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

Skip to comments.

ObamaCare Can Be Repealed (Obamacare is today's Intolerable Act)
RealClearPolitics ^ | 3/23/2010 | Edwin Feulner

Posted on 03/23/2010 12:07:05 PM PDT by mojito

Late Sunday night, in a narrow and partisan vote, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the most significant piece of social legislation in over seven decades. It did so in the face of overwhelming and principled opposition from the American people. Large majorities of Americans oppose this legislation because it offends the historic American dedication to the principle of self-government. They understand that this new law will accelerate Washington's intrusion into our most personal and private decisions.

This is why opposition to this bill will only grow. Supporters of this bill argue that popular hostility will recede upon its passage. But, rather than cementing our descent into a European-style welfare state, last night's passage of Obamacare is best seen as a historic turning point, a true catalyst for real change.

I write to reassure our supporters, the conservative movement, and the American people at large that The Heritage Foundation will do all within its power to keep this issue alive in the public square and make the intellectual case for the repeal of this act. We will bring all our resources to bear on behalf of those who believe America is and will always remain the Land of the Free.

This, rest assured, can be done. The American people are never permanently thwarted. President Obama's health care legislation can and will be repealed.

[....]

If there is one good thing about the past year - one in which we have witnessed unprecedented horse-trading, press stunts, midnight votes and political manipulation in both houses of the U.S. Congress - it is that the American people have come away educated as never before about the differences between these two visions for America.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 111th; bho44; bhofascism; bhohealthcare; bhosocialism; bhotyranny; communism; demcare; democrats; fascism; healthcare; impeachobama; liberalfascism; marxism; obama; obamacare; socialism; socialisminamerica; socialisthealthcare; socializedhealthcare; socializedmedicine; tyranny; unconstitutional
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 next last
To: kalee

I hope someone has an answer for this lady.....perhaps she still needs to shop around? It’s stories like that that tick me off...


121 posted on 03/23/2010 3:29:08 PM PDT by Fawn (Exterminate Pitbulls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Dick Holmes
“they put in a mandate for everyone to buy insurance”

...with high income households subsidizing low income households (income re-distribution forced by law).

122 posted on 03/23/2010 3:29:34 PM PDT by Gabrial (The Whitehouse Nightmare will continue as long as the Nightmare is in the Whitehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

There is such a thing as COBRA, which covers you between jobs. As long as you have continuous coverage, you are fine. If you drop coverage for any length of time, your previous illnesses become pre-existing conditions. At least that was the way it worked for me. I ran out of COBRA at one point and had to pay for insurance at the going rates for a certain period to make sure I remained continuously covered.


123 posted on 03/23/2010 3:36:20 PM PDT by firebrand (working on a plan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

As other posters have described it varies. I think the most common is to exclude it from coverage. You have it, if you get treatment for it the only reasonable premium is the cost of the treatment plus some profit for administration. In other words, charge you more for the treatment than you would otherwise pay.

So they exclude treatment for the pre-existing condition and insure you for everything else.

Insurance is shared risk. Everyone has a small risk of X, you all pay in, the percentage that get X are paid for by those that don’t.

If you already have the condition, your risk is 100%.

Another way of looking at it is as a gamble. You are gambling that your claims will be more than your premiums (else you would just put the premium money in the bank and come out ahead.

The insurer is betting the opposite - your premiums will be more than your claims and he will make a profit.

If you come to the insurer already with a claim, what premium is possible BELOW the cost of that claim? IOW, who would take that gamble?


124 posted on 03/23/2010 3:38:00 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Yes, or “crime doesn’t pay” is another way to look at it. You are actually committing fraud when you lie on an insurance questionnaire.


125 posted on 03/23/2010 3:39:04 PM PDT by firebrand (working on a plan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
It’s now a “health care plan.” Kind of like buying a maintenance plan

Except for catastrophic, which is what I have. And seems likely to go bye-bye under Obamacare.

126 posted on 03/23/2010 3:40:08 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
I actually think we would have been better off with a Republican-sponsored single-payer plan, rather than this hodgepodge that will run the insurance companies out of business. We could have (or may be able to, in the future) eliminate all the abortion, euthanasia, age-based coverage (Medicare cuts), ID cards, peeking into bank accounts, siphoning off funds by the IRS, hiring of 16,500 new IRA agents, limits on yearly coverage to $5,000 (if that's still in there), and all the other intrusions I forgot to mention. If you're sick or injured, you go to a doctor and get treated. End of story.

The health care plan that just became law is a power grab and a redistribution-of-income plan. Maybe the Republicans could start working on a simple, single-payer alternative to this monstrosity.

127 posted on 03/23/2010 3:49:35 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

I agree. Her husband had worked his whole adult life until he became ill. They spent all their savings during his long illness. Finally he was granted disability so they had some relief. His disability did not provide anything for her and only covered the children until they turned 18. Her son is not able to get insurance due to the mental health issues. He has been advised to apply for disability. Her husband has been dead for 2 years and she and her son are uninsured.

