|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 22, 2014 11:41:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsu2000 on Jul 23, 2014 7:29:10 GMT -8
First I think it's important to remember how Obamacare became law. www.briansussman.com/politics/how-obamacare-became-law/The process is what really divided Congress and the reason they have been unable to work together since IMO. Now we still have to wait for this to slowly make it's way to the Supreme Court and them to issue a ruling but what I keep hearing is that if you want to interpret the law you can come to one conclusion or if you go by how the law is written you come to the conclusion that subsidies are only for states that establish their own exchanges. Here's what will happen. Obama will blame the Republicans. Obama will tell the people the Republicans don't want them to have health coverage. Democrats will never ask the Republicans to help rewrite the law that they didn't vote for but demand they rewrite a section that the Democrats totally screwed up on. Republicans will not do anything at first. They never do. They'll then fold. Which they always do. Should the Republicans take the time to rewrite portions of the law they don't agree with and fix the subsidies portion? No, because whatever they did it would be changed or not followed. This is just another example in history if you don't work with someone to come to a conclusion over time you'll need the other person's help which at that time they'll probably tell you to F off. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 23, 2014 10:08:08 GMT -8
The Fourth Circuit decided a case on the same issue the exact opposite on the same day. I suspect the whole DC Circuit will hear this case and overturn the panel.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 23, 2014 12:15:30 GMT -8
First I think it's important to remember how Obamacare became law. www.briansussman.com/politics/how-obamacare-became-law/The process is what really divided Congress and the reason they have been unable to work together since IMO. Now we still have to wait for this to slowly make it's way to the Supreme Court and them to issue a ruling but what I keep hearing is that if you want to interpret the law you can come to one conclusion or if you go by how the law is written you come to the conclusion that subsidies are only for states that establish their own exchanges. Here's what will happen. Obama will blame the Republicans. Obama will tell the people the Republicans don't want them to have health coverage. Democrats will never ask the Republicans to help rewrite the law that they didn't vote for but demand they rewrite a section that the Democrats totally screwed up on. Republicans will not do anything at first. They never do. They'll then fold. Which they always do. Should the Republicans take the time to rewrite portions of the law they don't agree with and fix the subsidies portion? No, because whatever they did it would be changed or not followed. This is just another example in history if you don't work with someone to come to a conclusion over time you'll need the other person's help which at that time they'll probably tell you to F off. You are pretty close. I think that things will drag out until after the fall election and maybe play out as you suggest if the Republicans don't take over the Senate. Should they take over the Senate, then the Dems will be given a dose of their own Nuc Option trick and a new law will replace ObamaKare. What will Obama do then? Should he veto that bill, then we will be in limbo until the fall of 2016. This is a real mess and getting worse. The Supreme Court will hear this issue before it is over. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 23, 2014 12:17:18 GMT -8
The Fourth Circuit decided a case on the same issue the exact opposite on the same day. I suspect the whole DC Circuit will hear this case and overturn the panel. Maybe, but neither side will give up until it reaches the Supreme Court at which time the real fun will begin. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 23, 2014 12:21:07 GMT -8
The Fourth Circuit decided a case on the same issue the exact opposite on the same day. I suspect the whole DC Circuit will hear this case and overturn the panel. Maybe, but neither side will give up until it reaches the Supreme Court at which time the real fun will begin. If DC Circuit en banc overturns the panel there is no conflict between circuits and USSC does not need to take the case. Saying, "I am taking this to the Supreme Court", does not mean the Court will take the case. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 23, 2014 12:22:11 GMT -8
The Fourth Circuit decided a case on the same issue the exact opposite on the same day. I suspect the whole DC Circuit will hear this case and overturn the panel. Maybe, but neither side will give up until it reaches the Supreme Court at which time the real fun will begin. Why would the divisions in our country being more torn be "fun"? |
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Jul 23, 2014 12:42:06 GMT -8
ICYMI: The smallest 20 states in America (40 votes, 40% of Senatorial power) account for only 11-12% of the country's population. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 23, 2014 14:23:11 GMT -8
Maybe, but neither side will give up until it reaches the Supreme Court at which time the real fun will begin. If DC Circuit en banc overturns the panel there is no conflict between circuits and USSC does not need to take the case. Saying, "I am taking this to the Supreme Court", does not mean the Court will take the case. The chances of that are very slim because of the actual wording of the law. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 23, 2014 14:25:17 GMT -8
If DC Circuit en banc overturns the panel there is no conflict between circuits and USSC does not need to take the case. Saying, "I am taking this to the Supreme Court", does not mean the Court will take the case. The chances of that are very slim because of the actual wording of the law. If the wording is so clear why the blistering dissent in the DC Circuit, and the 3 to 0 opinion in the 4th Circuit? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 24, 2014 10:54:05 GMT -8
The chances of that are very slim because of the actual wording of the law. If the wording is so clear why the blistering dissent in the DC Circuit, and the 3 to 0 opinion in the 4th Circuit? Good question and the answer is just why they will eventually be found wrong by the Supreme Court along that 5-4 line. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 24, 2014 11:22:31 GMT -8
More likely the full DC Circuit will overturn the panel, and agree with Richmond. No conflict, no Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 24, 2014 13:29:28 GMT -8
More likely the full DC Circuit will overturn the panel, and agree with Richmond. No conflict, no Supreme Court. Not very likely. Is it so painful for you cling-on liberalss to see ObamaKare falling apart? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 24, 2014 14:00:04 GMT -8
More likely the full DC Circuit will overturn the panel, and agree with Richmond. No conflict, no Supreme Court. Not very likely. Is it so painful for you cling-on liberalss to see ObamaKare falling apart? Why would it not be likely? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 24, 2014 14:11:42 GMT -8
Not very likely. Is it so painful for you cling-on liberalss to see ObamaKare falling apart? Why would it not be likely? The language is clear. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 24, 2014 14:25:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 24, 2014 15:29:18 GMT -8
Maybe a little whistling in the dark? Or they could be right. It would be better for everyone that this get settled one way or the other in a hurry. I would like to see a system in place that served everyone who is legal in an economic and efficient manner. Even if it were to be ObamaKare. I don't have much faith in that so I expect a new law right after the 2016 election. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 24, 2014 16:23:14 GMT -8
Maybe a little whistling in the dark? Or they could be right. It would be better for everyone that this get settled one way or the other in a hurry. I would like to see a system in place that served everyone who is legal in an economic and efficient manner. Even if it were to be ObamaKare. I don't have much faith in that so I expect a new law right after the 2016 election. Yes, I think Warren, with her landslide victory and long coattails, will go for a single payer system. |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Jul 24, 2014 19:04:14 GMT -8
Maybe a little whistling in the dark? Or they could be right. It would be better for everyone that this get settled one way or the other in a hurry. I would like to see a system in place that served everyone who is legal in an economic and efficient manner. Even if it were to be ObamaKare. I don't have much faith in that so I expect a new law right after the 2016 election. Yes, I think Warren, with her landslide victory and long coattails, will go for a single payer system. One can only hope. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 24, 2014 19:42:11 GMT -8
Talk about whistling in the dark. You two ding dongs are pretty funny. I will say that right now Warren has a better chance than Hillary, but that could change again.
|
|
