bring you down. There will be one tomorrow with the opposite results.

Especially when big business gets waiver after waiver.

And nobody likes insurance companies.

This thing is going to stay unpopular for awhile.

required in many states to even get a drivers license whether we have a vehicle or not. I also know of young people who have needed health insurance, I have had health insurance for years and did not "need it" but was glad to have the insurance any how.

That would be fraud. What insurance company is engaging in that?

accident. In Texas you can not get drivers' license unless you have insurance, not fraud.

They can't insure a car without one. To determine liability rates you must know what car you are insuring.

From the Texas DMV site:

To apply for your Texas driver's license, head to your local DPS office with:

A valid out-of-state driver's license.
Proof of your identity.
Proof of your Social Security number.
Proof of your Texas residency. One of the documents must prove that you've lived in Texas for a minimum of 30 days.
Complete required application forms available at any Texas DPS office. Your application must include a photograph and thumbprint.
Pay the required fee.
Pass the vision test.

No mention of auto insurance to get the licence.

Maybe if Texas Secedes, you won’t have to get car insurance...

But then again, lots of big expensive cars down there, so people who own them have got to protect their assets against all those illegals driving crappy cars w/o insurance..So in this case I guess govt. is good..Govt. is good only if when it protects assets..

Good luck down there and we support all you guys down there...(Progressive Dems)

Your post indicates you didn't. The poster I replied to said you had to have car insurance -- even if you didn't have a car -- to get a driver's licence. I say that is not true. Do you have information that it is?

has a lot of requirements in order to get Insurance..

Insurance protects assets... People want to protect their assets..

Texas Govt is very specific and requires a lot of steps in order to get car insurance.

Isn’t this a case of govt. over reach which right wingers talk about all the time..

Nothing to do with what you were talking about...Just the fact that you mentioned that what is needed in order to obtain insurance...

I am not from Texas. I just don't believe you need to have car insurance when you don't have a car just to get a license.

Many of them don't trust the government or big business and they feel like anyone or anything requiring them to buy something they don't want is taking away their freedom.

Most of them probably love having insurance. That's different than approving of Obamacare.

We have been paying through purchasing insurance for ourselves because hospitals passes the cost of non payers on to cover the expenses the hospitals incurs when taking care of the uninsured. How would you feel if you went to an emergency room and did not have insurance and they told you to come up with the money before you are treated?

What a great idea.

so just how would your public option work, who pays for it, etc.

been destroyed over and over again. It was a failed talking point to try to push mandated insurance which came directly from those with a vested interest in saving the failing Health Insurance Corps.

I opposed mandated insurance when Obama was running and opposed it also, one of the reasons I supported him over Hillary. As he said regarding his opposition to Mandated Ins. 'if mandates worked we could end homelessness by forcing people to buy homes'.

HC is a RIGHT. And no one should be forced to buy a product from ANY Corporation. You do NOT have to own a car, that is a choice. Many people don't own cars, I don't eg. So please stop trying to equate human Health Care with automobiles.

Those who do not have insurance and is either unable to pay it refuses to pay I am "mandated to contribute to cover their cost. If everyone was responsible for their healthcare there would nit be a need to mandate. One of the reasons most states went to auto requirements was the lack of financial responsibility. We could have it where there does not have to be mandate on health insurance by providing proof of financial responsibility. The truth is when we have a health crisis the cost is more than one can afford.

are not happy with ACA. Disturbing but just as in Kentucky people are happy with KYNECT but unhappy with Obamacare. ACA is in the very infant stage, yes there could be some good changes but benefits are just starting to be realized.

and many of whom are still carrying their 23-24-25-26 year olds on their own policies feel free to bad-mouth the ACA..

anf if they are not eligible for a subsidy or medicaid they are envious of those who are

narrow-minded ignorant bastards

and if I were polled, I would say i approve of ACA.

But my feelings about it are not so strong that I think people who say they do not approve are stupid nor that they should feel pain for that opinion.

So they deserve some of it themselves..Ignorance is dangerous!!

And the Dems aren't doing enough to point out the positives. And also showing who is obstructing fixing the problems. Fundraising seems to be more important, maybe they plan on running ads on this. Didn't do so well in 2010 with this approach.

We need a bunch of warriors surrounding our POTUS...What do we have. On the national level.....

Three....Warren, Grayson and Sanders..How do possibly fight these guys with only 3....

to go on their stupid way until they get sick or fired or lose their insurance. Only then will they look up and still find fault with
the system.

I have in laws that benefitted from ACA and they still don't think Obama did anything good. They think he is anti Christian, that is
the only thing that matters, the only thing on their mind.

they just want some issues fixed by congress.

The whole article is worth a scan to see it goes deeper than just the Poll Stats.

If I were polled I would say - Nope. I don't. But it was the BEST START EVEEEEEEEEEER! We started where we were at - now lets keeping pushing it to a single payer system.

Once previously uninsured people get that taste of insurance - they aren't gonna give it up.

I would also like to see an eventual expansion to basic dental health.

Add them up, you get a majority.

Nothing new.

Millions more will learn about the benefits of personal health insurance as time goes on.

ACA is law. Thanks Obama, for removing that stress from my shoulders!

Critics (both right and left) can go fuck themselves.

Sadly, the insurance companies are the main beneficiary of ACA. I'm surprised how many conservatives are against ACA and how many progressives are in favor of it, considering how it essentially forces us to give money to corporations.

A better solution would be an expansion of Medicare and Medicaid that provides all people with basic health coverage, with the private existing merely for supplemental purposes and playing much less of a role.

Forget single, payer, forget NHS, this is most substantially the existing system that maintains the cartel status of the insurance industry (antitrust exemption), virtually no cost control measures other than self denial of care, intentionally poor ramping to the exchanges, the inefficiency of state pools rather than harnessing the full negotiating power of the nation as a true counter weight, continuing the state based regulation that has proven ineffective and outgunned with no resources to even the odds, stubbornly and foolishly stuck with the employer based system of gatekeeping, functions under the wrongheaded assumption that individual abuse is the central driver of costs, guaranteed profits to a criminal cartel creating another too big to fail institutions back stopped by the full faith and credit of the US, abuses and distorts the taxing authority of the government by dictating the post tax spending of citizens without any voluntary action from the citizen, failed to make rescission illegal, is in no small part a big sloppy, wet kiss to the pharmaceutical industry expanding patents costing consumers and the government more money while failing to negotiate drug prices, places struggling working class folks to purchase a consumer product that they cannot afford to use.

Also, of interest on the side is the thing that is actually beneficial and working is socialism. The real hay being made here is the patchwork expansion of Medicaid, aka socialism. Yep, it is the socialist aspect of the plan that is the primary driver of both satisfaction with the plan and the increase in covered citizens. Left to invisible hand portions the plan would a bust with overwhelmed cheerleaders pointing to a few pay to play features and possible waivers for alternative exchange set ups (thanks Bernie!) as a success.

You see, when you carefully construct a plan to not disrupt the existing system you largely end up with the existing system and with little benefit to the average person. The plan ends up being a big help to the really, really poor if they have the right geography and the well off and the wealthy because they are guaranteed coverage and their liability is limited.
Most folks are getting a mandate to buy whatever slop the boss wants to serve.

Wouldn’t it be safer buy insurance from ACA rather than directly through the insurance companies.

I mean, if you run into problems associated with benefits, deductibles, or other denial problems
couldn’t/ wouldn’t ...those directly working for the ACA be more likely to help the consumer.

Because 99% of the time the Insurance Companies will tell you “Tough Shit.”

"greater customer service" is a new tack on the ACA I haven't seen yet.

what could possibly be more convienent than a complete upending of the health insurance industry, that doesn't change the role of the health insurance provider, but instead ADDS multiple layers of government intervention. It adds millions to the program, yet millions are dropped from pre-existing policies.

99% of statistics are made up.

This is health care, this is people's life and death matters here, and that is not is not something that can just be put up for a majority vote or the whims of public opinion.

And besides, if you take away the white vote, then you'd have totally different numbers.

Again, I don't care. ACA is the law of the land. I consider debate over it to be closed.

or just this one ?

I make $26,000 per year. Asking me to pay $307 a month (cheapest plan I found)? I give the middle finger to that. It should be completely free to those who make under $50,000 a year. I'm not paying the equivalent of a car payment for health care.

It sounds as though you should be entitled to some subsidies...

Know plenty of people who make as much as you who are not paying as much..

So again, what state are you in?

There were several plans, and the cheapest was a Bronze plan, under Health Plus I think. What are the people you know paying?

"Let all these people who continually support right wing fear mongering of govt..feel the pain, to the point that they are forced to realize that they have been duped by their own stupidity.. "

It'll never happen because they are total "MORANS".

Until they see their loved ones in pain...