We give free medical to illegals and to welfare mamas, my friend can;t even find someone to take her if she pays.


128 posted on 03/23/2010 3:52:19 PM PDT by kalee (The offences we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Makes sense....thanks


129 posted on 03/23/2010 3:52:20 PM PDT by Fawn (Exterminate Pitbulls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

I agree....so many have said this is really not about health care—it’s about distributing wealth and capitalism. We need tort reform and other things....but this bill is so intrusive and inclusive, it needs to be stomped to death!


130 posted on 03/23/2010 3:53:49 PM PDT by Fawn (Exterminate Pitbulls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Tort reform and closing of the borders. Essential.


131 posted on 03/23/2010 3:58:42 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Secession talk is really picking up steam. It is a viable option for the states. Of course, they would not let us go peaceably. I truly believe that open revolt is coming to this nation and I fear the terrible storm to come. In my lifetime I have never seen resentment as palpable as this.


132 posted on 03/23/2010 4:00:52 PM PDT by defendingright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
How do you feel about insurance companies rejecting people with pre-existing conditions? I never really thought about that before...but I think that’s pretty sh*tty.

Just out of curiosity, if you for whatever reason did not have any insurance on your automobile, and you totaled it in a wreck, would you expect the local Geico, or State Farm, or Nationwide to write you a policy the next day providing full coverage retroactive to before you had your accident, and then pay the full price of repairing or replacing the car that you totaled? Would you consider it "sh*tty" of them to say "Sorry, we don't cover accidents or other losses that occurred prior to the effective date of your policy"?

133 posted on 03/23/2010 4:00:57 PM PDT by VRWCmember (NOHCRIN10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mojito

So will the ambulance chasing lawyers now sue the government when an operation goes wrong?


134 posted on 03/23/2010 4:03:12 PM PDT by jetson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
Don’t put words in my mouth.....I want private insurance to stay put.....but you are obviously in favor of kicking the weak to the curb. Nice.

You want private insurance to stay put, but you think it is "sh*tty" that they can deny coverage for pre-existing conditions? If insurance companies are forced to cover pre-existing conditions, then they will not and cannot stay put. If your world view includes a dichotomy of forcing insurance companies to cover all pre-existing conditions or the weak being kicked to the curb, then you are the type of voter that is easily deceived into voting for democrats.

135 posted on 03/23/2010 4:06:44 PM PDT by VRWCmember (NOHCRIN10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial
A man works twenty years at Company 1 and pays premiums for twenty years to Aetna through payroll deduction. In year 21 he contracts diabetes. Aetna covers it. Then Company 1 shuts down and he loses his job. The next day the same guy goes to work across the street at Company 2 that also uses Aetna for healthcare insurance. Aetna won't insure him because he has a pre-existing condition. Is that fair to the man? In my book it stinks. In his type of situation I agree with post #2.

In your scenario, the man would be able to continue coverage thru COBRA upon losing his job at company 1 and have continued coverage until he gets another job that offers insurance. When his coverage thru the Company 2 sponsored plan kicks in, he has no lapse of coverage, and since he was covered by the plan in effect when his new plan started, his diabetes would not be a "pre-existing condition" (he already had coverage when he was diagnosed) so it would be covered by his new insurance plan. This is the way it works with most insurance companies that provide employer sponsored insurance.

136 posted on 03/23/2010 4:19:59 PM PDT by VRWCmember (NOHCRIN10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: All

“Our children and our grand children will grow up knowing that man named Barack Obama put the final girder
in the framework for a SOCIAL network in this country” -Joe Biden

I got chills when I heard this.... you bet my children are going to grow up knowing a man named Barack Obama destroyed the values of our country.


137 posted on 03/23/2010 4:35:53 PM PDT by prisoner6sson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember

I want to ‘force’ anyone to anything.


138 posted on 03/23/2010 5:11:15 PM PDT by Fawn (Exterminate Pitbulls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
You want cold? How about a letter from a government bureaucrat that starts: "Dear potential Heart Bypass patient. If you are still alive, your surgery will be scheduled for March 23, 2014......

Grow up already. Not everything in life is able to be put in a neat little package. People without "insurance" are still able to get medical treatment in this country. But those days are numbered because enough little twits didn't think our system was "fair". So we'll get fair alright. Fair and p!ss poor for all.

139 posted on 03/23/2010 7:17:37 PM PDT by Mygirlsmom (R.I.P. Republic In Peril)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Exactly. It’s no different than you have no insurance on your car, have a wreck that does thousands in damage and THEN go get car insurance and tell them to fix it.


140 posted on 03/23/2010 10:01:56 PM PDT by gopheraj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 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