Page 4 of 401 FirstFirst 1234567891454104 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 8004

Thread: ACA Running Thread

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    Why do you think I'm talking about the House?

    This is a massive program with a lot moving parts. States, businesses, etc. there's got to be motivation. Enough people want it to fail that they'll kill it regardless.
    As is the fate of most brilliant, workable plans, everyone hates them.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrangor View Post
    Sounds pretty bad. Would love to hear some counterpoints as to why it isn't nearly as bad as it seems. Self Verification of eligibility for subsidies? Me thinks we might be inviting a small amount of fraud into the system.
    Just incredibly na´ve. Self-verification. Oh, okay.

    Let's run everything that way.
    Q: So, did you pay your taxes this year?
    A: Yeah, like, as far as you know.
    Q: Okay then, I guess we're done.
    Last edited by jhmd2000; 07-08-2013 at 10:15 PM.

  3. #63
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    120,297
    Quote Originally Posted by jhmd2000 View Post
    As is the fate of most brilliant, workable plans, everyone hates them.
    There's no discussion of improving the plan. Just scrapping it with no real discussion of what to replace it with. There's little will to do anything about health care except bend over and accept it and bitch about Obamacare.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    There's no discussion of improving the plan. Just scrapping it with no real discussion of what to replace it with. There's little will to do anything about health care except bend over and accept it and bitch about Obamacare.
    If they are seriously going to rely on self-verification, I need to understand how scrapping it isn't the best plan. Or the only not Charles-Barkely-turrrrible plan.

  5. #65
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    PH. - Obama is the one scrapping the plan. Businesses weren't being uncooperative. They didnt even have a chance.

    Individuals weren't gaming the system. The system hasn't even been set up. Obama delayed it because he saw the disaster it would be. Republicans are convinced the ACA is the equivalent of the Titanic. If they believe the best thing is for it to never leave shore why would it surprise you that they aren't going to swoop in and save the day.

    The democrats had full authority and ability to craft their own healthcare program. They did without any compromise from the pubs. It is their baby. Turns out it is pretty much DOA. blaming it on the people who from the go said "don't do this! It will be a disaster" is silly.

    The democrats created Frankenstein. Don't expect the republicans to step in and bring it to life. Both seats if legislature and the presidency. 5 years later and it is still a complete wreck.

  6. #66
    Some of us are still waiting for someone to explain how the president can decide not to enforce part of the law. Forget whether anything is good policy. It is the law. Furthermore, as this article indicated, it's poisoning the immigration debate.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/mornin...stom_click=rss

    “They have shown no respect for traditional Constitutional separation of powers,” Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., told National Review‘s John Fund about the impact of the Obamacare delays on the immigration debate, “and that makes it difficult to pass laws where the fear is that they will simply ignore the parts they don’t like.”

    Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, who is on the House Judiciary Committee and had been a member of a bipartisan group working on immigration reform, echoed Roe’s concerns on Meet the Press. “In fact, if you look at this Obamacare debacle that they have right now, this administration is actually deciding when and where to actually enforce the law. And that’s what some of us in the House are concerned about. If you give to this administration the authority to decide when they’re going to enforce the law, how they’re going to enforce the law … what’s going to happen is that we’re going to give legalization to 11 million people and Janet Napolitano is going to come to Congress and tell us that the border is already secure and nothing else needs to happen.”

  7. #67
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    120,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrangor View Post
    PH. - Obama is the one scrapping the plan. Businesses weren't being uncooperative. They didnt even have a chance.

    Individuals weren't gaming the system. The system hasn't even been set up. Obama delayed it because he saw the disaster it would be. Republicans are convinced the ACA is the equivalent of the Titanic. If they believe the best thing is for it to never leave shore why would it surprise you that they aren't going to swoop in and save the day.

    The democrats had full authority and ability to craft their own healthcare program. They did without any compromise from the pubs. It is their baby. Turns out it is pretty much DOA. blaming it on the people who from the go said "don't do this! It will be a disaster" is silly.

    The democrats created Frankenstein. Don't expect the republicans to step in and bring it to life. Both seats if legislature and the presidency. 5 years later and it is still a complete wreck.
    The Democrats created a bipartisan bill without bipartisan support that needs bipartisan implementation. It's a bad mix.

    And how can you say businesses weren't being uncooperative. All the talk was how businesses were cutting hours and planning to absorb the penalty instead of providing health care. Now I think an ideal health care model completely removes health care from employment. You can't say businesses were playing ball when they weren't.

