Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Are the AG's who oppose the HCR only seeking to annul the mandate or the entire thing?

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 » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:06 PM
Original message
Are the AG's who oppose the HCR only seeking to annul the mandate or the entire thing?
As politically-motivated as these grandstanding AG's are, it could only be a good thing if the mandate could get ruled unconstitutional. It doesn't seem possible that it would be, but the ideal outcome would be for the abhorrent corporate welfare part of the HCR to get nixed but the regulations kept in place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. They're using the mandate as cover.
They're batshit crazy wingnuts who really want to dismantle Medicaid in their states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. I agree, forcing Congress to go back and fund this
the right way would be a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. I personally think every state should have gotten the Cornhusker kickback.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I do too, or just eliminate Medicaid and move them all to Medicare
Either way it would have eliminated the unfunded portion of the expansion of Medicaid that seems to form the basis for those state AG's to sue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is an attack on everything.
If they can kill this, then Medicaid and Medicare will be taken on with the precedent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Then I agree with you and Hello Kitty: the AG's should be given the stiff-arm
I hate the new HCR, but I'd hate seeing Medicare/Medicaid get squashed as a result of having the HCR ruled unconstitutional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ksoze Donating Member (635 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Using it for votes in upcoming elections each face
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. Well...
If ONLY the mandate is ruled as unconstitutional it does not mean the entirety of the bill is nixed. The problem with this is that, despite the fact I hate the mandate, these grandstanding repukes might milk some points from the public in attacking or bringing down the mandate.

So...

Would the benefit of having this lukewarm and milquetoast HCR bill improved by the removal of mandates, outweigh the negative of letting a few Repuke AG's put it on their resume when they run for governor of their respective states?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
9. This is the Rethugs we area talking about. They want to kill everything.
I don't want them to get even close.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. mandate is necessary
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 03:16 PM by Teaser
invalidating it will simply cause congress to re-enact it in another form, more durable. and it would pass easily, with bipartisan support.

You will see why, given some thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
11. I saw three articles from lawyers who said they probably won't
even be able to get to court with them because they are not a legal challenge.
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 Sun Oct 22nd 2017, 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency 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