Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Texas rejects key provisions of Obama's health law
reuters ^ | 7/9/2012 | By Corrie MacLaggan

Posted on 07/09/2012 7:07:47 PM PDT by tobyhill

Governor Rick Perry said on Monday Texas will not implement an expansion of the Medicaid program or create a health insurance exchange, placing the state with the highest percentage of people without insurance outside key parts of President Barack Obama's signature law.

The announcement makes Texas the most populous state that has rejected the provisions. Some 6.2 million people are without health insurance in Texas, or 24.6 percent of the state population, the highest percentage in the nation. California has more people without insurance but a lower percentage.

Perry joined fellow Republican governors of Florida, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Mississippi and Louisiana in rejecting the two provisions of the law, according to americanhealthline.com. They hope that November elections will result in Republicans winning the White House and enough seats in Congress to repeal the law.

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; abortion; deathpanels; fubo; obama; obamacare; rickperry; statesrights; texas; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: One Name

The Federal Government does not have the police power, at least not on given by the Constitutions, but Roberts would have us believe there is. A state can require health insurance, which is Romney’s best defence of what he did. But as the United States is not a unitary state, nor a monarchy like Canada and the UK, nothing in the Constitution gives the Congress such a power.


21 posted on 07/09/2012 8:51:35 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

I agree with your assessment.

The individual States could require it under the 10th; but that is hardly the issue...

What a mess!


22 posted on 07/09/2012 9:01:42 PM PDT by One Name (Go to the enemy's home court and smoke his ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
There'll be a court challenge and eventually Mr Roberts & Friends will rule that all must obey.ALL must obey.

Kind of like in Massachusetts when Mitt Romney implemented his socialized Medicine complete with an Individual Mandate that enforced it's own "All Must Obey" clause.
23 posted on 07/09/2012 9:04:29 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: One Name

Thanks!

Have you noticed that Liberals in “both” parties always gravitate to the most unsolvable problems? And the longest lived tax opportunity?

Teenage smoking, (Zipper-Boy), Hilly”care,” etc.


24 posted on 07/09/2012 9:04:45 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: One Name

Liberals have long been infatuated with Parliamentary Government, because they long for centralized power. Parliamentary government is really monarchy whether there is a crowned head or not. The French Republic is monarchical even though it has no king. Canada and Australia are monarchies and will be even if they no long recognize the Queen. Our States are different in concept and history than Canadian provinces. One reason why Texas is so hated is that we HAVE a strong sense of separate identity, as Virginia and others once had. Liberals hate this, because they want to make Washington the Paris of America.


25 posted on 07/09/2012 9:16:53 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

The difference is that Massachusetts has the legitimate authority to do such a thing. Congress does not: yet, the Chief Justice has just said they do.


26 posted on 07/09/2012 9:19:02 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: All


Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


27 posted on 07/09/2012 9:24:07 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The difference is that Massachusetts has the legitimate authority to do such a thing. Congress does not: yet, the Chief Justice has just said they do.

So socialism at the State Level is OK, but not at the Federal level.

What a concept for a conservative to argue for.
28 posted on 07/09/2012 9:24:16 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Maybe they will still say no! The supreme wimps are not the final say of our nations policies! Never were meant to be.


29 posted on 07/09/2012 9:26:09 PM PDT by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Well, it may be bad policy and still be law. That is why Scalia mentioned slavery in connection with the Arizona case. It may have been bad policy, but even Lincoln acknowledged that a state had a right to institute it.


30 posted on 07/09/2012 9:33:29 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: fabian

Well, in “Casey” the Court just basically said that Blackmun’s opinion was piss poor. But they chose not to overturn the DECISION. A majority of the Court could still decide to reverse the decisions and somehow just ignore what Roberts has said. Of course, with him on the Court, if they did reverse without his consent, he might as well resign. I think the SOB hopes that the dissenters will soon disappear. He has a vested interest in Obama’s reelection and/or his succession by a non- conservative.


31 posted on 07/09/2012 9:39:57 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Good.


32 posted on 07/09/2012 10:09:35 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Thank you Perry! Now I can tell the Feds to stuff it if they try to force me to pay for abortion and contraception! :D


33 posted on 07/09/2012 10:12:08 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas, Texas, Whisky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
"Thank you Perry! Now I can tell the Feds to stuff it if they try to force me to pay for abortion and contraception! :D"

This was the very polite version of Texas saying cram it up your cram hole. Now if we don't win in November and repeal Obama care we might hear a less polite version of that message.

It might go something like this. Obama care STOPS at the border of Texas. Accept this kindly or we might just deal with you the same way we deal with a foolish batter that charges the mound.

34 posted on 07/09/2012 11:34:28 PM PDT by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"So socialism at the State Level is OK, but not at the Federal level. What a concept for a conservative to argue for."

Speaking the truth is not the same as arguing for it. A state can do anything allowed in its state constitution. It's the federal government that is limited by the US constitution. That's simply a fact.

35 posted on 07/10/2012 4:54:54 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist
"Obama care STOPS at the border of Texas. Accept this kindly or we might just deal with you the same way we deal with a foolish batter that charges the mound."

Unfortunately, Texas in the only state with authority to do all of this. The Republic of Texas, a soverign nation, joined the Union with a treaty. It was the only state to do so. The treaty says that it can also leave if it wants to.

36 posted on 07/10/2012 5:00:14 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Tell me,"friend",in '92 that absolute whackjob,Ross Perot, got almost 20% of the popular vote.Can you tell me what percentage of the Electoral vote he got?

Aaaahhh,never mind.Arguing with you is like arguing with my pet goldfish.Same result.

P.S.,Osama Obama sends hugs and kisses.

37 posted on 07/10/2012 5:13:20 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Jimmy Carter Is No Longer The Worst President Of My Lifetime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
I'm sure this is a silly question, but what percentage of Texas citizens are without medical insurance? Why do I suspect that it is a whole lot less than 24.6%?

Because you are not stupid.

What the article doesn't tell you is that the illegals they are counting in this bogus staticstic are not even covered by the law, and in fact, are specifically exempted. (So as to make them even more cost competitive against actual citizens.

38 posted on 07/10/2012 8:34:23 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Hopefully by then we will have the balls & guns to tell Traitor Roberts & friends where they can stick their unconstitutional edicts.

Liberty or Death!


39 posted on 07/10/2012 11:50:10 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

“”Some 6.2 million people are without health insurance in Texas, or 24.6 percent of the state population, the highest percentage in the nation.”

I’m sure this is a silly question, but what percentage of Texas citizens are without medical insurance? Why do I suspect that it is a whole lot less than 24.6%?”

Whether there is a distinction or not, I am one of that 6.2 million and I wish to stay that way until I choose,(not the government) otherwise!
A man has the right to decide how to spend his own money, and manage(or not manage) his own health.

Indeed looking at the obesity rates in Texas and the rest of these united States it seems rather clear that that many of us prefer to live with more health risk.

Y’all can go to hell Washington! I’ve gone to Texas where freedom still means something.


40 posted on 07/10/2012 11:56:50 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson