Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,212 posts)
Sun May 5, 2019, 01:57 PM May 2019

Barr's worst move had nothing to do with Mueller

By Catherine Rampell

The Washington Post

The worst thing that Attorney General William Barr did this week arguably had nothing to do with possible contempt of Congress or the Mueller report.

It had to do with health care.

On Wednesday, amid the circus over alleged special counsel snittiness, the department that Barr oversees formally asked a federal appeals court to strike down the entire Affordable Care Act, jeopardizing access to health care for tens of millions of Americans.

If the Trump administration prevails, everything in the law would be wiped out. And I do mean everything: the protections for people with pre-existing conditions, Medicaid expansion, income-based individual-market subsidies, provisions allowing children to remain on their parents’ insurance until age 26, requirements that insurance cover minimum essential benefits such as prescriptions and preventive care, and so on.

The administration’s rationale was laid out in a policy brief supporting a lawsuit challenging Obamacare by 20 red states. Their logic: When Congress, as part of President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, set the penalty for not carrying health insurance to zero, that effectively made it no longer really a “tax,” and therefore made it unconstitutional. Somehow, that rendered the rest of the law unconstitutional, as well; including lots of provisions having nothing to do with the mandate.

This reasoning has been rejected even by conservative legal scholars otherwise opposed to the law. But legal merits (and demerits) aside — which are likely to be ultimately adjudicated by the Supreme Court — it’s also not clear what political upside Republicans could possibly see in mounting yet another overt attack on Obamacare.

-more-

https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/rampell-barrs-worst-move-had-nothing-to-do-with-mueller/

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Barr's worst move had nothing to do with Mueller (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin May 2019 OP
Fastest way to scoop all our assets pandr32 May 2019 #1
Thank you for putting "preexisting condition" ResistantAmerican17 May 2019 #3
Sorry to hear pandr32 May 2019 #6
A whole lot of red households are going to be hurt by this. CrispyQ May 2019 #2
And sadly while they lose their health care they will still vote repuke because of abortion. kimbutgar May 2019 #4
Trump's relentless quest to trash Obama's legacy Skittles May 2019 #5

pandr32

(11,615 posts)
1. Fastest way to scoop all our assets
Sun May 5, 2019, 02:01 PM
May 2019

Most people I know have some form of a "pre-existing condition" and prescription costs are already through the roof. The American people will go broke.

ResistantAmerican17

(3,827 posts)
3. Thank you for putting "preexisting condition"
Sun May 5, 2019, 03:35 PM
May 2019

In quotes. That is a term invented by insurance companies to deny healthcare to the people who need medical care and, in some cases, need medical care to live. Through medical negligence, I am a surgical diabetic. They had to remove my pancreas. Insulin——dead without it. Period. No fault of my own. So what, right Barr? A choice??? Hardly.

pandr32

(11,615 posts)
6. Sorry to hear
Mon May 6, 2019, 02:59 PM
May 2019

and I hope you are not out-of-pocket for the insulin. I have heard awful stories of people not being able to afford it and rationing the little they do manage to get.
Personally, I would like to see insurance companies out of healthcare. Since their business model is for-profit I see them at odds with actual healthcare. Their focus is on profitable premiums and minimal pay-outs.

I grew up in Canada and of-course have fond memories of our government-run healthcare.

CrispyQ

(36,518 posts)
2. A whole lot of red households are going to be hurt by this.
Sun May 5, 2019, 02:01 PM
May 2019

Besides pre-existing conditions, that children-on-their-parent's-insurance-until-age-26 is VERY popular, even in red households.

The GOP doesn't have a plan. Let them die, or better yet, let them go bankrupt & then die is their plan. Evil fuckers, every one.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Barr's worst move had not...