Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Supreme Court Obamacare Case -- Pros and Cons
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 31 of 39 (657439)
03-28-2012 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Jon
03-27-2012 8:54 PM


Re: DAY TWO, and the beat goes on ...
Hi Jon,
Has this point been brought up yet do you know?
Personally I would be astonished that it was not known about, but I do find it curious that there is not a lot of discussion about it.
Meanwhile we see the public opinion polls show general support:
quote:
PBS: Court of Public Opinion Weighs In on Health Care Reform Law
CBS News/New York Times poll found that two-thirds of Americans want the Supreme Court to overturn some or all of the law, but the survey also showed strong support for individual pieces included in the measure.
Nearly 40 percent said they wished to see the court turn back the entire law, with 29 percent expressing support for overturning the requirement that all Americans obtain health insurance or pay a fine.
Other mandates were far more popular, with 85 percent of respondents saying they favored the law's requirement that insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions. Sixty-eight percent, meanwhile, backed the provision allowing individuals up to age 26 to remain on their parents' health plans.
A CNN survey released Monday revealed similar findings, with 23 percent of respondents saying to leave the law as is, 43 percent wanting to overturn some of its provisions and 30 percent hoping the court would reject the overhaul in its entirety.
A survey by Pew Research Center indicated little has changed since President Obama signed the law two years ago, with 47 percent of Americans approving of it and 45 percent disapproving. The individual mandate is more unpopular. The poll showed 56 percent of the public disapproves of that foundation of the law.
(To the question of which political party can do a better job dealing with health care, 49 percent said Democratic, while 35 percent said Republican.)
You'll note that the opinions are much more favorable when the individual parts are polled than when it is just the whole package. Cognitive dissonance anyone?
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Jon, posted 03-27-2012 8:54 PM Jon has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Taq, posted 03-28-2012 2:54 PM RAZD has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 32 of 39 (657442)
03-28-2012 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by RAZD
03-28-2012 2:02 PM


Re: DAY TWO, and the beat goes on ...
You'll note that the opinions are much more favorable when the individual parts are polled than when it is just the whole package. Cognitive dissonance anyone?
Exactly. Democrats have really missed a chance to use this law as a cudgel. They could claim, and rightly so, that Republicans are in favor of overturning a law that prevents insurance companies from dumping kids that have cancer. They could easily paint Republicans as being in the pockets of greedy insurers who see sick children as a threat to profits.
But of course, this case is not about the popularity of the law, nor the efficacy of the law. It is about the constitutionality of the law.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 03-28-2012 2:02 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Perdition, posted 03-28-2012 2:58 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 34 by RAZD, posted 03-29-2012 7:02 PM Taq has not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 33 of 39 (657443)
03-28-2012 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Taq
03-28-2012 2:54 PM


Re: DAY TWO, and the beat goes on ...
Exactly. Democrats have really missed a chance to use this law as a cudgel. They could claim, and rightly so, that Republicans are in favor of overturning a law that prevents insurance companies from dumping kids that have cancer. They could easily paint Republicans as being in the pockets of greedy insurers who see sick children as a threat to profits.
If the law passes the Supreme Court's muster, I'd be very surprised if they didn't use it this way. However, this case has been on the way since almost the very moment the law was signed, so while the Republicans have been using it as a rallying cry (to some effect), if it is ruled unconstitutional, the Democrats who were using it as a cudgel could seem to have quite a bit of egg on their faces.
I think it was more of a wait and see how things pan out before we really tie ourselves to it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Taq, posted 03-28-2012 2:54 PM Taq has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 34 of 39 (657667)
03-29-2012 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Taq
03-28-2012 2:54 PM


Re: DAY TWO, and the beat goes on ...
Hi again Taq,
But of course, this case is not about the popularity of the law, nor the efficacy of the law. It is about the constitutionality of the law.
So we will need to wait until June.
However it is nice to see how fully prepared the justices are:
Does Antonin Scalia Know What's in the Affordable Care Law?
quote:
The deal that Scalia was referring to -- legendary in conservative anti-Obamacare circles -- was not a classic "kickback." Nelson negotiated for indefinite, unending Medicaid funding for his state. That ended up as part of the bill that initially passed the U.S. Senate on a 60-40 vote.
Here's the rub: It's not actually part of the law. Democrats removed the Nebraska deal in the final tortured negotiations that passed the PPACA in the House. When it got to the Senate again, Democrats only needed 51 votes to pass it; Nelson, who'd gotten the bad press from the deal AND nothing to show for it, glumly voted no.
Of course he has probably made up his mind before hand, so he doesn't need to pay attention.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Taq, posted 03-28-2012 2:54 PM Taq has not replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 35 of 39 (658231)
04-03-2012 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Perdition
03-27-2012 5:09 PM


Re: ARGUMENT AGAINST
all the general practitioner does is write scripts or send you to a specialist.
what a gig.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Perdition, posted 03-27-2012 5:09 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Perdition, posted 04-03-2012 12:37 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 36 of 39 (658232)
04-03-2012 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Artemis Entreri
04-03-2012 12:31 PM


Re: ARGUMENT AGAINST
all the general practitioner does is write scripts or send you to a specialist.
Wow, your doctor sucks. Mine does exams, orders tests him/herself, councils on health style, and yes, writes prescriptions and refers me to a specialist if needed.
But even if all they did was write scripts and send you to specialists, do you not find that a useful occupation? Would you know what medications to take? Would you know who to go see for an ailment? If so, why are you going to the doctor at all?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Artemis Entreri, posted 04-03-2012 12:31 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Artemis Entreri, posted 04-03-2012 12:41 PM Perdition has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 37 of 39 (658236)
04-03-2012 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Perdition
04-03-2012 12:37 PM


Re: ARGUMENT AGAINST
just for the scripts. my pharmacist can answer all those questions, but I need some dude to sign his name so i can get teh pillz.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Perdition, posted 04-03-2012 12:37 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Perdition, posted 04-03-2012 12:59 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 38 of 39 (658244)
04-03-2012 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Artemis Entreri
04-03-2012 12:41 PM


Re: ARGUMENT AGAINST
just for the scripts.
Then it seems your doctor is doing everything you want him to. What's your complaint again?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Artemis Entreri, posted 04-03-2012 12:41 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Artemis Entreri, posted 04-04-2012 3:11 PM Perdition has not replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 39 of 39 (658400)
04-04-2012 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Perdition
04-03-2012 12:59 PM


Re: ARGUMENT AGAINST
its necessary.
Then it seems your doctor is doing everything you want him to. What's your complaint again?
mostly the misleading vagueness of the 5th post. your strategy of posting something very vague and then adding more specific details when you get called on it is amusing (i am a fan of this style myself). I don't go to the doctor, and when I need to i pay for it, I am the example of the inaccuracy of the 5th post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Perdition, posted 04-03-2012 12:59 PM Perdition has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024