How the Affordable Care Act was passed in a routinely normal process.

[jamil]

This is the thread where supporters can feel free to fill in the routine, boring details of exactly how Obamacare was "introduced to Congress, debated, amended, voted on, passed by both houses, signed by the President" just like every law, and then even "deemed Constitutional by [STRIKE][SCROTUS][/STRIKE] SCOTUS".

Perhaps you could start with the wide spread public and congressional support the President's health care plan had from the time His Majesty first proposed it. And because of that, why using unconventional procedures would then be unnecessary to pass it. Of course any detail of the routine passage and adoption of a bill should include it's origin, which in this case is house bill HR3590. Make sure you demonstrate how the details of its processes and procedures are no different than those that all the other duly passed legislation go through. If you want, you can even support how the President's claim of bipartisan support is technically true. After all, HR3590 originally passed unanimously in the house. Apparently Republicans LOVED obamacare before they hated it.

Make sure you also expose the mundane details how the SCOTUS [STRIKE]made[/STRIKE] "deemed" the law constitutional. And for extra credit you can explain how calling it a tax is constitutional because HR3590 originated in the House as an appropriations bill.

 

[rockhopper46038]

I doubt more than a handful of the ardent ObamaCare supporters in Indiana know the story of which you speak; let alone any ObamaCare supporters on INGO. It is a sordid, sordid affair, to be sure.

 

[g00n24]

Ummm...This is easy! Our Kings in the kingdom of Washington DC are so smart, so all knowing, so incapable of making errors or mistakes, so much better than us peons that they know what is best for us, and they know exactly how each one of us should live our lives. SO...whatever they need to do to help us live the best way we can is ok for them to do it anyway they deem necessary!

Your argument is meaningless because you are not a super human, incapable of flaws, as they are!

 

[foxxie02]

and i thought unicorns sharted this monster out..... there goes the warm and fuzzy

 

[jamil]

I doubt more than a handful of the ardent ObamaCare supporters in Indiana know the story of which you speak; let alone any ObamaCare supporters on INGO. It is a sordid, sordid affair, to be sure.

I know there's at least one person who seems to know the history. That's where I got the quote from.

 

[jamil]

What? No takers? I'm accusing Obama and his allies in congress of subverting the Constitution and the will of the people. I'm saying they pulled some shenanigans to railroad the ACA into law. C'mon show me how wrong I am. Show me how typical and normal the process was.

Kut? Pooty? [STRIKE]Streak?[/STRIKE] Anyone?

 

[SeaCaptain49]

Since "Obamacare" originated in the Senate, and since SCOTUS declared the mandate a tax, and sicne the Constitution says all "revenue" bills must originate in the HOR, it seems that a court challenge of Obamacre on Constitutional (tax origination) grounds would have merit.

 

[88GT]

Since "Obamacare" originated in the Senate, and since SCOTUS declared the mandate a tax, and sicne the Constitution says all "revenue" bills must originate in the HOR, it seems that a court challenge of Obamacre on Constitutional (tax origination) grounds would have merit.

The Constitution has nothing to do with Constitutionality.

 

[SeaCaptain49]

The Constitution has nothing to do with Constitutionality.

I get what you're saying. However, it seems there's an opening to challenge it since the revenue portion originated in the Senate.

 

[jamil]

Since "Obamacare" originated in the Senate, and since SCOTUS declared the mandate a tax, and sicne the Constitution says all "revenue" bills must originate in the HOR, it seems that a court challenge of Obamacre on Constitutional (tax origination) grounds would have merit.

Nope. That's not it. And even if it were, it would still pass the Robert's court. Just like it did the first time.

But, that's not it. HR3590 indeed originated in the House. Of course, if you look up the origins of HR3590, you might scratch your head and say with a cheesy fake Spanish accent, "Whaaat? This ain't no stinkin' Obamacare! Eh, must be a typo." Note what that bill was about, and by what margin it passed. And then follow it through the Senate. And there you will find the first of many shenanigans. When you REALLY want to pass what the people and your political opponents don't want, you don't take any chances. You play parlor tricks and use parliamentary hocus pocus to ram that sucker through. Because, the children.

 

[Tombs]

People like to over complicate things.

It was passed on its propaganda and weightless promises alone. By hundreds of bleeding heart emotional rants on the floor and in the media. But the key people in helping it become law were all the mindless drones who proclaimed that it was socialized healthcare, when nothing could be further from the truth.

If people would have discussed the truth of it, it would have never seen the light of day.

Now I understand some will be furious at having the title of "socialist healthcare" taken away from their bag of negative labels. First you need to understand what socialist healthcare is. It's where you visit a hospital or doctor, receive care, and walk out without ever having dealt with insurance or bills of any kind. The medical provider sends the bill to the government. The funds come from existing tax systems being raised to pay for it. You don't need to sign up for anything, you aren't forced to buy some new service, and it's available to every citizen. It can have downsides, such as a lower level of care than what some might have been able to find before, and higher taxes, but ultimately it isn't as evil as it's made out to be. I prefer our old system for the record, but people need to realize some things can be done right and can still provide some perks even if you don't like it. It's a time tested functional system.

Now what ACA is... It's a fine for not buying health insurance from a private corporation. It also sets minimum requirements for your coverage, such as requiring men to have pregnancy coverage. This forces the cost of your health insurance to be raised dramatically. It will be raised by double in almost all states aside from Colorado, which was lowered by 30%. You get to enjoy all the fun of having to hunt down and work out a plan with a private corporation, pay for that plan, receive an equal or lesser degree of care than would be provided under socialized healthcare, and do so under the threat of fines for non-compliance. Oh right, you'll probably lose your doctor, current health insurance, and maybe even your job.

Now, which exactly do you think is worse?
I really couldn't care less about its constitutionality, that's a worthless debate. It's a debate of labels instead of explaining why it's bad and why it needs to be repealed yesterday.

 

[Cldedhnds]

All bills have to be passed so we can find out what's in them. Seems logical to me.

 

[jamil]

People like to over complicate things.

It was passed on its propaganda and weightless promises alone. By hundreds of bleeding heart emotional rants on the floor and in the media. But the key people in helping it become law were all the mindless drones who proclaimed that it was socialized healthcare, when nothing could be further from the truth.

If people would have discussed the truth of it, it would have never seen the light of day.

Now I understand some will be furious at having the title of "socialist healthcare" taken away from their bag of negative labels. First you need to understand what socialist healthcare is. It's where you visit a hospital or doctor, receive care, and walk out without ever having dealt with insurance or bills of any kind. The medical provider sends the bill to the government. The funds come from existing tax systems being raised to pay for it. You don't need to sign up for anything, you aren't forced to buy some new service, and it's available to every citizen. It can have downsides, such as a lower level of care than what some might have been able to find before, and higher taxes, but ultimately it isn't as evil as it's made out to be. I prefer our old system for the record, but people need to realize some things can be done right and can still provide some perks even if you don't like it. It's a time tested functional system.

Now what ACA is... It's a fine for not buying health insurance from a private corporation. It also sets minimum requirements for your coverage, such as requiring men to have pregnancy coverage. This forces the cost of your health insurance to be raised dramatically. It will be raised by double in almost all states aside from Colorado, which was lowered by 30%. You get to enjoy all the fun of having to hunt down and work out a plan with a private corporation, pay for that plan, receive an equal or lesser degree of care than would be provided under socialized healthcare, and do so under the threat of fines for non-compliance. Oh right, you'll probably lose your doctor, current health insurance, and maybe even your job.

Now, which exactly do you think is worse?
I really couldn't care less about its constitutionality, that's a worthless debate. It's a debate of labels instead of explaining why it's bad and why it needs to be repealed yesterday.

First, the thread isn't about what Obamacare is or does. It's about how it became law. A few Obama supporters have basically said that it passed both houses of congress, signed by the POTUS, stamped "okey dokey" by the SCOTUS, it's the law, get over it. But saying that is like Lance Armstrong saying, "I won 7 Tour de France titles fair and square, get over it."

As for the law itself, I guess it's what you would expect as the logical compromise between socialists and free market capitalists. Saying that it's not socialism ignores expanding medicaid, subsidies to help people afford the higher premiums, and especially forcing the market to absorb costs and risks that it would not naturally take on.

The only realistically capitalist attributes about Obamacare are, people purchase products from private companies, and those companies get to make a profit. Aside from those facts, for all intents and purposes, Obamacare may as well be single payer. Not that I would want single payer, but it would have been cheaper.

 

[Stickfight]

Is there a claim being made here?

It seems there is: that the journey Obamacare took to get where it is now was crooked. I don't dispute that but I tend to think quite a few actions of the have to be cloaked in cowardice otherwise people would not put up with them.

But it is generally true of this forum that some kind of click through agreement where every participant read a short description of how hypothesis testing works and the nature of evidence, woud benefit us all greatly.

 

[jamil]

Is there a claim being made here?

It seems there is: that the journey Obamacare took to get where it is now was crooked. I don't dispute that but I tend to think quite a few actions of the have to be cloaked in cowardice otherwise people would not put up with them.

But it is generally true of this forum that some kind of click through agreement where every participant read a short description of how hypothesis testing works and the nature of evidence, woud benefit us all greatly.

Is there a claim being made here?

 

[zippy23]

No one read it, its been sitting in a drawer for years, they got super majorities in congress and KNEW they had to pass it as quickly as possible shortly after they won while as little people as possible were paying attention. They lied about it, no one read it except for the republicans who all voted NO, while the libs fell in line with their leader asking ZERO questions, they are sheep. Now we are screwed, the liberals will of course point fingers at republicans, libertarians will blame republicans and act self righteous while they sat out of the last few elections or helped democrats win by voting third party, and our health insurance is wrecked! awesome, what sucks is its a little late for me to buy land and pay it off, i dont think we have that many years left until collapse, sad. Very sad, what i think is the worst part is that democrat will NEVER admit they are wrong, EVER, even with a bill called OBAMAcare, they still blame republicans and people believe it. what a joke

 

[KLB]

No one read it, its been sitting in a drawer for years, they got super majorities in congress and KNEW they had to pass it as quickly as possible shortly after they won while as little people as possible were paying attention. They lied about it, no one read it except for the republicans who all voted NO, while the libs fell in line with their leader asking ZERO questions, they are sheep. Now we are screwed, the liberals will of course point fingers at republicans, libertarians will blame republicans and act self righteous while they sat out of the last few elections or helped democrats win by voting third party, and our health insurance is wrecked! awesome, what sucks is its a little late for me to buy land and pay it off, i dont think we have that many years left until collapse, sad. Very sad, what i think is the worst part is that democrat will NEVER admit they are wrong, EVER, even with a bill called OBAMAcare, they still blame republicans and people believe it. what a joke

You actually think the republicans read it before the vote?

 

[Stickfight]

Is there a claim being made here?

I do not see the utility in pretending one has not been made. It isn't like the forum lacks opportunities for back patting and knowing glances exchanged among its regulars.

Thought it is unfortunate that is all right now to call out other users as a means of disparaging their views before they've even made them known.

 

[jamil]

I do not see the utility in pretending one has not been made. It isn't like the forum lacks opportunities for back patting and knowing glances exchanged among its regulars.

Thought it is unfortunate that is all right now to call out other users as a means of disparaging their views before they've even made them known.

I was asking if you're making a claim. I know the claim I made. I hoped to make that obvious. I still don't know what you're saying which was why I asked. Do you think I'm unfairly accusing someone? Do you feel that there's no evidence for what I AM claiming? Just what are you trying to say?

 

[jbombelli]

No one read it, its been sitting in a drawer for years, they got super majorities in congress and KNEW they had to pass it as quickly as possible shortly after they won while as little people as possible were paying attention. They lied about it, no one read it except for the republicans who all voted NO, while the libs fell in line with their leader asking ZERO questions, they are sheep. Now we are screwed, the liberals will of course point fingers at republicans, libertarians will blame republicans and act self righteous while they sat out of the last few elections or helped democrats win by voting third party, and our health insurance is wrecked! awesome, what sucks is its a little late for me to buy land and pay it off, i dont think we have that many years left until collapse, sad. Very sad, what i think is the worst part is that democrat will NEVER admit they are wrong, EVER, even with a bill called OBAMAcare, they still blame republicans and people believe it. what a joke

You must be a Republican.