Supreme Court Ruling on Health Care

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To all the lawyers and lawyer-types,

It seems (at least to me) that Justice Roberts took a huge step toward protecting states rights in his written opinion…and ultimately with the majority ruling. So, in the near future, does it have any impact on states being able to independently ban abortion?
 
stevegravy said:
Symbolism, bill goes nowhere in senate. But if it make people feeeeel better then go for it.
Click to expand...
Of course it is, but some of these Democrats are facing elections, and they will have to face their constituents who do not like unpopular ObamaTax
 
ProVobis said:
Yes, but are they quitting because they are being taxed or are they quitting because they don’t see that lucrative a profession anymore? If I were to hear that I might be the victim of cost cuts in my profession, I’d certainly look for something else. Just saying.
Click to expand...
Read the surveys and make up your own mind

physiciansfoundation.org/uploadedFiles/Health%20Reform%20and%20the%20Decline%20of%20Physician%20Private%20Practice.pdf

thedoctors.com/ecm/groups/public/@tdc/@web/documents/web_content/con_id_004676.pdf

doctorsandpatients.org/resources/85-physician-attitudes-survey-june-2012
 
_Abyssinia said:
House to Vote Wednesday on Repealing Pro-Abortion Obamacare

Going to be interesting which democrats vote repeal

lifenews.com/2012/07/09/house-to-vote-wednesday-on-repealing-pro-abortion-obamacare
Click to expand...
From my sources, this is the 31st time that the House will be voting to repeal ObamaTax. I give teh GOP credit for persistence. I wish Harry Reid would fall into a recoverable coma.

And if one…just one democrat votes for repeal it would make it more bi-partisan than the original ACA ever was.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
From my sources, this is the 31st time that the House will be voting to repeal ObamaTax. I give teh GOP credit for persistence. I wish Harry Reid would fall into a recoverable coma.

And if one…just one democrat votes for repeal it would make it more bi-partisan than the original ACA ever was.
Click to expand...
Agree with all. Or maybe Harry can go home and visit his pomagranate trees…

You are dead right about getting ONE Democrat vote will be heavily symbolic given that not a single Republican voted for this monstrosity. Obamacare is the ONLY such bill, enacted with absolutely no bi-partisan support. It is also the only such bill that has become MORE unpopular with time. At some point, if nothing else than for political survival, some of the Democrats will see the light or it will inspire more support to turn the Senate Republican. Reid has not produced a budget, has blocked numerous bills to overturn Obamatax. What’s he afraid of? If there is support then Senators will vote for it…of course this infers they have knowledge and courage both of which seem to be lacking in Congress (and the White House)

Lisa
 
Here is a decent explanation of why Roberts ought to be impeached.

takimag.com/article/a_vast_new_federal_power_andrew_napolitano/print#axzz20E5cFlcM

Napolitana understands, from the article:

I wonder whether the chief justice realizes what he and the progressive wing of the court have done to our freedom. If the feds can tax us for not doing as they have commanded, and if that which is commanded need not be grounded in the Constitution, then there is no constitutional limit to their power, and the ruling that the power to regulate commerce does not encompass the power to compel commerce is mere sophistry.
:mad:
 
RobbyS said:
The term is pretty broad. The welfare state established by the British in 1904ff, claimed much less power over its subjects than the French laic state of the time claimed over its citizens.

As to the term,”ushers,” I think this fits the role of the clergy in the Church. They are there to serve Christ and His bride at the Wedding. We others in the Wedding Party much do so also.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s kind of why I think it depends what you mean by “welfare state”. 🙂

No, I was thinking more about the European minded thing about the bishops, not the term “ushers”. Sorry 'bout that.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
In this country, the government is us. We don’t have nobility here, noone is born with an inherent claim to the throne. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
This is true, but you should have told that to Bush and Romney. I think we’ve gotten rid of all the Kennedys. 😃
 
_Abyssinia said:
Read the surveys and make up your own mind
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I’m just going from my own personal experience of the past 50 years. Many of my doctors have left or transferred for different reasons.

