is Jim Buss. Lakers have made multiple missteps, including Nash. That's a bold statement about Randle. I assume you think the Lakers should draft Towne to complement Randle. The Lakers may opt for D'Angelo Russell of OSU, as they do need a PG. By the way, UCLA was ranked #1 in NCAA baseball. Of course I was at Jackie Robinson stadium watching them lose to Maryland. There are other sports than basketball.
no lifetime cap, and no pre-existing exclusion is sui generis? You could not buy health insurance like that before Obamacare.
Yet most of these guys want to compare it to their last policy and complain “I’m paying more” than I use to pay. The notion of identifying the proper baseline for comparison seems to be beyond their intellectual ability. Obamacare may ultimately be bad for the economy or others in the industry but, for the insured, there is no argument that it is the best benefit the government ever gave us.
On another topic –congrats on UCLA having the number one recruiting class. No wait, my bad. The number one recruiting class …[drum roll] is Duke. Déjà vu all over again.
Okafor is for real. I’ve never seen post moves like that by an 18 year old. Better than Shaq, better that Hakeem....Shaq sat on the bench his freshman year. If Okafor has any ceiling at all above where he is now, we’re talking All Star. But don’t even think about it – he will not be around at Number 2 for the Lakers.
And he does not "fit"with Julius Randle.
By the way, remember our argument on whether the Steve Nash trade was a bad idea? You’ve been pretty quiet on that one. Talk about flushing money and picks down the drain. Giving Kobe 36 million for his declining years was almost as bad. Need to get rid of the Buss children before the Lakers can rebuild.
There is nothing "illegal" that the lawsuit alleges about the law. The justices may take up a different route "intent of the law". About the rebates I went through the arguments and found one line from Chief Justice Roberts when he said ".....so it can be modified by a future Administration" that gives credibility to my view. Actually former GOP Senator Trent Lott told GOP to pass a bill amending the law to allow rebates across the board and prevent a court ruling. Knowing the "block and obstruct" culture of the GOP, that was too much to ask for.
I am sure the ACA will be allowed to stay with a 6-3 or 5-4 ruling.
Then it will be up to Congress to pass an amendment to allow rebates in all exchanges.
What?
The Supremes are dealing with a mere 4 words in the text of this massive monstrosity. Go read it.
Having coverage is one thing. Getting treatment is quite a different story.
For me, I bought my own healthcare plan and I want nothing to do with the Federal Government
and some clerk deciding what care they would be so kind to allow me. I depend on no one but myself.
Anyone wanting the centralized gov't to take care of them, be my guest
will not
Well that is your 5 cents and I am allowed to put in my 5 cents. End of argument.
The policies are issued by for profit private sector, if you don't know. The ACA only mandates that those policies cover certain things:
1. allow people with pre-existing conditions
2. preventive care and check ups
3. mental illness
4. birth control and contraception