Posted on 05/25/2015 10:41:24 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
WASHINGTON (CBS/AP) — A Supreme Court ruling due in late June could wipe out health insurance for millions of people covered by the president’s health care law.
But it is Republicans — and not White House officials — who are talking about damage control.
If that sounds wrong, check the math.
(Excerpt) Read more at sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com ...
Yeah, too bad the court has an obligation to not allow funding for an unapproved activity.
Correct, those guys want it in place to use it as leverage they will never get rid of.
Those Republicans will be in damage control mode with all of their contributors who have benefitted from Obamacare. In the real world, people will be thrilled to get the feds out of their health care decisions.
From what I understand millions of Americans still don’t have medical insurance because of the stratospheric cost of 0care. People just ain’t signing up. No matter how much advertising and/or moral suasion by the obamas, nobody wants it. Even the original Obamacare girl wanted out.
Republicans better find a way to counter all the lies and half-truths from the press and television media. If not they’ve lost before the game has actually begun.
From your mouth to Allah’s ear, as the saying goes...
good! two birds with one stone!!
The only way this would work is if SCOTUS overturned Obamacare just before the election, and the media went splodeynanas about how it was the republican’s fault.
That would require coordination between SCOTUS, MSM, DNC, and the White House.
“Vote Democrat NOW to save your free health care!” Sounds a little like Vote Dem NOW or the Pubbies will cancel your Soshakurity!
Don’t worry, they would never stoop so low just to win an election and lock in a permanent Dem voter base.
“From what I understand millions of Americans still don’t have medical insurance...”
47 million were unisnsured when Ocare started, 7 million supposedly signed up.
“Republicans better find a way to counter all the lies and half-truths...”
GOP pols have never been good at that.
The MSM know the judges read the papers. This is their way of trying to influence the decisions.
The conservatives in the GOP could “grab the bull by the horns”, to bring back privatized medicine at the national level. To be acceptable to the public, it has to have several key ingredients.
1) To start with, reassure Medicare recipients that they will continue to get their Medicare. However, nobody else is put in the Medicare system after a given cut off date. Medicare’s evil twin, Social Security, is ended the same way, with nobody new entering the system.
2) Strongly restrict insurance for routine health care. Insurance should only be for catastrophic and long term care.
3) End the data gathering parts of HIPAA, as well as making it a federal crime to access patient records without their permission, as well as the restoration of doctor patient privilege without a signed warrant for those particular records.
4) Medicaid will be given to the states as block grants, and federal guidelines for the spending of Medicaid money will be voluntary for the states.
5) Right now some doctors have discovered that if they do not take Medicare, Medicaid or insurance, their costs are so low that they can provide the same level of care for 50% less as well as make more money. So this is the preferred form for full privatization. HMOs will still exist, however.
Like they suffered in the 2014 mid-terms!!
"I actually do not believe this"
Call me a cynic, but IMO all Obamacare did was replace a costly and dysfunctional health care system with one that is costlier and even more dysfunctional.
According to the CIA World Factbook, the US ranks 51st in life expectancy at birth, but we spend almost twice as much for our health care as any other developed country.
Can Republicans even begin to address this? It took 70 years to create it, I am skeptical that it can be fixed during my lifetime. That's no matter what the SC decides here.
The USA tries to save preemies, and a lot of them die anyway. Eliminate those preemies from the statistics and we have a lower infant mortality rate.
And I now hope that Ginsberg stays on through the end of 0bama’s term, such that the next President gets to appoint the next Justice.
Always and ever living God, may it be Your will that Ted Cruz be the 45th President of this great nation!
Bump
So if the Supreme Court rules against Obamacare then the Democrats will immediately propose a one line change to Obamacare that will correct the issue the Supreme Court ruled on. And if the Republicans vote that down then the will own it.
And the nation will really suffer if it is not canceled.
As mentioned in related threads, regardless what Obama’s activist justices want everybody to think about the constitutionality of Obamacare, the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for intrastate healthcare purposes. This is evidenced by the excerpts from historical Supreme Court case opinions towards the end of this post.
The constitutional reality is that each state should have its own, 10th Amendment-protected healthcare program if that’s what a give state’s voters want, RomneyCare a rough example.
The reason that the corrupt federal government is trying to force unconstitutional federal healthcare on the states gets us back to the 17th Amendment.
More specifically, the Founding States had not only established the federal Senate, but had given the power to vote for senators uniquely to state lawmakers. The reason that only state lawmakers could vote for federal senators was so that senators would protect their states in Congress by killing bills which not only steal state powers, but also state revenues assoctiated with those powers, intrastate healthcare now added to the list of stolen state powers.
In fact, the Supreme Court has historically clarified that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue which Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers, such powers not including healthcare as evidenced by the excerpts at the end of this post.
“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.
But as a consequence of ill-conceived 17A, low-information voters now go home after voting for their favorite federal senators and watch football, clueless that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to establish things like Obamacare. As a consequence, corrupt senators get away with stealing from their own states by passing unconstitutional bills like Obamacare instead of killing it.
In fact, the Senate is constitutionally obligated to lead Congress to successfully propose a healthcare amendment to the Constitution to the states before passing such a bill.
And what’s worse is that the Senate then confirms activist justices who declare unconstitutional laws like Obamacare to be constitutional.
What a racket!
Below are excerpts from Supreme Court case opinions which clarify that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate healthcare.
Regarding the constitutionality of Obamacare insurance which activist justices are now probably looking for an excuse to justify, please note the third entry in the list below from Paul v. Virginia. That excerpt clarifies that insurance policies are a simple contract, not commerce. And Congress’s Commerce Clause powers do not extend to regulating insurance policies, even if buyer and seller belong to different states.
”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. [emphases added]” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” —Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
”4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce [emphasis added] within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract of indemnity against loss.” — Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925.
Again, there’s never been anything stopping the states from establishing their own healthcare programs, or from amending the Constitution to expressly grant such powers to the feds.
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators and activist justices along with it.
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.