Why Health Care Is a Losing Issue for...

Why Health Care Is a Losing Issue for Republicans

There are 26 comments on the www.theatlantic.com story from Mar 30, 2012, titled Why Health Care Is a Losing Issue for Republicans. In it, www.theatlantic.com reports that:

Win or lose at the Supreme Court, the GOP is likely to suffer at the ballot box as long as health is a central issue in future campaigns.

Over at his relatively new Daily Beast digs, David Frum argues that Republicans are in trouble if they lose the Supreme Court challenges to the Affordable Care Act. He says that if the law is ruled constitutional, then "healthcare comes roaring back as a campaign issue," and a potent one, for "because of the prolonged economic downturn, more Americans than ever have lost -- or are at risk of losing -- their health coverage." What are Republican candidates going to tell those people?

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.theatlantic.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#21 Apr 2, 2012
Bringmedinner wrote:
Obamacare and the push to legalize marijuana through pretending it is medicinal are two peas in the same Leftist pod. These freeloading dope heads want us to pay for their hormone altering, autism causing, brain chemical changing, endocrine system inhibiting marijuana as an entitlement.
I have not heard of that one, I don't think obamacare covers marijuana and I don't think it will have to as it is not an approved drug. Even if it is legalized it will be no different than a lot of drugs which are legal but not covered by insurance.

I am not for free loading or obama care but if I want to alter my hormones, brain, or endocrine system I think that is my business not yours or obamas, the opperative word is "my" so take your drug war somewhere else.
Bringmedinner

San Jose, CA

#22 Apr 2, 2012
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
I have not heard of that one, I don't think obamacare covers marijuana and I don't think it will have to as it is not an approved drug. Even if it is legalized it will be no different than a lot of drugs which are legal but not covered by insurance.
I am not for free loading or obama care but if I want to alter my hormones, brain, or endocrine system I think that is my business not yours or obamas, the opperative word is "my" so take your drug war somewhere else.
It has to do with a dope head and pusher's impact on society, which is nothing but negative and destructive. It is now to the point of people like you knowing about the damage they are doing to themselves and wanting others to shoulder your health care costs.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#23 Apr 2, 2012
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
I am sorry I forgot I was talking to mr bill and assumed you would pick up on that since we are talking about the federal government regulating the insurance.
It is not interstate commerce. How can it be interstate commerce if you can't buy it from another state.
If a corporation doing business in 50 states wih all the profit and much administeationm crossing both state line and national orders is not interstate commerce; you might have a point.

To make your point, you could find a health insurance company that actually only does do business in one state, with no foreign call centers; and with all operations and HQ in that same state, and apply to the US Supreme Court as a friend of the court, representing them.

Then, you might have to prove that what happens to their customers will not affect any other customers; but also they would need to represent clients in a state where everyone already has insurance.

That would be Massachussets, but I can't help you finding that company. Ask Mr. Romney for help. He might enjoy destroying helth care for all Americans. It certainly would be great for his candidacy.

All the above is fairly esoteric, but is still more likely than President Obama ordering you to eat your vegetables.
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#24 Apr 2, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
If a corporation doing business in 50 states wih all the profit and much administeationm crossing both state line and national orders is not interstate commerce; you might have a point.
To make your point, you could find a health insurance company that actually only does do business in one state, with no foreign call centers; and with all operations and HQ in that same state, and apply to the US Supreme Court as a friend of the court, representing them.
Then, you might have to prove that what happens to their customers will not affect any other customers; but also they would need to represent clients in a state where everyone already has insurance.
That would be Massachussets, but I can't help you finding that company. Ask Mr. Romney for help. He might enjoy destroying helth care for all Americans. It certainly would be great for his candidacy.
All the above is fairly esoteric, but is still more likely than President Obama ordering you to eat your vegetables.
Well if insurance is interstate commerce then why did states regulate insurers in the first place? I ll tell you why Mr ?Bill. it was because it was originally the states that granted companies the right to hire agents, underwrite and sell insurance. In fact, the first American insurance companies pre-dated the Revolution.

If you have A company with branches in adjoining states you have to contract with different insurance companies to cover their employees. Or be like me, I don't have insurance, i have an employer sponsored health plan, god forbid there is no state agence which regulates it and neither does the federal government have one but we seem to get by just fine without it.

Even if you get by the fact that the court cant make up its mind whether insurance constitutes commerce or not then your still stuck with does the commerce clause give the federal government to compel me to create commerce by buying insurance so they can regulate it. If you accept that they can then your back with broccoli they can make you eat broccoli or almost anything else they want, if you don't then you have gutted obamacare as it won't work without everyone having skin in the insurance game.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#25 Apr 2, 2012
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
Well if insurance is interstate commerce then why did states regulate insurers in the first place? I ll tell you why Mr ?Bill. it was because it was originally the states that granted companies the right to hire agents, underwrite and sell insurance. In fact, the first American insurance companies pre-dated the Revolution.
If you have A company with branches in adjoining states you have to contract with different insurance companies to cover their employees. Or be like me, I don't have insurance, i have an employer sponsored health plan, god forbid there is no state agence which regulates it and neither does the federal government have one but we seem to get by just fine without it.
Even if you get by the fact that the court cant make up its mind whether insurance constitutes commerce or not then your still stuck with does the commerce clause give the federal government to compel me to create commerce by buying insurance so they can regulate it. If you accept that they can then your back with broccoli they can make you eat broccoli or almost anything else they want, if you don't then you have gutted obamacare as it won't work without everyone having skin in the insurance game.
There is no doubt that insurance is commerce. Think about the back end...insurance industry makes money by investing your premiums, and paying out as needed.

Ther is no rationale for the broccili fantasy; but there certainly is for preventing freeloaders from stealing from those with insurance; as happens now.

You've seen my reasons for believing insurance is interstate, I've seen yours. There's not much more to say, except that we'll see in July...and this Supreme court is very committed to their agenda above the law. So, you may get what you wish for.
That is, more money for less health insurance.
Robert

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#26 Apr 2, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no doubt that insurance is commerce. Think about the back end...insurance industry makes money by investing your premiums, and paying out as needed.
Ther is no rationale for the broccili fantasy; but there certainly is for preventing freeloaders from stealing from those with insurance; as happens now.
You've seen my reasons for believing insurance is interstate, I've seen yours. There's not much more to say, except that we'll see in July...and this Supreme court is very committed to their agenda above the law. So, you may get what you wish for.
That is, more money for less health insurance.
I am sorry mr bill the justices are agree with me but you can read the minority opinion if it makes you feel better.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

The Best of Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'the ARTS' to perform at Tamarack (Feb '15) Oct '17 wannabe 7
News Best of South Carolina Music (Dec '15) Dec '15 KEN LANTER 1
News Why Our Elites Are Failing Us and How to Fix It (Jun '12) Dec '15 Ritual Habitual 6
News Meet the Musicians of Best of Utah Music (Jan '15) Jan '15 betty 1
News Gavin DeGraw to Release "Best Of" Album October... (Aug '14) Aug '14 HelloMyNameIs 1
News Thanks for Everything (Jun '14) Jun '14 Stan HQ 1
News The Best of Winter Soups: Cream of Tomato and B... (Jan '14) Jan '14 Tres Chic 2
More from around the web