Health care: Republicans aim to halt ...

Health care: Republicans aim to halt 'Obamacare'

There are 120 comments on the WJLA-TV Arlington story from Aug 22, 2013, titled Health care: Republicans aim to halt 'Obamacare'. In it, WJLA-TV Arlington reports that:

More than a third of House Republicans urged their leader Thursday to trigger a government shutdown rather than fund the implementation of the health care overhaul they call "Obamacare."

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WJLA-TV Arlington.

Since: Aug 13

Temecula, CA

#43 Aug 24, 2013
The ACA was passed by a Democrat Congress and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president. There will be no government shut down because the public will rightly blame Republicans, and party leaders know this. If the GOP wants to repeal the ACA, they better get control of the Senate and Presidency. But they seem hellbent on losing in 2016 (Ted Cruz, seriously???), so get used to the ACA.

Besides, the ACA already has too many popular provisions to be repealed successfully (ban on lifetime coverage, no denial for preexisting conditions, kids stay on parents' plan longer, free health screenings, 80-20 insurance spending, etc.) Anything the GOP offers as an alternative (and they haven't offered any alternative, as Newt points out) will have to contain the popular provisions of the ACA.

“Yeah, but...”

Since: Sep 11

MILKY WAY

#44 Aug 24, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a load.
First of all, the way things "were" was that a huge percentage of Americans had NO coverage at all. Health care costs were the #1 reason for wage stagnation, and the #1 cause of bankruptcy.
People without health care would end up in the Emergency room, which is the _MOST_ expensive place to go. Often they would be there for treatments which could have been handled sooner, cheaper. Since they have no money and since hospitals can not turn people away, those people were getting treatment paid for by taxes.
And, on top of all that, we were ranked poorly.
That's how it _was_.
You may not have complained... YET. But I can guarantee you that you were in the minority.
<quoted text>
No you aren't. You said you have health insurance. You're not paying dick in extra taxes.
My health insurance costs increased more than the increase in cost of living and more than the increase in the GDP. That, my friend, is a tax increase.

As you point out, not having health coverage didn't deny people from access to health care. You can say that care was the MOST_expensive care. It was still cheaper than now.

Since: Jan 09

Central NJ

#45 Aug 24, 2013
I can see your reasoning, It's stupid, but I see it! My pet peeve is the need for Ins, no matter who pays for it. I don't have plumbers Ins for the plumbing./ I dopn't have mechanic's Ins for when the car breaks down. Why do I need it for medicine? Simple, With Ins, The Drs have been able to raise their prices to unprecedented heights. To gain this much would have been impossible without it. I long for a return to the days when there was no ins! Not more and more complicated schemes that would presumably cost me less, until the AMA negotiates higher rates and my taxes go up again. Take all my health care away from this most corrupt of governments!
My President was elected by dead people!
Regards, Terri
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
No business should be providing Health Insurance.
It's a model that makes NO SENSE.
Does your business pay for your car insurance? your home owners insurance? Your life insurance? No.
It's ridiculous that it would pay for your health insurance.
End ALL corporate health insurance. Use that money to PAY EMPLOYEES a reasonable amount. Let's the employees by health insurance.
Everyone makes out better.

Since: Jan 09

Central NJ

#46 Aug 24, 2013
I Wouldn't "Blame" them, I would congradulate them!
My president was elected by dead people
Regards, Terri
DHLiberal wrote:
The ACA was passed by a Democrat Congress and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president. There will be no government shut down because the public will rightly blame Republicans, and party leaders know this. If the GOP wants to repeal the ACA, they better get control of the Senate and Presidency. But they seem hellbent on losing in 2016 (Ted Cruz, seriously???), so get used to the ACA.
Besides, the ACA already has too many popular provisions to be repealed successfully (ban on lifetime coverage, no denial for preexisting conditions, kids stay on parents' plan longer, free health screenings, 80-20 insurance spending, etc.) Anything the GOP offers as an alternative (and they haven't offered any alternative, as Newt points out) will have to contain the popular provisions of the ACA.

Since: Aug 13

Temecula, CA

#47 Aug 24, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
My health insurance costs increased more than the increase in cost of living and more than the increase in the GDP. That, my friend, is a tax increase.
As you point out, not having health coverage didn't deny people from access to health care. You can say that care was the MOST_expensive care. It was still cheaper than now.
That's not a tax increase any more than rising milk prices are a tax increase.

We pay the most for health care of any industrialized nation. We rank near dead last in patient satisfaction, longevity, and infant mortality. Our health care system is broken beyond repair. The ACA is at least a step in the right direction.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#48 Aug 24, 2013
TerryE wrote:
I Wouldn't "Blame" them, I would congradulate them!
My president was elected by dead people
Regards, Terri
<quoted text>
Prove it.

Obama won by nearly 6 million votes.

I'll consider you right if you can give me the names of only 3 million dead voters who voted for Obama

“Yeah, but...”

Since: Sep 11

MILKY WAY

#49 Aug 24, 2013
DHLiberal wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not a tax increase any more than rising milk prices are a tax increase.
We pay the most for health care of any industrialized nation. We rank near dead last in patient satisfaction, longevity, and infant mortality. Our health care system is broken beyond repair. The ACA is at least a step in the right direction.
I am not required to buy milk.
The Supreme Court says the cost of health insurance is a tax. Hence the increase in health insurance cost is indeed a tax increase.

If the system is broken beyond repair, why tax it? Wouldn't it be better to abolish it? Taxing a broken system won't repair it, especially if it is beyond repair!

Since: Aug 13

Temecula, CA

#50 Aug 24, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not required to buy milk.
The Supreme Court says the cost of health insurance is a tax. Hence the increase in health insurance cost is indeed a tax increase.
If the system is broken beyond repair, why tax it? Wouldn't it be better to abolish it? Taxing a broken system won't repair it, especially if it is beyond repair!
Being required to purchase insurance isn't a tax. Car insurance, for example, is a requirement in many states, but the money I pay to AllState could not, by any stretch of imagination, be considered a "tax".

It WOULD be better to abolish the system we have now. Our costs are outrageous, the quality of care horrible. We have the lowest longevity and highest infant mortality in the industrialized world. The free-market has completely failed. When that happens, government must step in. We should have a single-payer system. The ACA is an irrevokable step in that direction.

“Yeah, but...”

Since: Sep 11

MILKY WAY

#51 Aug 24, 2013
DHLiberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Being required to purchase insurance isn't a tax. Car insurance, for example, is a requirement in many states, but the money I pay to AllState could not, by any stretch of imagination, be considered a "tax".
It WOULD be better to abolish the system we have now. Our costs are outrageous, the quality of care horrible. We have the lowest longevity and highest infant mortality in the industrialized world. The free-market has completely failed. When that happens, government must step in. We should have a single-payer system. The ACA is an irrevokable step in that direction.
You can say it's not a tax as much as you like. The Supreme Court says it is a tax.
The car insurance analogy doesn't work. Nobody is required to buy car insurance.There are plenty of people driving cars without insurance and nobody wants the IRS to make sure they have purchased insurance.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#52 Aug 24, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not required to buy milk.
The Supreme Court says the cost of health insurance is a tax. Hence the increase in health insurance cost is indeed a tax increase.
If the system is broken beyond repair, why tax it? Wouldn't it be better to abolish it? Taxing a broken system won't repair it, especially if it is beyond repair!
The system is broken because too many people are being left out of it.

Fixing the system requires that everyone participate AND that the Health Care insurers can't eliminate people they don't want to insure.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#53 Aug 24, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
You can say it's not a tax as much as you like. The Supreme Court says it is a tax.
The car insurance analogy doesn't work. Nobody is required to buy car insurance.There are plenty of people driving cars without insurance and nobody wants the IRS to make sure they have purchased insurance.
There are plenty of people driving _ILLEGALLY_ without insurance.

And as someone who HAS insurance _AND_ has to also pay for UNINSURED insurance, I very much would like the IRS to make sure that everyone has insurance.

You being forced to have insurance saves me money since I will no longer have to buy additional insurance to cover the fact that you don't have any.
Robert

Douglasville, GA

#54 Aug 25, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
None of those people are being forced to drop their plans.
If they don't like working for UPS, they can switch jobs.
They did not drop their plans their plans were taken away in order to avoid a 40% tax on the employer who pays for the plan. Yea just switch jobs, some answer. UPS had good insurance for their employees, it covers eye wear and dental. Employers all over the country are downgrading their plans rather than pay the tax. And for people who are not so fortunate to have a high value plan their prices are going up because of Obamacare not down as promised. As people find out across the country what Obamacare really means to them they will blame it on the democrats who had to vote on the bill so they could read it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#55 Aug 25, 2013
Robert wrote:
How about these Teamster Union workers at UPS loosing their spousal benefits so the company can get out from under obamacare Cadillac plan taxes. That will teach you for listening to the lyar in chief. Remember when he said if you like your plan you can keep it, how is that working out for you.
It's working out pretty good. My healthcare coverage hasn't changed one bit, and millions of Americans who couldn't afford it will now have health insurance.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#56 Aug 25, 2013
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>I wold not count on it, enough people get a taste of what it did to their plans and there might be a different landscape in Washington.
It is one thing to say you want to support helping someone who has no insurance and support a insurance law like Obamacare but when find out it ends up taking insurance away from the very people who supported it or it hits you really hard in the pocket book that changes things. Just think how those UPS employees feel who now have find other coverage for their spouses. They are thinking about when Obama said if you like your plan you can keep it, they did not know that the plan they wanted to keep was going to get taxed out of existence.
Nope, just more scary ignorant rhetoric.

UPS is only dropping the spouses who CURRENTLY HAVE INSURANCE through their OWN employer. Spouses without insurance from their own employer will be able to remain.

No one is losing insurance coverage.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#57 Aug 25, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
A man gets elected and, as his first priority, ramrods Obamacare don the throats of Americans who never wanted it, all with the help of both Houses of Congress's who refused to read the law before enacting it and who were so ashamed of their actions didn't mention it during their reelection campaigns a few months late. They got a shellacking. Then that same man cannot find it within himself to implement that law.
I never complained about paying for health care insurance, nor did I complain about paying for health care. Most people didn't. We were satisfied with things just the way they were.
But, dammit, I will complain about having my money stolen. I am being taxed for Obamacare and the President won't implement it! You cannot have it both ways. You take my money, deliver what it's for. All I am seeing is higher health care insurance premium a, higher health care coats, and fewer rather than more people paying into the system.
Obama & the Dems in Congress got elected by a majority of Americans after campaigning specifically on healthcare reform.

They did what they were elected to do.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#58 Aug 25, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither will it be implemented as long as Obama is President.
It all turned out to be just another tax with nothing to show for it.
Nope, implementation is beginning already with states setting up their healthcare exchanges and individuals start signing up in October.
Responsibility

Petaluma, CA

#59 Aug 25, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody is required to buy car insurance.
Dear, nobody is required to buy a car.

Most of us will at least once in our life require some kind of health care.
Responsibility

Petaluma, CA

#60 Aug 25, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it. Obama won by nearly 6 million votes.I'll consider you right if you can give me the names of only 3 million dead voters who voted for Obama
My favorite comment on a beautiful Sunday!
Responsibility

Petaluma, CA

#61 Aug 25, 2013
TerryE wrote:
My President was elected by dead people!Regards, Terri
<quoted text>
Terri, dear, your loser candidates were losers if they could not get all those gazillion dead people to vote for them! LOLL

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#62 Aug 25, 2013
SirPrize wrote:
<quoted text>
My health insurance costs increased more than the increase in cost of living and more than the increase in the GDP. That, my friend, is a tax increase.
As you point out, not having health coverage didn't deny people from access to health care. You can say that care was the MOST_expensive care. It was still cheaper than now.
No, increasing health insurance costs are no more a tax increase than increasing in gas or food or clothing or cars or anything else that's gone up in price the past years.

ER care is STILL the most expensive care, and hospitals make up for that cost by charging higher prices for everyone, which in turn raises your health insurance costs.

The more uninsured people getting their care in the ER, the higher your insurance premiums will be.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News White House will override Obama's climate plan 4 min Into The Night 2,533
News EPA to ease emission restrictions on coal-fired... 13 min Into The Night 272
News Judge targeted for jailing people who can't aff... 2 hr extraextra111 2
News Norfolk Southern Takes Responsibility For Fuel ... 4 hr Get out of my pocket 1
News In wake of a brutal tragedy, friends remember t... 5 hr cil 15
News A man is arrested Feb. 7, 2017 during a targete... 10 hr Paul Syntor 1
News FOX6 Investigators: The Price of Justice (Nov '09) 14 hr TheMilwaukeeRoad 32
More from around the web