Eleven attorneys general slam Obama healthcare fixes as illegal

Attorneys General from 11 states are claiming that Obama and HHS are acting illegally with at least some of the "delays" and "fixes" placed in the name of executive privilege to somehow make the crazy ObamaCare law work.

They say Congress needs to be involved, not just Obama and HHS secretary Sebelius.

Although some of these fixes may indeed be legal per the PPACA, some may in fact not be legal.

The big one is the Obama decree that insurance companies may continue to offer insurance that no longer meets the minimum standards outlined in the law. That came about because Obama was called out and exposed as a liar because of statements about being able to keep existing policies.

Many rules and regulations however are in fact delegated to the HHS and IRS per the law, so changing things may be legal.

That's where all the confusion is coming from.

But with all the unchanged portions of the law being implemented, it really may not make much difference since it seems many people simply don't want to get involved either way.

They've injected so much confusion and micro-managing it's a wonder anybody knows anything at all.

Eleven GOP attorneys general say the Obama administration is breaking the law by repeatedly making changes to ObamaCare without going through Congress.

The attorneys general specifically criticize President Obama's executive action that allowed insurance companies to keep offering health plans that had been canceled for not meeting ObamaCare's more rigorous standards.

“We support allowing citizens to keep their health insurance coverage, but the only way to fix this problem-ridden law is to enact changes lawfully: through Congressional action,” the attorneys general wrote in a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “The illegal actions by this administration must stop.”

Eleven attorneys general slam Obama healthcare fixes as illegal

It's time for a Constitutional Congress...the Senate and House are out of control and Obama makes laws up as he goes.
Until either this happens or 3/4 of the States get together and change it, we will all lose. We will have NO Healthcare because there will no longer be any doctors to treat us!

reply to post by xuenchen


Until there is BIPARTISAN outcries about this, it's just the GOP yelling more nonsense.

Doesn't matter what Obama did, they'd cry fowl. He could have gone to Congress and then they'd complained that he's not a real leader cause he couldn't make an executive decision himself.

I'm so tired of the GOP trying to a pick a fight over non issues like this.

ACA is a problem, it needs fixing, but it's not going to be done by claiming the admin is doing something illegal, when a GOP led WH would have done the same damn thing.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Just because there are only 11 AG's from the same party that are claiming what the emperor is actually wearing, doesn't take away the validity of their claim.

beezzer
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Just because there are only 11 AG's from the same party that are claiming what the emperor is actually wearing, doesn't take away the validity of their claim.

Yes it does.

Considering they would not have complained had George W done the same thing.

Context and history are very important in politics .

~tenth

and just how many of those lawmakers are the cause of ACA becoming a Law in the first place...

they were negligent in allowing a 2.000 page, intricate health reform bill to be passed without even reading it

Yes both the 0val 0ffice 0ccupant ( Øbama) AND the total Congress should be investigated for tyranny, accepting Lobbyist favors.... and should have a decade long ban on being compensated for advising or working for any health or insurance industry corporation after leaving office


the 11 gripers about legality & constitutionality are hypocrites.
they may be correct but the horse is already out of the barn because they keep leaving the door wide open
they have missed a dozen opportunities to evict the 000... to their, and the peoples' detriment




well,,, the state Atty Generals were not the Congress that were asleep at the wheel... my mistake

but my rant is still on

more power to the state legal prosecuters... maybe the AGs can start the re-calls for the state representatives that allowed 0bamacare to run amok on the people

tothetenthpower

beezzer
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Just because there are only 11 AG's from the same party that are claiming what the emperor is actually wearing, doesn't take away the validity of their claim.

Yes it does.

Considering they would not have complained had George W done the same thing.

Context and history are very important in politics

.

~tenth

Then that is an issue with partisan politics.

Not illegality.

reply to post by beezzer

Then that is an issue with partisan politics.

That's exactly what the GOP are about though isn't it?

They haven't produced a single piece of counter legislation to any of Obama's plans. They simply vote NO, cry foul and scream that it's illegal.

Yet present no alternative or solution.

It's just a bunch of crybabies, sad they lost a few elections and they will say, or do anything to discredit the work of those currently holding the office they think they deserve.

That is why I don't respect the GOP or any other political party, but the GOP most of all, because they don't actually do anything but complain and blow hot air up their supporter's arses.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower

Yes it does.

Considering they would not have complained had George W done the same thing.

Context and history are very important in politics

.

~tenth

Well, 'ol Bush did in fact have some "plans"

Differences ?
Similarities?
Keep your existing plan?

In January of 2007, George W. Bush was entering the final stretch of his two-term presidency. Bush, however, chose not to ride off simply into the sunset. Instead, he put forth a comprehensive plan to reform the private health insurance market. It’s long-forgotten now, because Democrats had just regained control of Congress, and these newly-empowered legislators pronounced the Bush plan “dead on arrival.” In many ways, though, the Bush proposal was impressive and credible. It would have expanded coverage while reducing the deficit. Should it serve as the starting point for replacing Obamacare? ............

How George W. Bush Would Have Replaced Obamacare

reply to post by tothetenthpower

HELENA — In the battle over health-care reform, U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg and his fellow Republicans in Congress are known mostly for one thing: Saying “no,” again and again, to President Barack Obama’s plan and new law.

They’ve voted several times to repeal it (such as last Wednesday), supported lawsuits to undo it, tried many ways to block its implementation and relentlessly bashed Democrats who supported it.

What may get lost in the political shouting match, however, is that Rehberg and Republicans do have health-reform proposals of their own — and have passed bills on the subject.

“These are all pieces that we as a Republican conference wanted to present (in 2009),” Rehberg said in an interview last week. “But (Democrats’) solution was essentially a government solution.”

Yet, at the same time, elements of some of their main proposals — interstate sales of health insurance, allowing businesses to pool together to buy insurance, use of high-risk pools for the hard-to-insure — are included in the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA), known by its detractors as “Obamacare.”

The GOP’s health-care ideas also are not without opposition and some question whether the proposals would help substantially reduce health-care costs or expand health coverage to the 50 million-plus Americans without it.

mtstandard.com... -8ecc-0019bb2963f4.html

Not a big fan of the GOP, but they do have counter-proposals for Obamacare.

You just don't hear about it.

reply to post by xuenchen


It actually doesn't surprise me that George had the better plan.

Not that I understand that plan fully as I'm not American and don't quiet understand the tax lingo involved, but it certainly seems like it would have been less of a headache overall.

In this instance however, you'd see the dems doing exactly what the GOP are doing now. The problem exists on both sides of the aisle. The only difference is I assume Democrats would have put out legislation that would have countered that plan, well, I suppose they did with ACA.

~Tenth

Nvm.

The California AG got a bribe of $932,900,000.00 for Cal ACA website...
You were saying what below?
Give it up already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tothetenthpower
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Until there is BIPARTISAN outcries about this, it's just the GOP yelling more nonsense.

Doesn't matter what Obama did, they'd cry fowl. He could have gone to Congress and then they'd complained that he's not a real leader cause he couldn't make an executive decision himself.

I'm so tired of the GOP trying to a pick a fight over non issues like this.

ACA is a problem, it needs fixing, but it's not going to be done by claiming the admin is doing something illegal, when a GOP led WH would have done the same damn thing.

~Tenth

tothetenthpower

beezzer
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Just because there are only 11 AG's from the same party that are claiming what the emperor is actually wearing, doesn't take away the validity of their claim.

Yes it does.

Considering they would not have complained had George W done the same thing.

Context and history are very important in politics

.

~tenth

No it doesn't. The truth is the truth, and it doesn't matter what they would have done (or not as the case may be), with a past administration, it doesn't make it any less true. Further that point doesn't have anything to do with "context", and while precedent can be important in politics both sides of the party line have been playing fast and loose with precedent for decades now.

For the record, making the "But they would have given George a pass" argument is..is one of the more tired tactics I've seen on ATS, and using it in a way that is completely fallacious and just flat doesn't make any sense, is one more black ball in the bucket that is making me wonder about this place.

This issue---the act to make you buy insurance---disguised as What?---Affordable Care Act--which has nothing whatsoever to do with health care---is the perfect platform for an articulate third party candidate with a nonpartisan plan.

I do honestly believe that as the real effects are beginning to be felt...this could be the issue that acts as an emetic to the Party Kool-Aide of both parties.
Let me tell ya, there's nothing like taking an extra 25% of a family's discretionary income to get their attention! Or losing their doctor, as three of my family members have, via a letter saying, "Your records are available for pick-up.... Our office will no longer accept Medicare/Medicaid patients."

I don't have that plan. I'll freely admit that I've just never found the time to read the entire act. I spent almost six hours once just looking up the references in one particular section and wasn't a bit smarter for it.
I'm pretty libertarian in outlook, I think I should be able to negotiate with my health care provider for his/her services. (Honestly, people, this isn't like internet service, you're looking your "provider" in the face!!) Why should I pay a middle-man to do that? I fully understand that some folks would rather not negotiate, would prefer to turn it over to an insurance company. That's fine with me, but why force me to do the same?
When I canceled my health insurance plan, I informed my health care providers that I had done so and told them that nothing would change on my end, they would still be debiting my account for payment at the time services were rendered but they would no longer have to fill out insurance forms. They were fine with that. I am fine with that. What does it matter to anyone else?

reply to post by redhorse

No it doesn't. The truth is the truth, and it doesn't matter what they would have done (or not as the case may be), with a past administration, it doesn't make it any less true.

Perhaps not, but it certainly makes it harder to take seriously. The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.

For the record, making the "But they would have given George a pass" argument is..is one of the more tired tactics I've seen on ATS, and using it in a way that is completely fallacious and just flat doesn't make any sense, is one more black ball in the bucket that is making me wonder about this place.

It is appropriate, because ACA is basically the same plan that the GOP put on the table in the 90's. They applauded it and tried to push it through. Now a decade and change later, it's the end of democracy.

See the problem?

Hypocrites, the lot of them, BOTH GOP and DNC.

~Tenth

ObamaramaCare is just that: a circus act.

It is not affordable and no one has any intention of making it work. This is about ripping off the citizenry through law. I'll pay more attention when the Single Payer solution hits the table.

Some things should never have been privatized ... and 'required' insurance is one of 'em. The reason things are privatized is to enrich their cronies and dodge blame for the ponzi schemes they actually are. Who's too blind (or too asleep) to miss this simple truth? They take from you more and more everyday ... and people just whine about it ... play their little part in the game by taking up silly arguments that miss the central issue.

You wanna whine about the GOP's plan? You wanna whine about the DNC's plan? You're whining over who took you to the bank. Don't you get it?!? Don't you remember it was Paul Ryan who developed a plan to rip off social security when he was a VP candidate ... but it was the same plan that was executed by Obamarama a little later after he was re-elected? Where were the tears then?

Obamarama has been on a winning streak because he's not afraid of employing Cloward-Plivenesque strategies. He will continue to win. The GOP will probably take control of the Senate this year ... but mark my words ... they'll never approach impeachment ... unless the GOP thinks that would put Biden out front of Clinton for the DNC nomination.

Everyone who thinks ObamaramaCare is a mess, isn't seeing the forest for the trees.

No way more republicains in high powered jobs are crying faul on Romneycare.

Still waiting for the end of the world suposed facts coming from the right, im probably going to have to wait for a while.