Posted on 03/06/2017 3:13:27 PM PST by gwjack
I think they’re pulling your leg.
so far this look like an expansion of little tweaks for obamacare.
and what the hell is this messing with Social Security?
(c) SUNSET OF
ESSENTIAL
HEALTH
BENEFITS
REQUIREMENT
.—Section 1937(b)(5) of the Social Security
4
Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u–7(b)(5)) is amended by adding at
5
the end the following: ‘‘This paragraph shall not apply
6
after December 31, 2019.’’.
7
Obamacare’s replacement explained “We begin by repealing the awful taxes,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSTD-Lo8P5o
Problem is he could get 60 with Democrats over a Trump veto.
So the betrayal would be Ryan, Rinos, and Democrats.
I wonder where to find the money Ryan is being paid to do this.
Deductions allow people to keep their own money. Tax credits reach into the pockets of others.
Contact Trump and tell HIM how unhappy you are instead. He’s been shown to listen, even if Congress doesn’t .
Stop sniffing glue.
ok further research on this section. this looks like delayed “repeal” of an ACA requirement added to social security.
The GOPe completely accepted the Dumbocrat framing of this issue. “Oh, dear, we can’t take health insurance away from 20 million people!” But yes, we can and we should. Nothing keeps most of them from figuring out a way to maintain their health without stealing tax dollars. If we “take away” the immoral, illegal and unconstitutional government-steals-money-for-you option, people would be forced to be creative. That is how it should be: Everybody looks out for himself and doesn’t ask for anything from anybody else. If you have faith in God, He will provide. And if He doesn’t, then God has His reasons. TRUST GOD, not the government!
“I’m not sure what Ryan is doing or why we need him.”
Agreed. Entrenched GOPe RINO who is REALLY a Big D...in more ways than one, LOL!
Is Grothman with the House leadership on this?
“However, we DID flip WI to RED for Trump.”
That you did. Well done.
A tax credit can also only reduce your taxes to zero.
From the summary:
Citizens AND Legal residents (ie. refugees, people on visas) are all eligible.
No change to purchasing insurance across state lines
No applying the antitrust laws to medical device and pharmaceutical countries.
No repeal of the mandate. no mention of repeal of the tax for non-payment - just allowing for a 30% price penalty for late enrollment.
No mention of the ‘death panels’ (and everything not mentioned stands.
No mention of all the other things ‘christmas treed’ onto the ACA - like government takeover of student loans
Definitely not a repeal - just a tweak. Republicans are cowards, afraid of the free market.
Repeal now.
Replace, well, maybe later. Or not. Don’t much care.
I PREFER FREEDOM FROM GOVERNMENT!
From the referenced article …
"But in recent months, since President Donald Trump took office, GOP members of Congress have increasingly been confronted by constituents worried about the prospect of losing insurance gained through Obamacare [emphasis added].” — CNBC: House GOP releases plan to repeal, replace Obamacare
The MAJOR constitutional problem with federal government regulation of insurance is the following. A previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that insurance policies are a contract, not commerce, regardless if the parties establishing a contract are domiciled in different states.
"4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract [emphases added] of indemnity against loss.” —Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
So regulating insurance is not in the scope of Congress’s Commerce powers. The states would therefore need to expressly amend the Constitution to grant Congress the specific power to regulate insurance imo.
Corrections, insights welcome.
In fact, note that former Speaker Pelosi seems to have ignored a resolution for proposing a healthcare amendment to the Constitution to the states before she irresponsibly rammed Obamacare through the House.
H.J.Res. 30 (111th): Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right of citizens of the United States to health care of equal high quality
A proposed amendment perhaps should include a provision that granted the feds the specific power to regulate INTRAstate healthcare insurance.
Drain the swamp! Drain the swamp!
Remember in November ’18 !
Since Trump entered the ’16 presidential race too late for patriots to make sure that there were state sovereignty-respecting candidates on the primary ballots, patriots need make sure that such candidates are on the ’18 primary ballots so that they can be elected to support Trump in draining the unconstitutionally big federal government swamp.
Such a Congress will also be able to finish draining the swamp with respect to getting the remaining state sovereignty-ignoring, activist justices off of the bench.
Noting that the primaries start in Iowa and New Hampshire in February ‘18, patriots need to challenge candidates for federal office in the following way.
Patriots need to qualify candidates by asking them why the Founding States made the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I; to limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers.
Patriots also need to find candidates that are knowledgeable of the Supreme Court's clarifications of the federal government’s limited powers listed below.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphasis added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
I think this is going to be private health insurance, with tax breaks for pre-conditions.
I thought it was tax deductions, not tax credits.
Five pages about lottery winners to be included or excluded. Face Palm. P. 11-16.
Well said/written, my FRiend.
I never take personal umbrage at “spirited discussion” of articles I post. Maybe I’ve had too many federal judges dress me down to maintain thin skin. I put up the article as it was the first that came across on my “instant read.”
You are correct in that there is a total absence of allowable commerce to trigger the Commerce Clause. I remember the days/weeks we discussed it in Constitutional Law. FDR and the Congress at that time perverted the CC by making all laws “affecting” interstate commerce.
I hope the free market thinkers in the Republican Study Committee, the Freedom Caucus, and the few Senators are able to prevail. I’d like the President to weigh in with a Tweet about the need for repeal, and take up replace/reform/surrender later.
I personally believe the taxes and mandates are repugnant to a free society.
Thanks for posting. All my best.
Gwjack
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.