That Luke, he was a good ol' boy...
Posted on 07/26/2014 8:11:09 AM PDT by Citizen Zed
Remember how Democrats rushed into passing President Barack Obama 's Affordable Care Act back in 2010 while they still had the votes? Now health care for millions teeters on a typo.
(Excerpt) Read more at t.co ...
You may be right, they may not have the guts to rule in a way that allows the Democrats to suffer the consequences of their own duplicity.
If they enacted the law the intention of which was to make every citizen buy a pony, and that law included a penalty for people who refused, and the penalty was that they got a skunk from the government, the court would say the skunk clause could be ignored because the the intent was to provide everyone with a pony.
Clarence Page is an Obama hack. It wasn’t a typo—it was planned to be that way so that, so the thinking went, Republican governors would be “FORCED” to create exchanges.
So says one of the architects of the death panel law.
Sorry, Clarence, your ignorance won’t sell here.
He “misspoke” when he said it was a “typo”.
Ironically (for Obama), many more states would have probably set up their own exchanges had the law not changed every six weeks at the whim of President Obama’s political calculations. In other words, he might have got the ‘hammer he desired by only allowing state exchanges to get subsidies’ had he not overwhelmed even friendly states with his illegal executive orders.
The larger picture is simple: Obama does not care about running the country. He cares only about winning the political argument of the moment. He succeeds at this pretty well (unfortunately), but the price of this success is to be a failure as a leader...which will ultimately be his true legacy.
In the mean time, he’s made an absolute mess out of the actual ACA law that was passed by congress and he’s adulterated the mechanisms of government that exist to make any changes to the law in a legal manner.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.
The liberal 'round-about' continues, and their control of the various media outlets allows it to happen...
Initial response...it's a type in the legislation. Clearly that wasn't the intent
A few days later, the renowned architect of the system is shown on tape in 2012 saying the intent is exactly what is in the legislation. The left responds - 'what he says is irrelevant. He didn't write the law.
Round and round we go.
Well said. And with the compliant media carrying his water, Obama gets away with this Alinskyite crap again and again.
I hope I’m wrong but I think the Supreme Court will evetuakky rule based on the intent of the law rather than the actual text of the law stating that subsidies flow through state exchanges, rather than a federal exchange.
Is Clarence Page still sucking up oxygen? I though he had passed a while ago.
Hey Clarence is only 67.
He’s got a few more years before becoming a distinguished “senior” member of journ-0-list like Bob Schieffer or Dan Rather.
What BS! That was no typo. They put it in that deliberately, to (i) keep the cost estimates down, (ii) encourage state-run exchanges.
The fact that the same architect says, over and over, on tape, at the time that the law was passed and since, that Congress intended to limit the subsidies to states that established their own exchanges, and prohibit subsidies in states that relied on the federal government to establish the exchanges, is of no account.
Today’s story is that Congress intended all along to provide subsidies in all states, whether the states established the exchange or not.
So your memories of all of that talk about how holding the provision of subsidies over the states’ heads in order to force them to establish exchanges is just your overactive imagination. And all of that committee testimony in the Congressional Record and people saying the exact same thing into microphones is the same.
MINITRUE WORKORDER
BB 071010 SUBSIDY HAMMER DOUBLEPLUS UNGOOD
REVISE SUBSIDY ALL STATES UPSUB ANTEFILING
Ain’t nobody that can eat fifty eggs...
This is pure propaganda to pressure the supremes and their clerks to change the plain text of the Obamacare law and its original political intent. The implied threat is the violence that will result when the po’folk don’t get their government freebies. Unfortunately Judge Roberts will again be the deciding vote.
1. Grubers: We have all met Grubers in our lives.
2. They believe that they are the smartest persons in the room.
3 No mistakes: But the main thing about them is this: They believe that they don't make mistakes like us ordinary humans, or they believe that they rarely make mistakes.
3. My point is this: Gruber did not make a mistake when he talked about how only State exchanges could apply for Obamacare subsidies, because he said it at least twice. He knew exactly what he was saying. He knew exactly what the law said, because he wrote it. No typo error or excuse for Gruber. No "I was heavily medicated when i wrote it."
We also know that the law went through several revisions and proofreadings before it was finally accepted. So there is strong proof that what we see in the law is exactly what Gruber and Obama wanted in the law. Sorry, Gruber, but you messed up bigtime. So be it.
4. Since he wrote the law, I bet that he is one of the few persons who has actually read every word over and over. He probably even memorized the whole damn thing.
5. I can hear know-it-all Gruber defending himself:"Who are you going to believe, me or you own lying eyes?"
6. I say this to Gruber and his partner in crime Obama: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Baucus explained legislative intent in 2009. He says the tax credits go only to state exchanges; that, according to his argument/justification of Obamacare, is what makes the law legal:
http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/92861105023/video-sen-max-baucus-says-in-2009-obamacare-tax
It’s rich, btw, to hear Baucus talk about the many amendments that will be made to the Obamacare bill. The DC polls are a cadre of out-of-control, lawless shysters. Even the Dems knew they should have allowed amendments. They are gangsters, every last one of them; they run a criminal syndicate.
I fear this too, but there is actually a much better legal argument for the letter of the law to be enforced. It is after all, what was actually intend by Congress and the POTUS. We shall see....
I don't think it's the states who won't get subsidies, but the citizens of those states who buy insurance and otherwise qualify for a subsidy. And since those states did not set up state exchanges, the people not getting subsidies (if the law were followed as written) would be using the federal exchange.
It’s not a typo. It was a deliberate decision by congress to give subsidies and have the employer mandate only in states that created a state Obamacare exchange. It was the hammer to force states to have exchanges.
The statute is utterly clear in that regard. Jon Gruber, architect of Obamacare, said exactly that in 2012.
When only 14 states have adopted state exchanges, the IRS made up a rule that expanded the statute to state and federal exchanges. The result of that rule is a $600-$700 billion expansion in the federal budget. The IRS has no authority to spend money etc. But it did, big time.
Today’s narrative is that the clear language in Obamacare must have been a typo. That is a deliberate lie. Jon Gruber is now telling the lie de jour along with the rest of the administration and democrat party.
That Luke, he was a good ol' boy...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.