Federal court throws out some Obamacare subsidies

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by thisnumbersdisconnected, Jul 22, 2014.

  1. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course there will be an appeal.

    But this is a heavily damaging blow to the healthcare law. Some 90% of the federal exchange enrollees are eligible for subsidies due to moderate and low incomes. Stripping the exchanges of the capability to award the subsidies could cripple Obamacare.
     
  2. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    Obamacare was badly written.

    Remember: It had to be passed to find out what was in it.

    That kind of stupid attitude keeps coming back to bedevil the legislation.


    Let's see if the dictator bypasses Congress and tries to illegally "fix" it with a stroke of his pen.
     
  3. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes Received:
    208
    What really got me was the dissenting opinion:
    Really? The crux of your dissent is "this is gonna be bad" rather than a legal foundation?
     
  4. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    Liberalism at work.

    The law doesn't matter. It's all about feeling good.
     
  5. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's all the liberals got. This was a thinly-veiled first effort at legislating socialism. That the political concept is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution doesn't seem to bother them. They seem to think they can change the Constitution.
     
  6. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    Did you notice. Two courts ruled today. Two courts contradict each other. Now watch the lawyers have fun. This will go to the SC to .... perhaps get an answer. Worms, worms, oh those cans of worms this court has opened.
     
  7. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes Received:
    208
    The can of worms this court has opened? I submit to you that the can of worms was already opened by the poorly written language of the law!

    CTB, what exactly are these "worms" of which you speak? That the ACA will be gutted, and people will lose health care insurance? That the economy will suffer because the insurance industry will explode in uncertainty?

    Are you saying that we should simply let the law stand and not argue against it? If so, why?

    Or, is it possible that the "can of worms" has to do with the precedent set by blindly accepting a law that is weak and inefficient in its writing, but we'll "give credit for trying" and let it stand, even though it tramples on the constitutional rights of the citizens?
     
  8. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes Received:
    208
    My prediction: The D.C. Appeals Court will meet in full session; and the matter will be decided via partisan politics rather than by the law. After which, the ACA will continue as is.

    I pray I'm wrong, and that our legal system would actually work...but I'm not optimistic.
     
  9. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    It does appear that we now know what's in the bill. Pelosi was right.
     
  10. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    Only time will tell which worms will emerge. But there are lots of lawyers who will make their life earnings on this topic. Already we see courts contradicting each other.
     
    #10 Crabtownboy, Jul 22, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 22, 2014
  11. Zaac

    Zaac
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    220
    That in itself is absolutely crazy. But you are absolutely correct. The contradictions pretty much mean that things remain as they are until the SCOTUS decides otherwise.

    It will continue to be a point of division used by the enemy as he manipulates the players in this world system to work the machinations of his bidding.

    If the subsidies are taken away, it will be a nightmare of PR for somebody when 8 million people and growing start complaining again about the added costs and how they can't afford insurance without the subsidies.
     
  12. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just got back from checking my houses (told my framers and roofers to go home, since the H/I is 107 right now) so while I heard about the Virginia court's ruling on the radio, hadn't had a good chance to follow up on details.

    Normally, the conflicting rulings would fast-track the cases to SCOTUS, but the D.C. court is saying it will now refer their case to all 11 judges on the D.C. Appeals Court.

    Ironically, there are other cases pending out there. By the time this is all heard before SCOTUS, there could be a mishmash of various rulings that either uphold or strike down, to greater or lesser degrees, the subsidies. I wouldn't be surprised if SCOTUS simply lifts all the cases out of the Appellate courts and hears all the cases under one umbrella.
     
    #12 thisnumbersdisconnected, Jul 22, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 22, 2014
  13. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    Believe I've said it before, all kinds of worms are going to crawl up out of the cans this SC court has opened.
     
  14. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    And I believe someone asked you to clarify exactly what "worms" you're talking about, which you have failed to answer.

    The ruling out of D.C. is clear: The wording of the ACA limits subsidy offers being available only through state exchanges. The awarding of subsidies by federally operated exchanges is therefore illegal. The Obama administration can whine all it wants about "the obvious intent ... " but such whines are useless, because if the "obvious intent" was to extend authority for subsidy awards to the federal exchanges, the law should have been written to include them.

    The Virginia ruling, on the other hand, makes no sense at all in light of the wording of the ACA. Therefore, it isn't the D.C. court -- which is what I assume you meant by "SC" since SCOTUS hasn't ruled and neither court is in South Carolina and the case itself was out of Virginia -- that opened a "can of worms" but the Virginia court.
     
  15. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes Received:
    208
    Then I guess someone should have taken more time to write a good law, rather than encouraging a senior representative to say "we have to pass it to see what's in it."

    Agree?
     
  16. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    Another stick thrown on the fire. Another worm crawling out of the can.

     
  17. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, irrelevant and off-topic. The issue both the other courts ruled on was the legality of federal-exchange awarded subsidies. This has nothing to do with that.
     
  18. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes Received:
    208
    CTB? Agree?
     
  19. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,619
    Likes Received:
    158
    Sadly that was impossible as it was from Obama and before he took office after the 2008 election the GOP had agreed to oppose everything he proposed. So even if it were the most perfectly worded bill every passed, they would have opposed it ... as would a number of members on this BB.
     
  20. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    The chicken says "bock!!!".
     

Share This Page

Loading...