    RaleighDevil, selective enforcement of laws occurs at every level of government. Not sure why you're getting upset about it here.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    The Democrats created a bipartisan bill without bipartisan support that needs bipartisan implementation. It's a bad mix.

    And how can you say businesses weren't being uncooperative. All the talk was how businesses were cutting hours and planning to absorb the penalty instead of providing health care. Now I think an ideal health care model completely removes health care from employment. You can't say businesses were playing ball when they weren't.

    RaleighDevil, selective enforcement of laws occurs at every level of government. Not sure why you're getting upset about it here.
    I certainly understand the academic argument here but the failure to implement the plan falls onto the organizations who designed it and who were supposed to implement it. The anti Obamacare factions have nothing to do with the issues/delays we've seen (SHOP, employer mandate, tax credits, etc). In fact, they have been begging for rules/details so they can be compliant.

    I think HHS spent way too much time on little things and didn't focus on the big ticket items until it was too late.

  9. #69
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    The Democrats created a bipartisan bill without bipartisan support that needs bipartisan implementation. It's a bad mix.

    And how can you say businesses weren't being uncooperative. All the talk was how businesses were cutting hours and planning to absorb the penalty instead of providing health care. Now I think an ideal health care model completely removes health care from employment. You can't say businesses were playing ball when they weren't.

    RaleighDevil, selective enforcement of laws occurs at every level of government. Not sure why you're getting upset about it here.
    PH - come on... a bipartisan bill that didn't get bipartisan support? Newsflash - if a bill received 0% support from one side of the political spectrum that means it isn't bipartisan. The Republicans didn't want anything to do with ACA. Call it obstructionism, call it Obama hate, call it foresight...whatever you want to call it - but they did not want this, did not support this, and have decried ACA every chance they have had (even going so far as to hold meaningless votes when new members of Congress enter...so they can put their dissapproving stamp on record).

    Secondly, you mean that businesses were in the planning stages of how they could best survive the added burden of more regulation and more obligation to their employees? Shocker! But again - we go back to the point. Business haven't had a chance to screw the system...neither have individuals. Because Obama squashed the Act before it was implemented (or delayed it).

    And this is certainly not normal operating procedure. This is a massive overhaul of about 15% of our national economy that was railroaded through government in a strictly partisan matter ... But then once signed into law the president just decides he can ignore the law and change it how he sees fit. I am sorry, but that is not business as usual.
    Last edited by Wrangor; 07-09-2013 at 07:03 AM.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    The Democrats created a bipartisan bill without bipartisan support that needs bipartisan implementation. It's a bad mix.

    And how can you say businesses weren't being uncooperative. All the talk was how businesses were cutting hours and planning to absorb the penalty instead of providing health care. Now I think an ideal health care model completely removes health care from employment. You can't say businesses were playing ball when they weren't.

    RaleighDevil, selective enforcement of laws occurs at every level of government. Not sure why you're getting upset about it here.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by jhmd2000 View Post
    You're right. The Democrats latched on to a horrible Republican idea.

  12. #72
    ACA was indefensible when it was passed, especially since the budget numbers cited to justify it as the "biggest deficit reduction bill EVER" were completely and transparently gamed. If a Wall Street CEO ordered his CFO to game the numbers in his 10-Ks the way Democrats structured ACA to game the CBO numbers, the CEO and the CFO would be in jail.

    The first giant brick to fall out was Ted Kennedy's unworkable long term care insurance program - the one that provided billions of revenue in the first ten years to game CBO, but then had to payout in the second 10 years after CBO stopped counting.

    This latest round of unilateral delays and this self-verification nonsense are completely indefensible and blame is rightfully laid on the administration and the people who originally designed the legislation.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by WFFaithful View Post
    You're right. The Democrats latched on to a horrible Republican idea.
    So horrible in fact that even the Republicans had the good sense not to pass it into law. If only.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    The Democrats created a bipartisan bill without bipartisan support that needs bipartisan implementation. It's a bad mix.

    And how can you say businesses weren't being uncooperative. All the talk was how businesses were cutting hours and planning to absorb the penalty instead of providing health care. Now I think an ideal health care model completely removes health care from employment. You can't say businesses were playing ball when they weren't.

    RaleighDevil, selective enforcement of laws occurs at every level of government. Not sure why you're getting upset about it here.
    Businesses make decisions that work best for them that fall in line with the law. If the feds didn't want them to have those choices they could have eliminated them in their writing of the law.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mangler View Post
    Businesses make decisions that work best for them that fall in line with the law. If the feds didn't want them to have those choices they could have eliminated them in their writing of the law.
    Yeah, that bolded line might count as the dumbest thing Ph has ever said on this board. Businesses were doing exactly what they needed to do to operate exactly within the bounds of this turd of a law, which means they were being uncooperative?

  16. #76
    Boomer Boy Shorty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    GA's Gilded 6th
    Posts
    7,930
    Actually, if Republicans were strictly playing politics with ACA and not acting in the best interests of the American people, they should insist the program be fully implemented as mandated by law. People would be chasing down democrat pols with dogs in five years.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mangler View Post
    Businesses make decisions that work best for them that fall in line with the law. If the feds didn't want them to have those choices they could have eliminated them in their writing of the law.
    That would have required that they read the law prior to passing it.

  18. #78
    Who would of thought that a gagillion page bill, that was read by nobody who voted for it, would turn out to be a miserable failure with all kinds of unforeseen circumstances and outcomes. Its not like we've had any similar issues with the Patriot Act.
    Last edited by BillBrasky; 07-09-2013 at 06:32 PM.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrangor View Post
    PH - come on... a bipartisan bill that didn't get bipartisan support? Newsflash - if a bill received 0% support from one side of the political spectrum that means it isn't bipartisan. The Republicans didn't want anything to do with ACA. Call it obstructionism, call it Obama hate, call it foresight...whatever you want to call it - but they did not want this, did not support this, and have decried ACA every chance they have had (even going so far as to hold meaningless votes when new members of Congress enter...so they can put their dissapproving stamp on record).
    Secondly, you mean that businesses were in the planning stages of how they could best survive the added burden of more regulation and more obligation to their employees? Shocker! But again - we go back to the point. Business haven't had a chance to screw the system...neither have individuals. Because Obama squashed the Act before it was implemented (or delayed it).

    And this is certainly not normal operating procedure. This is a massive overhaul of about 15% of our national economy that was railroaded through government in a strictly partisan matter ... But then once signed into law the president just decides he can ignore the law and change it how he sees fit. I am sorry, but that is not business as usual.
    1. The Affordable Care Act is built on the same scaffolding as former Gov. Mitt Romney’s health reform approach in Massachusetts. Both reforms create new coverage options through insurance reforms and Medicaid expansions, improve the affordability of coverage, and require shared responsibility for health care financing across individuals, employers, and taxpayers.

    2. The new law requires all individuals to hold health coverage—an idea advanced by Stuart Butler and Ed Haislmaier of the Heritage Foundation as far back as 1989. Other conservative scholars and Republican policymakers who have embraced the idea of shared responsibility include Mark Pauly, a health economist at the University of Pennsylvania; Sen. John Chafee; a group of the health care law’s cosponsors—including Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT)—who introduced similar legislation in 1993; and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

    3. The Affordable Care Act requires health insurers to pool the risk of small businesses and individuals through the health insurance exchange—thus giving them greater bargaining power and better rates. Enabling individuals, small businesses, and trade associations to band together and obtain better prices was a key plank in the House Republican leadership’s “Solutions for America.”

    4. The Affordable Care Act gives young adults new coverage options. These include staying on their family coverage through age 26 just like the proposal the House Republicans offered during the health reform debate.

    5. Employers may automatically enroll their workers in health insurance. This was proposed by the Republican Study Group and the House Republican leadership during the health care debate last year.

    6. Employers may use premium incentives and other tools to encourage workers to participate in a range of workplace wellness programs. This idea enjoyed widespread Republican support. Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE), the Republican House leadership, and the Republican Study Committee introduced proposals during last year’s health care debate. A bipartisan group of senators led by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) also championed this approach in the Senate HELP Committee.

    7. States may use federal funding to experiment with medical liability reforms. This is similar to the proposals advanced by Sens. Mike Enzi (R-WY), Richard Burr (R-NC), and Tom Coburn (R-OK), and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) during the reform debate.8. Families and businesses may purchase coverage across state lines. This was an idea shepherded by Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) and others, including the House Republican leadership, during the health care debate.

    9. States may pursue their own approaches to health reform as long as they can provide equivalent or better coverage at a comparable or lower cost. The House Republican leadership championed state innovation in their alternative proposal to health reform.

    10. The Affordable Care Act establishes high-risk pools that provide access to health coverage for those who generally are unable to find affordable insurance in the individual market, particularly those with a preexisting condition. This is an idea Republicans endorsed in their alternative proposal.

    Really?
    Last edited by ONW; 07-09-2013 at 06:19 PM.
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  20. #80
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    So be honest ONW. What web site did you copy and paste from? At least reference your direct quotes. Don't go RJ on us.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •