- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Will Republicans use reconciliation to try and repeal Obamacare?
Posted on 11/6/14 at 9:33 pm
Posted on 11/6/14 at 9:33 pm
Hot Air
quote:
A Republican-majority Senate could simply use reconciliation, the same procedure used by Democrats in 2010 to pass the law, to un-pass it. Why, Robert Reich and his friends at MoveOn are already on guard for this sinister possibility, having suffered a collective brain injury that prevents them from remembering how lefties used the same means to get ObamaCare enacted. All we need is 51 votes!
This post was edited on 11/6/14 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 11/6/14 at 9:35 pm to Revelator
need to keep some of it, like can't be dropped if you get sick.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 9:39 pm to Revelator
Supreme Court might be taking another whack at it....
LINK
quote:
This past Monday, when most of the nation was focused on the midterm elections, the Supreme Court hinted that it could be taking seriously the latest right-wing challenge to the Affordable Care Act. In King v. Burwell, ACA opponents have asked the high court to overturn the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ rejection of their argument that ACA tax credits and subsidies are illegal on federally managed state insurance exchanges (of which there are 34 or 36, depending on how one counts). Most court-watchers had expected that the Court would deny ACA opponents’ request. The justices’ standard practice is to wait and remain above the fray, until and unless a split among the circuit courts materializes. However, on Monday, the Court neither denied nor granted review, instead “re-listing” King for consideration at its next internal conference, this coming Friday, November 7.
LINK
Posted on 11/6/14 at 9:52 pm to arcalades
quote:
need to keep some of it, like can't be dropped if you get sick.
Probably better to repeal the whole thing and start from scratch...with a bill that they will actually read before passing.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 9:59 pm to USMCTiger03
quote:
Probably better to repeal the whole thing and start from scratch
That would be great if they had won enough Senate seats to override the inevitable veto.
Best strategy is probably to attack it piece by piece.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:04 pm to Revelator
quote:
Will Republicans use reconciliation to try and repeal Obamacare?
I think you'll see attempts at reform rather than outright repeal. Campaigning on repeal in your deep red district is one thing, but actually going through with it in DC is another. Removing millions of people from their Obamacare policies and bringing back problems such as the preexisting condition and whatnot could be a clusterfrick best avoided.
This post was edited on 11/6/14 at 10:06 pm
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:09 pm to OldTigahFot
quote:
enough Senate seats to override the inevitable veto.
I'd like to see them try this - get every DEM senator on record - if they uphold the veto, let them justify it to their constituents in the next election.
The GOP should keep sending bills to the POTUS for signature or veto - NO COMPROMISES with the duplicitous one. Let the DEM senators decide if they want to end their careers by upholding the veto.
I don't want a SINGLE compromise with Obama. Not a one.
Elections have consequences - or so I have heard.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:11 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
attempts at reform rather than outright repeal
I don't totally object to this approach.
Unless the GOP has a health care bill ready to replace it, it may be the only pragmatic way to handle the mess.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:12 pm to Revelator
I'm down with it.
I get the feeling the electorate is still hanging on to the promises of 2012 R's who said repeal and replace was the plan.
I get the feeling the electorate is still hanging on to the promises of 2012 R's who said repeal and replace was the plan.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:21 pm to Revelator
There's a catch here.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law by Obama on March 23, 2010. That was BEFORE the reconciliation process was completed.
Reconciliation was used to pass the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, which was signed into law by Obama a week later, on March 30, 2010.
We would have Obamacare even without the reconciliation process, it would just look different. Some Dem. House members refused to pass the Affordable care Act as it was presented to them on March 21, 2010, so on that day the House passed both the Affordable care Act AND the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Obama, Reid and Pelosi had to pledge to those Dems that the amendments they wanted put in place regarding Obamacare would , via reconciliation to avoid the then-unattainable 60-vote cloture rule which was lost when Brown was sworn in to the Senate, be approved by the Senate on the 51 vote majority rule and be signed into law, which it was one week later. This is an important distinction. Again, the Affordable Care Act , i.e., Obamacare, was signed into law prior to the reconciliation process taking place to amend certain parts of it that were not palatable to a small group of Democratic congressmen. Thus, the reconciliation route could only be used to undo the amendments to the Act specified in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, and not the ACA itself.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law by Obama on March 23, 2010. That was BEFORE the reconciliation process was completed.
Reconciliation was used to pass the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, which was signed into law by Obama a week later, on March 30, 2010.
