The ACA is now the law of the land. It went all the way to the Supremes. It's here to stay.
I was reading yesterday about a Republican candidate in Florida that was doing a town meeting with a bunch of seniors, expecting them to fall in line against it, but 19 out of 20 were behind it instead. They had kids getting covered who could not before, or had pre-existing conditions, etc. Once it's been in place a little while, getting rid of it will be as hard as getting rid of Social Security or Medicare. Not that they should, but that's another debate altogether.
The R's are going to have to quit trying to vote it out or defund it and do what Congress should have been doing for quite a while now - figuring out the parts of it that are nonsense or just plain screwed up and fix them. It's much like Medicare, it will take a few years yet to get it starting to streamline and run correctly.
(05-01-2014 09:16 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The ACA is now the law of the land. It went all the way to the Supremes. It's here to stay.
I was reading yesterday about a Republican candidate in Florida that was doing a town meeting with a bunch of seniors, expecting them to fall in line against it, but 19 out of 20 were behind it instead. They had kids getting covered who could not before, or had pre-existing conditions, etc. Once it's been in place a little while, getting rid of it will be as hard as getting rid of Social Security or Medicare. Not that they should, but that's another debate altogether.
The R's are going to have to quit trying to vote it out or defund it and do what Congress should have been doing for quite a while now - figuring out the parts of it that are nonsense or just plain screwed up and fix them. It's much like Medicare, it will take a few years yet to get it starting to streamline and run correctly.
All very true. But as BBF sort of said, in this state the political law of the land (for Republicans and Dems) is to focus on these prominent, but ultimately futile, rhetorical battles. Fighting the good fight over ACA or Medicare is a lot easier than actually working hard and focusing on problems for Alabamians that are much more within their ability to solve
(05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Actually, it was turned down for multiple reasons, part of which include the fact that states are responsible for all cost overruns...not that that ever happens in government.
And really? The answer to the healthcare is to make more people dependent on government?
(05-01-2014 10:16 PM)LightEmUp70 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Actually, it was turned down for multiple reasons, part of which include the fact that states are responsible for all cost overruns...not that that ever happens in government.
And really? The answer to the healthcare is to make more people dependent on government?
No, the answer to healthcare is to make sure everyone has it.
We are nowhere near the top in health outcomes, but we blow away the competition when it comes to spending per capita.
Every other industrialized country on the planet has figured it out. Why can't we?
(05-01-2014 10:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:16 PM)LightEmUp70 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Actually, it was turned down for multiple reasons, part of which include the fact that states are responsible for all cost overruns...not that that ever happens in government.
And really? The answer to the healthcare is to make more people dependent on government?
No, the answer to healthcare is to make sure everyone has it.
We are nowhere near the top in health outcomes, but we blow away the competition when it comes to spending per capita.
Every other industrialized country on the planet has figured it out. Why can't we?
No other industrialized nation has as many people as ours, unless you want to count China and use their system.
If you want to trade off 6 month waits for basic procedures and appointments so that everyone has health care, then move to Canada.
Besides, you're talking about the wrong thing. Everyone has access to health care. My office sees no insurance patients regularly and we operate on them all the time. You really need to actually work in health care before you go rambling on about how great the government running it would be. Just look at the VA system.
(05-02-2014 08:00 AM)dfarr Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:16 PM)LightEmUp70 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Actually, it was turned down for multiple reasons, part of which include the fact that states are responsible for all cost overruns...not that that ever happens in government.
And really? The answer to the healthcare is to make more people dependent on government?
No, the answer to healthcare is to make sure everyone has it.
We are nowhere near the top in health outcomes, but we blow away the competition when it comes to spending per capita.
Every other industrialized country on the planet has figured it out. Why can't we?
No other industrialized nation has as many people as ours, unless you want to count China and use their system.
If you want to trade off 6 month waits for basic procedures and appointments so that everyone has health care, then move to Canada.
Besides, you're talking about the wrong thing. Everyone has access to health care. My office sees no insurance patients regularly and we operate on them all the time. You really need to actually work in health care before you go rambling on about how great the government running it would be. Just look at the VA system.
The thought of having to go to the VA scares the hell outta me.
(05-02-2014 08:00 AM)dfarr Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:16 PM)LightEmUp70 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Actually, it was turned down for multiple reasons, part of which include the fact that states are responsible for all cost overruns...not that that ever happens in government.
And really? The answer to the healthcare is to make more people dependent on government?
No, the answer to healthcare is to make sure everyone has it.
We are nowhere near the top in health outcomes, but we blow away the competition when it comes to spending per capita.
Every other industrialized country on the planet has figured it out. Why can't we?
No other industrialized nation has as many people as ours, unless you want to count China and use their system.
