It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Justice Department sides with court ruling Obamacare invalid

page: 7
35
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes, repeal it all, including pre-existing, and then replace it all, including pre-existing. The only one missing things is you.

His administration did not decide the ACA was unconstitutional, that was the courts. You are blinded by political bias induced ignorance.

If the ACA is unconstitutional it has to go, right?




posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Nope. The only think missing a replacement plan. For the past 2 years, while Republicans held both the House and the Senate, they couldn't come up with a plan.

They still don't have a plan, just empty promises and tired rhetoric. In the meantime, Trump wants to cut billions from Medicare and Medicaid.



His administration did not decide the ACA was unconstitutional, that was the courts.


The courts also ruled Trump's Muslim ban was unconstitutional, that didn't stop the Trump administration from fighting it.
edit on 27-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

No they didn't. Political activist did. The "judge" did not even look at the ban on it's merits, the "judge" looked at comments Trump made which were not a part of the ban to rule on the wording of the ban.

The SC has already said the ONLY thing that made the ACA Constitutional was it being a tax. The tax portion is now gone, therefore unconstitutional.

Why won't you answer, if it's unconstitutional it needs to go, right?



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:33 PM
link   
The argument that not all Americans can afford healthcare thus should not have it is specious at best. Why? Because they still get it when needed through Emergency Room visits which are far more costly, not to mention that illness that goes unchecked costs more in the long run to treat if even treatable at that point. The thing is, and this is where people just don't get it for whatever reason, a move to single payer healthcare where everyone gets treatment with little to no deductible is actually less expensive in the long run than our current system which has millions of uninsured and very high deductibles. And that does not even factor in savings that could be had by employing cost controls etc. America pays over double any other nation for its healthcare with less care and worse results. Do your research and you will get it. And, here's one more thought. Suppose you lost your job, no longer had health insurance and had no way to afford it, would you be okay with you and your family having no coverage and perhaps suffering a catastrophic health event? Probably not. So why would you find that acceptable for others?



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The mandate is also gone, so the unconstitutional argument is gone too. Regulated health care and basic standards are not unconstitutional.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It can all go then, and be replaced.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




The SC has already said the ONLY thing that made the ACA Constitutional was it being a tax. The tax portion is now gone, therefore unconstitutional.

ah the roberts rule

with out the "tax" that wasn't a tax it would have been tossed
how soon many forget

nice point



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Replaced with what? Even Mike Pence was against this move because of the political ramification of 16 million Americans being suddenly uninsured, and with no replacement plan in place.

Face it. The only way protect people with pre-existing conditions is either a mandatory payment to a greater insurance pool, which is what the ACA did, or a universal, single payer, Medicare for all health care option.


Vice President Mike Pence was concerned about the political ramifications of moving ahead without a strategy or a plan to handle the suddenly uninsured if the suit succeeds.

www.msn.com...


How will the Republican do that? It's against their platform.


edit on 27-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Since you are asking how will they do it, that would imply your accusation of a broken promise premature. That's all that's needed, thank you. So maybe now you can finally answer the question you have dodged over and over, if the ACA was unconstitutional, it had to go, right?



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The threat of 16 million people being thrown off their health care plan through this Trump Administration supported lawsuit, and support of this court's opinion without a replacement or backup plan, in itself is contrary to Trump's campaign promise to protect Americans with pre-existing conditions.

He has no plan, he didn't have a plan and I don't any plan in the works in any Republican caucus or congressional committee. It took years to pass the ACA. Now you think Trump can pull a plan out of his ass to save is campaign promise.


edit on 27-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yawn. Maybe the Democrats should have not created an unconstitutional law. Don't you think all laws that are unconstitutional need to go? Or are you happy with things being unconstitutional when it suits your purpose?



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

How will they be "thrown" off their policies ?

😷



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Trump has re-stated that a Republican plan will protect preexisting conditions.

😎



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

What republican plan? They don't have one. LOL

'We need a plan': GOP shaken by Trump's healthcare demands www.politico.com...


And if Trump wants them to move forward with larger changes, they said, the president needs to propose them himself.

“The president makes very clear that he understands the importance of health care and that he wants the Republican Party to be the party of health care,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), whose opposition to repeal efforts in 2017 was critical in stopping the effort. “In order to do that, he has to have a detailed plan that is going to be an improvement over the ACA.”



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha

How will they be "thrown" off their policies ?

😷


By nullifying the law, that is the ACA, that forbids insurers from denying coverage to patients with pre-existing conditions or out pricing their ability to pay for coverage.




edit on 27-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Declaring the entire scam invalid is the best news I have heard about it.

I knew all along the charade wouldn't last that long.. How long it did last was too long though.

The cost of a behemoth sized deception like Obamacare continuing would be immeasurable in damage to generations to come.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Please explain to me, YOU, in your own words, not some random poster trying to cover for your ignorance, in what way does covering patients with pre-existing conditions violate the Constitution? What constitutional article, section or clause did the judge cite in his determination that makes the ACA unconstitutional. Do you know? Whose civil rights are being violated by covering patients with pre-existing conditions? Can you explain this in your own words?

Do you know what the Trump administration did to cause the ACA to become unconstitutional, should the Supreme Court so decide? Do you know the history of Republican sabotage of the ACA?



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

So then it is the GOP and not Trump according to that who not doing the work.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

The ACA was a lie from day 1. Talk about people thrown off their policies, the ACA did that. It's unconstitutional. Do you know how Obama made it constitutional, by making it a tax, another promise broken by Obama.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: shooterbrody

Deflection....sigh. You're so predictable.

Trump promised, again and again, to protect those with pre-existing conditions.



Sigh, you are so myopic. Are saying the only way to "'protect those with preexisting conditions" is with the unaffordable don't-care edict?







 
35
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join