We would have Obamacare even without the reconciliation process, it would just look different. Some Dem. House members refused to pass the Affordable care Act as it was presented to them on March 21, 2010, so on that day the House passed both the Affordable care Act AND the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Obama, Reid and Pelosi had to pledge to those Dems that the amendments they wanted put in place regarding Obamacare would , via reconciliation to avoid the then-unattainable 60-vote cloture rule which was lost when Brown was sworn in to the Senate, be approved by the Senate on the 51 vote majority rule and be signed into law, which it was one week later. This is an important distinction. Again, the Affordable Care Act , i.e., Obamacare, was signed into law prior to the reconciliation process taking place to amend certain parts of it that were not palatable to a small group of Democratic congressmen. Thus, the reconciliation route could only be used to undo the amendments to the Act specified in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, and not the ACA itself.
This post was edited on 11/6/14 at 10:34 pm
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:37 pm to NHTIGER
What amendments would be taken out?
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:46 pm to TOKEN
quote:
Some portions, and perhaps all, of the Affordable Care Act may be immune to attack via Budget Reconciliation because they fall under these restrictions. For, example, the current law reduces the deficit over time. Any changes might result in increasing the deficit which would not be allowed under Budget Reconciliation. Also, provisions of the act like restrictions on insurance companies being able to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions probably would be exempt since they don’t produce a change in federal outlays or revenues. The Senate’s Parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough will have to rule on whether the changes in any repeal legislation met the requirements for Budget Reconciliation. If she reuled they did not, the Republicans would need 60 votes to override her ruling, something Republicans would not get.
However, many of the key provisions of the law – including the individual mandate to purchase health insurance, the creation of insurance exchanges where low-income families can buy subsidized policies, and Medicare and Medicaid funding measures –probably would meet the reconciliation requirements.
In short, the Republicans probably could repeal some, but not all, of Obamacare using Budget Reconciliation. Unfortunately, the provisions they could repeal would be some of the most critical to the operation of the law.
LINK
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:13 pm to TOKEN
quote:
What amendments would be taken out?
Really a long and very tedious answer to that question.
Read the summary here to see the changes made to the original ACA passed into law.
LINK ;
And remember, the process would also involve requiring the bureaucrats at HHS to go back and change thousands of pages of regulations promulgated as a result of the changes created by this second piece of legislation.
Keep in mind that Obama and Pelosi wanted the original ACA to stand as it was passed, and only agreed to the changes seen here as a way to get the final group of House Dems to agree to vote yes on the ACA itself. (as stated above, both bills were passed on the same day one after the other in the House.) So canceling out the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 via reversing the reconciliation process actually would leave us with the even worse version that is the ACA minus the amendments!
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:18 pm to NHTIGER
Well, the individual mandate is in trouble.
This essentially guts the bill.
This essentially guts the bill.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:40 pm to TOKEN
quote:
Well, the individual mandate is in trouble.
The Reconciliation bill lowered the individual mandate amount that appears in the Affordable Care Act. Under the ACA, for 2014 it would have been $495 but the amendment act reduced that to $325. For 2015, the ACA set the individual mandate amount at $750, while the reconciliation amendments lowered it to $695. Both examples of how leaving the ACA in place and getting rid of the amendments act would only make Obama smile. He didn't want to sign the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 ("the reconciliation bill"), but he had to because he promised his own party leaders he would, since that was the only way to get the ACA passed.
Posted on 11/7/14 at 6:52 am to Revelator
Repeal the mess. Then start over and fashion a new law. Just keep the government OUT of healthcare. Let private sector run healthcare. Let the doctor service the patient instead of working for the government.
While we're at it.
IMPEACH THE FRAUD.
While we're at it.
IMPEACH THE FRAUD.
Posted on 11/7/14 at 6:58 am to Matrixman
Certainly at the very least, the Republicans could defund it, couldn't they?
But if McConnel and Boehner are still chosen to lead either side, I have no confidence in anything getting done.
But if McConnel and Boehner are still chosen to lead either side, I have no confidence in anything getting done.
Posted on 11/7/14 at 7:00 am to USMCTiger03
quote:
Probably better to repeal the whole thing and start from scratch...with a bill that they will actually read before passing.
What about the people who are already on the insurance rolls and are directly benefiting from Obamacare?
Posted on 11/7/14 at 7:12 am to GetCocky11
quote:
What about the people who are already on the insurance rolls and are directly benefiting from Obamacare?
What about those people thrown off their previous insurance that were told they could keep it? The only people that like ObamaCare are being subsidized by those thrown off their insurance policies and forced into the ACA.
This post was edited on 11/7/14 at 7:14 am
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News