Don’t forget too, many were opposed to any kind of healthcare reform even before Obama got elected. This could have been the best free-market bill in the world and it wouldn’t have mattered.

Bush’s prescription plan was liked because he didn’t raise taxes. But is borrowing money from China the better way to go? Just saying.
 
ProVobis said:
I don’t know. I’m just going from my own personal experience of the past 50 years. Many of my doctors have left or transferred for different reasons.

Don’t forget too, many were opposed to any kind of healthcare reform even before Obama got elected. This could have been the best free-market bill in the world and it wouldn’t have mattered.

Bush’s prescription plan was liked because he didn’t raise taxes. But is borrowing money from China the better way to go? Just saying.
Click to expand...
Personal experience does not correspond to how many doctors feel. Many would support health care reforms, many people like parts of ObamaTax, like pre existing conditions, but most people do not like the mandate
 
ProVobis said:
I don’t know. I’m just going from my own personal experience of the past 50 years. Many of my doctors have left or transferred for different reasons.

Don’t forget too, many were opposed to any kind of healthcare reform even before Obama got elected. This could have been the best free-market bill in the world and it wouldn’t have mattered.

Bush’s prescription plan was liked because he didn’t raise taxes. But is borrowing money from China the better way to go? Just saying.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Doctors would have embraced reform that would have given them and their patients more choices and options. So to claim “the best free market bill in the world wouldn’t have mattered” is speculation at best. Most doctors are (or were!) small, independent businessmen as well as physicians. While most hire administrators or managers for their practices, they are aware of the economic forces impacting their ability to treat patients.

There are a number of doctor run/advised think tanks and there are some really good concepts such as letting patients control the dollars. You will find that if PATIENTS are spending their money they are a lot more careful than if it’s all covered by insurance. Incentives provided by plans like HSAs promote careful decision making on the part of patients. Too often if a benefit is available, people will use it to the max…no skin off their nose. But when it’s your own money you make better choices.

Although the prescription drug bill is a solution in search of a problem, the reality is that it’s been pretty fiscally sound, particularly in comparison to other sections of Medicare. Further had the bill been structured properly it would have reaped huge concessions from drug companies. As it turned out one of the main proponents of the bill ended up getting a very lucrative contract in the pharmaceutical industry so sadly corruption prevented this bill from being a model for other such legislation.

BTW the major borrowing has been done by Obama-siah for his pet projects, not to support the Medicare drug benefit.

Lisa
 
LisaA said:
BTW the major borrowing has been done by Obama-siah for his pet projects, not to support the Medicare drug benefit.
Click to expand...
Precisely my point. No one here seems to be attacking Presidents for borrowing, only for taxing.
 
stevegravy said:
Here is a decent explanation of why Roberts ought to be impeached.
Click to expand...
The ONLY member of the U.S. Supreme Court ever impeached (and found not guilty BTW) was Samuel Chase in 1804. Are you serious in thinking that there’s ANYONE who will introduce charges of impeachment against Chief Justice Roberts??? 🤷
 
ProVobis said:
Precisely my point. No one here seems to be attacking Presidents for borrowing, only for taxing.
Click to expand...
My goodness, then you have limited your CAF experience to threads devoid of conservatives or libertarians. There is frequent and vehement criticism for the rising debt, the deficits, the overspending all of which result in more borrowing. In fact if you analyze most of the objections to taxation, it’s not that people begrudge paying taxes but that they believe their money is being wasted on ineffective, corrupt and useless programs. Politicians being the skunks that they are want to continue their pet projects, and given the objections to raising taxes shove them through with ever increasing levels of the debt ceiling.

While it’s both sides of the aisle I believe the Democrats are far more subject to the temptations to increase levels for old programs or bring on new programs. That we are nearly bankrupt seems to be of little concern.

Bringing this back to the thread, one of the biggest objections to Obamacare IS the spending which will necessarily result in more borrowing, increased deficits and then more howls to increase taxes.

Lisa
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top