Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Any chance we can get the lame ducks to repeal the mandate provision of HCR?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:24 PM
Original message
Any chance we can get the lame ducks to repeal the mandate provision of HCR?
If the 'pug strategy is to take all the good parts out of the watered-down HCR bill, leaving ONLY the mandates, shouldn't OUR reps, before they leave office, do the sane thing and take away their chance to do that?

Given that the mandates were half the reason we LOST the House, why leave them in at all?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nope. The mandate is required if insurance companies are required to accept people regardless of
Edited on Tue Nov-16-10 06:27 PM by BzaDem
pre-existing conditions. Otherwise, premiums would be like they are in New York state with community rating but without a mandate (thousands per month on the individual market).

If the mandate is removed, the pre-existing conditions regulation would be removed at the same time. Neither is going to be removed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It's also a foot in the door for government benefits...
Once it's determined that everyone can't afford insurance...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. We already KNEW that millions of people couldn't afford insurance
That's why Obama was PROPOSING healthcare reform to start with.

No additional proof NEEDED to be provided.

All the mandates did was give the Right an issue to beat us over the head with. Thanks to them, we may NEVER get a majority for any future advances in healthcare coverage in the future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Given that he has to prove the sky is blue to the GOTP...
I get it.

Never say never. They said exactly the same thing about Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. All they have to do is accuse you of "fraud" and they can drop you. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. got a link to that?
seems to me accusations aren't enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. No, Hello_Kitty doesn't, because the assertion is false. Any link would therefore have to be false
as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. It is the Republicans job and great pleasure to gut healthcare...
If we lost the House because we enacted the most progressive bill to pass Congress since Medicare, then the electorate is so abysmally stupid that they would put Republicans in charge after they destroyed the economy.

Oh shit...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. If the mandates hadn't been there, there's no way we'd have lost 60 seats.
That issue was used over and over and over again to hurt our candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Oh I truly think that's nonsense...
Clearly you've forgotten history... the opposition ALWAYS gets a bump after the other party wins the WH. Always. We've been discussing this for weeks and weeks here on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Not in 1934...not in 1962...not in 2002.
We didn't HAVE to lose big this year.

Clearly party's leaders just decided to concede the House without a fight-probably because they believed the bogus Lanny Davis "Obama's better off with a Republican Congress" meme.

If we'd made "we'll FIX HCR next year with a majority" our theme this fall, we could have saved a lot of House seats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. Gosh.. you found three years out of how many decades?
I still call BS... sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. The economy lost the house, not health care.
Though I understand why the electorate would reject progressive ideas. There has not been a serious progressive who intended to run for the White House, with a chance of winning, since Huey Long set out to oppose FDR. (He was assassinated). The last politician who both called himself a progressive and was considered a progressive to be elected was Hoover, and a real liberal kicked his ass...because of the economy.

Of course, Johnson was the last real liberal to be elected...and he resigend because he could not kick the ass of a anti-war candidate, which resulted in turning the White House over to Nixon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. I've yet to see one single exit poll that even comes close to reflecting that baseless nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. +1 for common sense, as opposed to acting like everyone's views correspond with theirs. n/t
Edited on Tue Nov-16-10 11:31 PM by BzaDem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. I think that you're misreading the election results
There is not a groundswell of support for repealing "Obamacare". In fact, most people either don't want the law repealed or they want it expanded. Unfortunately, a lot of young and progressive leaning individuals (once again) failed to cast ballots in a crucial midterm election, so a lot of the people whom were "speaking" didn't have highly favorable opinions of it but they're not representative of the public as a whole. It will be harder for the Republicans to take the new law, either in whole or in part, then they may think.
Second of all, the Republicans hate ALL of "Obamacare" including the mandates- that's what they're mainly focusing on in their court challenges and legislative repeal. There is no evidence that I've seen or heard that suggests that they *secretly* love them IMHO.

As somebody else here wrote, the mandates are the structural foundation of the new health care law. Remove them and the whole thing basically just falls apart. I should add too that ANY kind of health care reform is going to include mandates, although in the case of single-payer (which I'm not opposed to at all), they'll be in the form of higher taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
7. That's the ONLY part of it that's non-negotiable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. I honestly think a lot of DUers would be perfectly happy if HCR were a mandate and nothing else
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. I think they'll get their chance to prove it
given enough time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
area51 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-10 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #18
26. +1
Except I think (or hope) that it's not a lot, it's a small number of very vocal people. The worst thing to do was to put in a mandate and leave the insurance companies for the most part unregulated, and not to have at least a public option which would force their prices down, and of course, BHO and congress did exactly the worst thing. Since they're so in love with multiple insurance companies, but are completely unwilling to stop their sociopathic behavior, nationalize them. End the denials, bankruptcies and deaths now!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veganlush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
8. the mandates are necessary. simular to auto insurance.
it diffuses the risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
13. None. Even less chance than before.
Now they KNOW they won't face reelection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
14. no
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
17. The mandate violates all of our core Democratic principles, BUT...
...our Congressional Democrats are going to hang on to it for all it's worth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veganlush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-10 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
19. The mandates weren't the problem
..the problem is that the dems were too pussified to make the case, they didn't stand up and fight the lies. Their lack of denial of the lies made people think the lies were true, it's pretty simple. If I accuse you of something, in front of people, and you don't deny it, how does that look? I have rw relatives that hate HCR. when pressed, they reveal their biggset fear: somebody is getting something they don't deserve> They feel that they work for theirs and somebody else is gonna get it free. That's because the dems wouldn't stand up and point out the fact that even someone without health insurance gets treatment at the emergency room, even before reform. Hospitals write off the cost as charitable giving, and inflate the cost, write it off on their taxes. what isn't covered that way is covered by passing on the cost to everyone else. That's why aspirins cost eight dollars each, etc.. So we already pay for the uninsured, but we pay too much because of the inefficient way we pay for them. HCR mandates that people have insurance. In some cases, those who can't afford the premiums will get help in the form of a tax credit. So how would you rather pay, OUTRIGHT, when someone goes to the emergency room, is charged premium hours for emergency care, and the rest is passed on through inflated prices for the rest of us, or would you rather help with their premium, and let them get their bills paid by a private insurer? Would it be cheaper to help someone pay their car insurance premiums or cheaper to just buy them a new car, and pay for whatever else property damage, damage to other cars involved, etc?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liskddksil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-10 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
25. No - but the tea-party will make the Republicans try
and the Republicans will have to choose between them and the insurance companies, who sure like the mandate, and won't let it be repealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC