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

1 posted on 07/09/2012 7:07:49 PM PDT by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
There'll be a court challenge and eventually Mr Roberts & Friends will rule that all must obey.ALL must obey.
2 posted on 07/09/2012 7:13:00 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Jimmy Carter Is No Longer The Worst President Of My Lifetime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

They would have to vacate their own ruling and rule that states must expand Medicaid.


3 posted on 07/09/2012 7:15:55 PM PDT by tobyhill (Conservatives are proud of themselves, Liberals lie about themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Nice.


4 posted on 07/09/2012 7:18:03 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat ( We're all Texians now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
They would have to vacate their own ruling and rule that states must expand Medicaid.

"Wise Latinas" specialize in that stuff.

5 posted on 07/09/2012 7:20:28 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Jimmy Carter Is No Longer The Worst President Of My Lifetime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

>> placing the state with the highest percentage of people without insurance outside key parts of President Barack Obama’s signature law.

No detectable bias there, eh? :-)

Good for our Governor, though!

As an aside... how I wish Gov. Perry, and not mittens, was to be running against Barky.

But, as they say down here, wish in one hand and spit in the other and see which one fills up the fastest. :-(


6 posted on 07/09/2012 7:21:54 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
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%?

7 posted on 07/09/2012 7:29:48 PM PDT by Pollster1 (Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
They all have health care.

It's just insurance the feds are cramming down our throats... doesn't matter what we want mind you. It'll be their way only. Aholes.

8 posted on 07/09/2012 7:35:05 PM PDT by Principled (It's not enthusiasm for Romney, it's grim determination to remove Hussein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

And you prove in one question why no intelligent person trusts the MSM. One simple question and the media ran past it.

As simple as asking for college transcripts of Obama, or how did he get a Connecticut SSN.

The media won’t ask how many Citizens are uninsured, beccause that number is very low. Illegals swarm our ERs and absorb out welfare. So expect that to never be answered.


9 posted on 07/09/2012 7:37:27 PM PDT by King_Corey (www.kingcorey.com -- OpenCarry.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Don’t know the answer to your questions, but...

27% of Texans are under18.


10 posted on 07/09/2012 7:40:05 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

“Why do I suspect that it is a whole lot less than 24.6%?”

Cause you’re forgettin a whole big ole segement of the “population”.


11 posted on 07/09/2012 7:40:36 PM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Bingo ... we have a winner, the word is “citizens”. The expansion of Medicaid was written expressly to cover illegal or undocumented or Mexicans or South Americans or whatever the hell you want to call them. Once you expand Medicaid, you can never go back and the Feds will (guaranteed) change the rules and decrease the funding. Look at the idiot states that grabbed the money lure to expand their unemployment insurance program .... they are deeply in debt to the Feds and can’t go back. For that percentage without Medicaid in Texas, please take a good look at moving to a state such as Mass, Il.,Californicate, NY, etc. to take care of your needs. They are states that are losing population and would love to have you.


12 posted on 07/09/2012 7:41:13 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet (Skittle pooping unicorns are more common than progressives with honor & integrity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Encourage everyone to go to the link and read the statements, such as:

“I will not be party to socializing healthcare and bankrupting my state in direct contradiction to our Constitution and our founding principles of limited government,” Perry said in a statement.


13 posted on 07/09/2012 7:41:22 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

>> I’m sure this is a silly question, but what percentage of Texas citizens are without medical insurance?

Or medical care? Probably none.

The numbers Reuters claims likely reflects illegals.


14 posted on 07/09/2012 7:42:09 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

” - - - 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.”

SO WHAT!!!!!???????????????

The State and Federal Governments have nothing to do with insurance or delivering Medical procedures.

The Government exists to govern, not go into the cesspool of unlimited debt creation to “help” people.


15 posted on 07/09/2012 7:43:46 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I wanna move to Texas...


16 posted on 07/09/2012 7:44:00 PM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Principled; Pollster1

Based on first hand observance and experience in the health field in our part of Texas, you can make a WHOLE LOT of money by just seeing Medicaid patients for health and dental care. Lots of really wealthy dentists whose very busy practices are based primarily on income from Medicaid. It’s generally the Black and Hispanic kids in grade schools who have the perfect teeth. Rest of them, not so much because dental insurance for the rest of us is very expensive.

No one even knows for sure how many people we have in Texas any more because of the open border so whatever number they use should be considered bogus.

If you would get rid of just the restaurants and buildings where health/dental care of some sort is provided and just those people that work in these two areas, this would be a very desolate state.


17 posted on 07/09/2012 7:50:06 PM PDT by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

You Got IT!

The Constitution has nothing to do with health care or insurance.

The “general welfare” clause is just that- a clause but not an Article. Nothing binding there.

