|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 06:26:15 [Permalink]
|
| Another thing I'm imagining is that healthy young people maybe could opt out of paying their part of a private health plan and simply pay the fine, if it's less than their existing contribution. Their fines, meanwhile, would help pay for the medical costs of others. Then, if they do get seriously sick, their preexisting condition would not stop them from rejoining a plan and getting treatment, right? |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 03/22/2010 : 06:52:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Another thing I'm imagining is that healthy young people maybe could opt out of paying their part of a private health plan and simply pay the fine, if it's less than their existing contribution. Their fines, meanwhile, would help pay for the medical costs of others. Then, if they do get seriously sick, their preexisting condition would not stop them from rejoining a plan and getting treatment, right? |
That's why the fine should go up over time, until it reaches the point where it is higher than reasonable insurance premiums. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 07:22:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
Cry me a river... |
I heard a compelling argument this morning for why the cries for repeal won't go anywhere. While most of the provisions in the current reform bill won't go into effect for years, some of them will go into effect within months (perhaps even before the elections). At least one of those early ones is a provision which forces the insurance companies to cover children with pre-existing conditions.
In November, the obvious campaign strategy is to say that anyone who wants to repeal these measures wants to put sick children and their families in the poor house. That should be all that's needed to make a pro-repeal platform political suicide.
Beyond that, of course, the Republicans would have to secure veto-proof majorities in Congress in November for repeal to have any chance. That's 20 Senators and 38 Representatives. Since only 18 Democratic Senate seats are up for grabs in 2010, this is going to be tough going. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 07:41:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Another thing I'm imagining is that healthy young people maybe could opt out of paying their part of a private health plan and simply pay the fine, if it's less than their existing contribution. Their fines, meanwhile, would help pay for the medical costs of others. Then, if they do get seriously sick, their preexisting condition would not stop them from rejoining a plan and getting treatment, right? |
That's why the fine should go up over time, until it reaches the point where it is higher than reasonable insurance premiums.
|
Good point. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 08:07:06 [Permalink]
|
The fallout begins.
Portrait of a conservative smeghead
Can't block health care reform in Congress? Sue.
That's the strategy that's been outlined by Virginia state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who confirmed Sunday that he will sue to block health care reform from becoming law. Reports the Richmond Times-Dispatch:
Virgina will file suit against the federal government charging that the health-care reform legislation is unconstitutional, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's office confirmed last night.
Cuccinelli is expected to argue that the bill, with its mandate that requires nearly every American to be insured by 2014, violates the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. The attorney general's office will file suit once President Barack Obama signs the bill into law, which could occur early this week.
"At no time in our history has the government mandated its citizens buy a good or service," Cuccinelli said in a statement last night.
|
They just can't stand losing, can they? What it is, lawsuits stole the 2000 prez election (I blame the lackluster Gore for a lot of that) and they have fallen under the impression that they can squeal like sodomized hogs, wave lawyers about, and get their way on anything. I don't think it's gonna work this time.
Virginia isn't the only Republican state that is considering lawsuits to combat Democrats' passage of health reform.
Prominent Republican lawyers have said legal arguments are already being drafted to throw Washington into a legal battle if health care reform passes Congress. "Deem and pass" was front and center of the debate.
“There is a lot of discussion among various lawyers and we’ve had some conference calls,” said Cleta Mitchell, a Washington attorney long active in GOP circles. “People are just distraught that the Democrats are even contemplating doing something like this. It’s utter lawlessness to deem a bill passed without voting for it. It’s horrific.”
Legally, the rule is somewhat of a gray area in politics. But Tim Jost, a law professor at Washington & Lee University, believes the health care bill would be perfectly legitimate even if Democrats were forced to use "deem and pass."
“The Constitution says that each house can write its own rules. Those rules are up to Congress to adopt and they’re not going to be second-guessed by the courts,” said Tim Jost, a law professor at Washington & Lee University. “As long as there is a vote on the language of the Senate bill, however they go about doing this, then the Senate bill is adopted by the house and they’ve met the requirements of the Constitution.”
|
So, they're gonna sue. Ok. But they should bear in mind that the only ones who will make out in that bid for national ridicule are the law firms, who will be more than delighted to take the various state's money as fast as said states can dole it out. And thus, the conservatives will lose again. Unfortunately, so will the rest of those state's populations.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Rubicon95
Skeptic Friend
USA
220 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 08:08:44 [Permalink]
|
The Bill does have the penalty increase each year after 2014. After 2018, the penalty would be pegged to the CPI. In MA, it will be pegged to 2.5% of income.
This is a quandry for MA residents. Currently we are penalized on a state level if you don't have insurance for more the 3 months of the year. Will we be penalized by the Fed as well or just pay the difference between the 2 penalties?