If you want to trade off 6 month waits for basic procedures and appointments so that everyone has health care, then move to Canada.
Besides, you're talking about the wrong thing. Everyone has access to health care. My office sees no insurance patients regularly and we operate on them all the time. You really need to actually work in health care before you go rambling on about how great the government running it would be. Just look at the VA system.
Amen, bro.
(05-01-2014 08:01 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Remember that the Alabama legislature has led the nation in cutting per pupil funding for ALL levels of public schools (K- Grad school) since 2008 - almost $1,400 - the largest cuts of all 50 states and we were already among the bottom 10 nationally. Part of the UAB problem - Medicaid - is only a partial issue in what was already a desperate funding situation for the whole school.
I don't know how things are going in political races in other states, but in Alabama the Republicans are all running on a platform of repealing the Affordable Care Act and whether their race is Congress or a state level post, they are ONLY campaigning against the President - and he's not even on the Alabama ballot. If not for the ACA, they would really have to say what they really intend to do if elected.
If this is the way Republicans are campaigning in other states, it is no wonder the sign up numbers for the ACA have lagged. Who wants to put their healthcare eggs all in a basket they are told will be destroyed as soon as the new Congress gets the chance.
Ignorant as usual. So it's the Republicans fault that people aren't signing up for the POS unconstitutional legislation known as Obamacare? You need to seek serious counseling.
(05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Perhaps, someone should simplify it for you.
Medicaid Expansion: The PPACA gives money to States to expand Medicaid eligibility to Americans under the age of 65 who are below 133% of the federal poverty limit, but states can decline without losing existing funding. The Act gives States 100% Federal funding for the first 3 years for newly eligible individuals, beginning January 1, 2014 and ending December 31, 2016. January 1, 2017 the funding will be decreased to 95% with the next 2 years each decreasing by 1% until the year 2020 which will be decreased to 90%. [3]
So if someone gave you a Mansion for three years to use for free and at the end of the three years, you are stuck with all the bills and the mortgage which you cannot sell or abandon, then would you live there? If you are a liberal with no concept of fiscal management, then of course. Three years free!!!! If you are a conservative, then no you don't because you look at it on a long term basis.
(05-01-2014 08:50 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 08:19 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 07:44 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote: [ -> ]Let's just kill everybody that can't pay for healthcare out of pocket and sell their organs. That'll fix the problem.
For Pete's sake, the states not cooperating with the Federal government on healthcare are moronic. This isn't the 1900's, this is 2014 and we're gonna have to accept some sort of national health structure, and the next elected government will have to modify it. Hopefully something short of what I just outline above.
I would agree. It's pretty amazing when you think about it that seemingly the majority of people in these states support the actions of their state government in refusing to cooperate. It's definitely cutting your nose off to spite your face, even if you ideologically against it, is it worth hurting your state to make a rhetorical stand?
What will be the implications when the Republicans again sweep all statewide offices this November, and all incumbents who run are returned to their posts? They have all campaigned against the ACA and the many among the 2/3 rds who would qualify for expanded Medicaid will feel relieved that they remain free of federal bondage as assured by their conservative politicians.
Hopefully, a balanced budget, smaller government, lower taxes and less regulation. You know we are a Republic right not a democracy.
Funny how the President realizes that Obamacare is so bad he is constantly changing the rules in violation of the law and yet ignorant people like yourself still don't get it. It is time to put an end to that POS legislation and do a market based reform allowing competition.
The government could have paid for the medical bills of the uninsured with the amount of money they wasted (Obama's buds) on the website alone.
(05-01-2014 09:53 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:16 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The ACA is now the law of the land. It went all the way to the Supremes. It's here to stay.
I was reading yesterday about a Republican candidate in Florida that was doing a town meeting with a bunch of seniors, expecting them to fall in line against it, but 19 out of 20 were behind it instead. They had kids getting covered who could not before, or had pre-existing conditions, etc. Once it's been in place a little while, getting rid of it will be as hard as getting rid of Social Security or Medicare. Not that they should, but that's another debate altogether.
The R's are going to have to quit trying to vote it out or defund it and do what Congress should have been doing for quite a while now - figuring out the parts of it that are nonsense or just plain screwed up and fix them. It's much like Medicare, it will take a few years yet to get it starting to streamline and run correctly.
All very true. But as BBF sort of said, in this state the political law of the land (for Republicans and Dems) is to focus on these prominent, but ultimately futile, rhetorical battles. Fighting the good fight over ACA or Medicare is a lot easier than actually working hard and focusing on problems for Alabamians that are much more within their ability to solve
None of you ACA lovers must own a small business. If you did, then you would understand how this POS is impacting Alabamians that HIRE workers. 57 million Americans lose their great health insurance plans and pay 100-200% more in premiums so about 3M uninsured can get free health insurance through Medicaid.
/sigh
(05-02-2014 08:02 AM)Blazer Engineer Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2014 08:00 AM)dfarr Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 10:16 PM)LightEmUp70 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 01:34 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The USG offered the state a deal - Alabama puts up $1B toward medicaid and the USG matches it with $18B.
It was Obamacare, the devil, so that deal was turned down.
I have yet to figure out how anyone turns that deal down, politics be damned. It's right up there with "We don't want the Feds telling us what to do, we're not going to set up a state health care exchange", so instead the people from Alabama who are looking for insurance under the ACA have to use the national exchange, where indeed, Federal bureaucrats who don't know the Alabama insurance market as well as the local people do offer insurance programs.
Most of it does not make sense, and won't for four or five years until the get the worst of the bugs out.
Actually, it was turned down for multiple reasons, part of which include the fact that states are responsible for all cost overruns...not that that ever happens in government.
And really? The answer to the healthcare is to make more people dependent on government?
No, the answer to healthcare is to make sure everyone has it.
We are nowhere near the top in health outcomes, but we blow away the competition when it comes to spending per capita.
Every other industrialized country on the planet has figured it out. Why can't we?
No other industrialized nation has as many people as ours, unless you want to count China and use their system.
If you want to trade off 6 month waits for basic procedures and appointments so that everyone has health care, then move to Canada.
Besides, you're talking about the wrong thing. Everyone has access to health care. My office sees no insurance patients regularly and we operate on them all the time. You really need to actually work in health care before you go rambling on about how great the government running it would be. Just look at the VA system.
The thought of having to go to the VA scares the hell outta me.
But people who have never used it before will vouch for it and tell us all how great it is.
The VA wouldn't be the model, Medicare would be the model. You know, that government insurance that tea partiers don't want to give up?
I continue to find it amazing how many UAB supporters are small government/no handout/tea party types. You do realize that about $500 million of direct federal government handouts go to UAB every year, and without that there would be no UAB at all. No Gene Bartow. No UAB football. No UAB degrees. Just some dusty old houses on the south side of Birmingham
(05-02-2014 08:40 AM)RBB Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:53 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:16 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The ACA is now the law of the land. It went all the way to the Supremes. It's here to stay.
I was reading yesterday about a Republican candidate in Florida that was doing a town meeting with a bunch of seniors, expecting them to fall in line against it, but 19 out of 20 were behind it instead. They had kids getting covered who could not before, or had pre-existing conditions, etc. Once it's been in place a little while, getting rid of it will be as hard as getting rid of Social Security or Medicare. Not that they should, but that's another debate altogether.
The R's are going to have to quit trying to vote it out or defund it and do what Congress should have been doing for quite a while now - figuring out the parts of it that are nonsense or just plain screwed up and fix them. It's much like Medicare, it will take a few years yet to get it starting to streamline and run correctly.
All very true. But as BBF sort of said, in this state the political law of the land (for Republicans and Dems) is to focus on these prominent, but ultimately futile, rhetorical battles. Fighting the good fight over ACA or Medicare is a lot easier than actually working hard and focusing on problems for Alabamians that are much more within their ability to solve
None of you ACA lovers must own a small business. If you did, then you would understand how this POS is impacting Alabamians that HIRE workers. 57 million Americans lose their great health insurance plans and pay 100-200% more in premiums so about 3M uninsured can get free health insurance through Medicaid.
/sigh
Exactly where in that post did I express my "love" for the ACA? I think it has serious problems, I was just expressing my frustration with the way Albama's leaders are choosing to act about it.
Moreover, when you're talking about the "unconstitutional" nature of the ACA? I didn't realize that your legal authority superseded that of the Supreme Court that declared it constitutional
(05-02-2014 09:09 AM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2014 08:40 AM)RBB Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:53 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:16 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The ACA is now the law of the land. It went all the way to the Supremes. It's here to stay.
I was reading yesterday about a Republican candidate in Florida that was doing a town meeting with a bunch of seniors, expecting them to fall in line against it, but 19 out of 20 were behind it instead. They had kids getting covered who could not before, or had pre-existing conditions, etc. Once it's been in place a little while, getting rid of it will be as hard as getting rid of Social Security or Medicare. Not that they should, but that's another debate altogether.
The R's are going to have to quit trying to vote it out or defund it and do what Congress should have been doing for quite a while now - figuring out the parts of it that are nonsense or just plain screwed up and fix them. It's much like Medicare, it will take a few years yet to get it starting to streamline and run correctly.
All very true. But as BBF sort of said, in this state the political law of the land (for Republicans and Dems) is to focus on these prominent, but ultimately futile, rhetorical battles. Fighting the good fight over ACA or Medicare is a lot easier than actually working hard and focusing on problems for Alabamians that are much more within their ability to solve
None of you ACA lovers must own a small business. If you did, then you would understand how this POS is impacting Alabamians that HIRE workers. 57 million Americans lose their great health insurance plans and pay 100-200% more in premiums so about 3M uninsured can get free health insurance through Medicaid.
/sigh
Exactly where in that post did I express my "love" for the ACA? I think it has serious problems, I was just expressing my frustration with the way Albama's leaders are choosing to act about it.
Moreover, when you're talking about the "unconstitutional" nature of the ACA? I didn't realize that your legal authority superseded that of the Supreme Court that declared it constitutional
It was ruled a tax. All taxes shall begin in the HOR not the Senate per the U.S. Constitution. Hence the reason why I hope enough Republicans elected are voted into office to overturn it. Although, both parties love power so I am not holding my breath.
Duly noted on the love part. My apologies.
The VA system sucks. This is coming from first hand experience.
People go to work for the VA simply for the fact they will pay them good money to see a hell of a lot less patients, all the holidays off, and good benefits.
Vets wait for months to get into see their docs.
(05-02-2014 09:03 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I continue to find it amazing how many UAB supporters are small government/no handout/tea party types. You do realize that about $500 million of direct federal government handouts go to UAB every year, and without that there would be no UAB at all. No Gene Bartow. No UAB football. No UAB degrees. Just some dusty old houses on the south side of Birmingham
There is a big difference in my mind between government investing money in private and public universities to find cures for cancer and etc versus forcing everyone to buy a certain type of health insurance or be fined by the Federal Government.
The fact that you cannot see the difference does not surprise me.
(05-02-2014 09:24 AM)RBB Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2014 09:03 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I continue to find it amazing how many UAB supporters are small government/no handout/tea party types. You do realize that about $500 million of direct federal government handouts go to UAB every year, and without that there would be no UAB at all. No Gene Bartow. No UAB football. No UAB degrees. Just some dusty old houses on the south side of Birmingham
There is a big difference in my mind between government investing money in private and public universities to find cures for cancer and etc versus forcing everyone to buy a certain type of health insurance or be fined by the Federal Government.
The fact that you cannot see the difference does not surprise me.
That is the first post that mentions the individual mandate. The discussion was, and the context of my post was, the expansion of Medicaid and "making people dependent on the government". My point still stands.
(05-02-2014 09:16 AM)RBB Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2014 09:09 AM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2014 08:40 AM)RBB Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:53 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-01-2014 09:16 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]The ACA is now the law of the land. It went all the way to the Supremes. It's here to stay.
I was reading yesterday about a Republican candidate in Florida that was doing a town meeting with a bunch of seniors, expecting them to fall in line against it, but 19 out of 20 were behind it instead. They had kids getting covered who could not before, or had pre-existing conditions, etc. Once it's been in place a little while, getting rid of it will be as hard as getting rid of Social Security or Medicare. Not that they should, but that's another debate altogether.
The R's are going to have to quit trying to vote it out or defund it and do what Congress should have been doing for quite a while now - figuring out the parts of it that are nonsense or just plain screwed up and fix them. It's much like Medicare, it will take a few years yet to get it starting to streamline and run correctly.
All very true. But as BBF sort of said, in this state the political law of the land (for Republicans and Dems) is to focus on these prominent, but ultimately futile, rhetorical battles. Fighting the good fight over ACA or Medicare is a lot easier than actually working hard and focusing on problems for Alabamians that are much more within their ability to solve
None of you ACA lovers must own a small business. If you did, then you would understand how this POS is impacting Alabamians that HIRE workers. 57 million Americans lose their great health insurance plans and pay 100-200% more in premiums so about 3M uninsured can get free health insurance through Medicaid.
/sigh
Exactly where in that post did I express my "love" for the ACA? I think it has serious problems, I was just expressing my frustration with the way Albama's leaders are choosing to act about it.
Moreover, when you're talking about the "unconstitutional" nature of the ACA? I didn't realize that your legal authority superseded that of the Supreme Court that declared it constitutional
It was ruled a tax. All taxes shall begin in the HOR not the Senate per the U.S. Constitution. Hence the reason why I hope enough Republicans elected are voted into office to overturn it. Although, both parties love power so I am not holding my breath.
Duly noted on the love part. My apologies.
How they got around that was the Senate Democrats used a "shell bill" procedure in which they took a House Bill, H.R. 3590, which dealt with tax breaks for veteran's with mortgages and added the guts to Obamacare into it and introduced it to the Senate. While this is definitely working your way through the backdoor and is what I would call a pretty fishy technicality, the Court accepts it's use as constitutional and satisfying that requirement of the constitution.
EDIT: not saying this is a good or bad thing, just trying to explain how it is all technically constitutional in the standard sense