To hell with these twisters!


18 posted on 07/09/2012 8:20:28 PM PDT by One Name (Go to the enemy's home court and smoke his ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

That was one positive of the ruling. The Roberts court protected the states from coercion by the Feds. Wish that would happen in a hundred other cases.


19 posted on 07/09/2012 8:47:01 PM PDT by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RetiredTexasVet

Indeed. The Federal Government wants to force Texas to spend more money on health AND education, although much of the burden is owing to the presence of non-citizens.


20 posted on 07/09/2012 8:47:05 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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]

To: RobbyS
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.

So what's your point?

Your on a conservative website devoted to defeating socialist crap, no matter if it is implemented at the Federal Level or State Level or County Level or City level and it doesn't matter if a consitution states it is OK to do it or not.

It's not just bad policy, it's socialism.

Quit making excuses for the Progressive Liberalism of Mitt Romney on a conservative website.

It does not pass the smell test.
41 posted on 07/10/2012 7:26:03 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
Aaaahhh,never mind.Arguing with you is like arguing with my pet goldfish.Same result.

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


As usual, Romney supporters lacking the necessary facts, logic, or conservative point of view, resort to the only thing they have left, falst accusations or name-calling.

Your boy is a lying Progressive Liberal. Your approach is POP (Party over Principle).

Arguing with you is like arguing with any other GOP-E flack, no principles, more like mere suggestions that are fungible and are thrown away whenever they conflict with your chosen Pretend Conservatives record.


42 posted on 07/10/2012 7:30:59 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

States are feel to make bad choices. Don’t confuse what they ought to do with what they are allowed to do. The freedom is circumscribed by the the Constitution and nowadays by a domineering central government. Much of this is the fault of the states themselves, because of the bad choices they make. Too often they failure to do their main duty, which is to guard the rights of their citizens.


43 posted on 07/10/2012 8:17:17 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise

During the first ten years after I left collage, I had health insurance for less than 3 three, two of which I was in grad school. Never felt the need, because medical care was not that expensive. Plus I was healthy.


44 posted on 07/10/2012 8:22:22 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
States are feel to make bad choices. Don’t confuse what they ought to do with what they are allowed to do. The freedom is circumscribed by the the Constitution and nowadays by a domineering central government. Much of this is the fault of the states themselves, because of the bad choices they make. Too often they failure to do their main duty, which is to guard the rights of their citizens.

I'm not confusing anything here.

Once again, you are on a conservative website devoted to defeating Socialism.

Do you agree that implementing Socialized Medicine, whether it is ObamaCare or RomneyCare is not what the founders had in mind when they setup this grand experiment called a Democratic Republic?

Do you also agree that it is a BAD thing whether implemented at the State Level (and hiding behind the 10th Amendment) or the Federal Level?
45 posted on 07/10/2012 10:09:40 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: One Name
The “general welfare” clause is just that- a clause but not an Article.

Further, providing for the "general welfare" means doing things which don't benefit any identifiable person in particular, but rather the public at large. If the government builds a road connecting two large cities, such a road will--if it is well conceived--offer benefits not only to the inhabitants of those cities, but also anyone who wishes to purchase goods which can be most efficiently delivered via that route, or whose constituent components are most efficiently delivered via that route, etc. By contrast, if the government gives James Q. Smith a check for $100 in exchange for not working, it's hard to see how that could offer any substantial benefit to anyone other than James Q. Smith and perhaps his family (and of course, dependency may mean that the money does more harm than good, even to him and his).

46 posted on 07/10/2012 11:29:30 PM PDT by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Your approach is POP (Party over Principle).

My approach is that on 11/6 I'll be voting for a guy who,although noticeably "imperfect",will receive at least some,and very possibly the majority,of the Electoral votes cast in December.Furthermore this man will harm me and my family at least somewhat less,and very possibly much less,than America's first unashamedly Communist President will.

You,OTOH,will be voting for some guy who won't even merit an asterisk in the final report issued by the Electoral College later this year.

And trust me when I assure you that if you call your posts to the attention of David Axelrod he'll *personally* make sure that you get the opportunity to spend a night of passionate lovemaking with Moochelle out of gratitude for your "principled" stand.I can just imagine those sloppy kisses now.But do make sure you get yourself tested after your night of bliss.

47 posted on 07/11/2012 5:02:31 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Jimmy Carter Is No Longer The Worst President Of My Lifetime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
You,OTOH,will be voting for some guy who won't even merit an asterisk in the final report issued by the Electoral College later this year.

And you will have sacrificed your principles and morals (If you really have any) on the alter of Fear and Political expediency, while will have not.

Congratulations!
48 posted on 07/11/2012 11:55:43 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

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