In MA we have people who cannot pay for ins but are making too much for Medicare. So the take the penalty -which is obscene if you ask me. One way around the penalty is declaring a religious objection. It was intended for Amish and Mennonite but I found out that Scientologist can have the penalty waived on those grounds.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 09:31:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
So, they're gonna sue. |
"Deem and pass" got tested by the courts back in 2005 or 2006, if I remember correctly. Democrats sued over the Republicans using it. The Republicans won, "deem and pass" is constitutional. Now, they wish they had lost. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 09:48:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rubicon95
The Bill does have the penalty increase each year after 2014. After 2018, the penalty would be pegged to the CPI. In MA, it will be pegged to 2.5% of income.
This is a quandry for MA residents. Currently we are penalized on a state level if you don't have insurance for more the 3 months of the year. Will we be penalized by the Fed as well or just pay the difference between the 2 penalties? |
Perhaps MA lawmakers will repeal the state insurances measures in favor of the Fed stuff in a few years?| In MA we have people who cannot pay for ins but are making too much for Medicare. So the take the penalty -which is obscene if you ask me. |
Yes, it is, which is why we should nationalize the entire health care industry, pay for it through taxes and forget all about this insurance crap.| One way around the penalty is declaring a religious objection. It was intended for Amish and Mennonite but I found out that Scientologist can have the penalty waived on those grounds. |
Can Eskimos get a waiver for pushing their infirm out to sea on ice floes to die?  |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Rubicon95
Skeptic Friend
USA
220 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 10:07:06 [Permalink]
|
"Perhaps MA lawmakers will repeal the state insurances measures in favor of the Fed stuff in a few years?"
 - Gee your not from MA are you?
"Yes, it is, which is why we should nationalize the entire health care industry, pay for it through taxes and forget all about this insurance crap."
When you say nationalize healthcare, do you mean making doctors state employees or creating a gov't run health insurance. There is a difference. When people hear nationalized HC, they think Cuba, but it could mean Sweden or Germany.
Personally, I'd rather give my doctor the payment directly and cut out any middle man.
"Can Eskimos get a waiver for pushing their infirm out to sea on ice floes to die?"
Depends on the infirmity I guess. Know any Alaskan you'd want to do that to??? |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 10:12:14 [Permalink]
|
| There won't be any more ice floes by the time this bill starts working. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 11:34:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by filthy
Cry me a river... |
I heard a compelling argument this morning for why the cries for repeal won't go anywhere. While most of the provisions in the current reform bill won't go into effect for years, some of them will go into effect within months (perhaps even before the elections). At least one of those early ones is a provision which forces the insurance companies to cover children with pre-existing conditions.
In November, the obvious campaign strategy is to say that anyone who wants to repeal these measures wants to put sick children and their families in the poor house. That should be all that's needed to make a pro-repeal platform political suicide.
Beyond that, of course, the Republicans would have to secure veto-proof majorities in Congress in November for repeal to have any chance. That's 20 Senators and 38 Representatives. Since only 18 Democratic Senate seats are up for grabs in 2010, this is going to be tough going.
|
Are we forgetting how retarded democrats are when it comes to the spin game? For fucks sake, they can't even win the argument about torturing other human beings.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Machi4velli
SFN Regular
USA
854 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 11:52:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Seatbelt laws save lives. Building codes do, too. I don't have much of an issue with protecting people from themselves when the threat is widespread and obvious.
|
Obvious to whom? If it were obvious to people, I would expect them to opt for coverage if they could -- so if coverage is made available via subsidies, why the fine also? |
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people."
-Giordano Bruno
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking
"Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable"
-Albert Camus |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 12:12:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rubicon95
"Yes, it is, which is why we should nationalize the entire health care industry, pay for it through taxes and forget all about this insurance crap."
When you say nationalize healthcare, do you mean making doctors state employees or creating a gov't run health insurance. There is a difference. When people hear nationalized HC, they think Cuba, but it could mean Sweden or Germany. |
I mean run everything like the VA. I believe Germany's system is an 8% tax which covers everything. I'm all for that.| Personally, I'd rather give my doctor the payment directly and cut out any middle man. |
But the problem is that you won't pay your doctor when you're healthy, and some very sick people can't pay at all. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 12:18:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Machi4velli
Obvious to whom? If it were obvious to people, I would expect them to opt for coverage if they could... |
Except that even when danger is obvious, some people are oblivious. Young adults think they're indestructible. Hell, we have tags on hair dryers saying that people shouldn't use them while in the bathtub.| ...so if coverage is made available via subsidies, why the fine also? |
The subsidies should be for people who can't afford coverage, the fines are for people who can. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Machi4velli
SFN Regular
USA
854 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2010 : 12:19:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Machi4velli
Obvious to whom? If it were obvious to people, I would expect them to opt for coverage if they could... |
Except that even when danger is obvious, some people are oblivious. Young adults think they're indestructible. Hell, we have tags on hair dryers saying that people shouldn't use them while in the bathtub.| ...so if coverage is made available via subsidies, why the fine also? |
The subsidies should be for people who can't afford coverage, the fines are for people who can.
|
Who would you expect to be hit by the fines hardest? I expect those on the bubble, just barely making enough to not qualify for free stuff. |
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people."
-Giordano Bruno
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking
"Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable"
-Albert Camus |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Health Care bill up for grabs
