Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The individual mandate, a Republican idea which shows how far to the right the Dems have gone [View all]CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)44. This is crazy.
If that is true then why do the Progressive Justices like it? None of this makes sense.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
156 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The individual mandate, a Republican idea which shows how far to the right the Dems have gone [View all]
MadHound
Apr 2012
OP
You know what? There are those of us who feel we are not allowed to say that the mandate is LEFT,
patrice
Apr 2012
#26
Just maybe it's Obama's way of ensuring that the individual mandate is off the table forever?
nanabugg
Apr 2012
#80
Or it could be used to provide "universal" health care through health savings accounts or some
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#85
Well, that is a telling statement about how far to the right you and a lot of this country have gone
MadHound
Apr 2012
#86
The PCORI doesn't do that for gov't; It's the tool by means of which CONSUMERS affect the exchanges.
patrice
Apr 2012
#24
Why do you discount the fact that the PCORI is built out of actual empirical PATIENT CENTERED data?
patrice
Apr 2012
#57
With 1/2 a trillion of taxpayer money and ongoing premiums from vast numbers of captured customers
Uncle Joe
Apr 2012
#25
Supposedly from cutting "waste and fraud". But I think that is BS. I think it's more along the
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#87
Don't forget that the Republicans now rejecting the mandate have moved even further to the right
libinnyandia
Apr 2012
#3
I'm not sure how it follows that the existence of AIM (founded 1968) means that Nixon
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#102
I think wonkette leans left, and I believe her column was tongue in cheek. The nixon library,
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#108
Nixon's proposal was better, and didn't include a mandate. I believe this is descended from the
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#93
I don't understand: If you don't stand-up for a LEGAL mandate, HOW can you get to Single Payer?
patrice
Apr 2012
#21
Also a big, big similarity: Government REQUIRED to implement Health Care, ergo a mandate of somekind
patrice
Apr 2012
#43
And you are not stretching far enough, in an extremely complex & dynamic REALITY. nt
patrice
Apr 2012
#52
Nixon's plan *didn't* have a mandate. Like I told you before. Why do you keep saying it did?
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#91
Because while the "progressive" judges are indeed progressive on social issues,
MadHound
Apr 2012
#49
Why did the Medicare Part D program get by with making us choose an insurance company for that
jwirr
Apr 2012
#13
Because the huge corporations own all the politicians. It is called Corporatism.
CAPHAVOC
Apr 2012
#17
Medicare Part D is a big fat boondoggle because of the corporate welfare factor.
Zalatix
Apr 2012
#82
Agreed but what I was asking is why it was constitutional and the HCR may not be?
jwirr
Apr 2012
#113
the notion that ins. cos. won't immediately start working to bypass any regulations in the ACA
KG
Apr 2012
#19
And there will be NO grounds to defend against those attacks if we yeild the Constitutionality of
patrice
Apr 2012
#22
Stereotypical characterizations don't include minimal hypothetical analysis of any other factors.
patrice
Apr 2012
#37
You know, it really is insulting when you accuse people of being tools, or victims, of the media
MadHound
Apr 2012
#46
What is not insulting about the assumptions which YOU make???? I will not attack your right to make
patrice
Apr 2012
#53
I think it's very interesting how so many assume that O yeilded to the mandate out of some kind of
patrice
Apr 2012
#30
Given that he went from supporting single payer, then promising a public option,
MadHound
Apr 2012
#39
Well, he as sure as fuck wasn't going to be able to go anywhere with any of it unless he was elected
patrice
Apr 2012
#50
The "Liberal" (ha!) justices are establishing Constitutional authority for gov't implemented HC. nt
patrice
Apr 2012
#60
I predict that they will uphold the constitutionality of the individual mandate. And will do so
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#96
And it's a nice set-up for the Republicans' return in 2016, maybe with Jeb.
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#101
"Appeal to authority" = logical fallacy. Debate the argument or the information.
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#92
Agreed. Heritage came out for the mandate in 1989. Now they're against it. (Wink, wink)
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#97
The amicus briefs to the SCOTUS to shoot down the law tell you which side is REALLY right wing.
joshcryer
Apr 2012
#79
So why are Democrats such as yourself now pushing a plan that has its origins
MadHound
Apr 2012
#126
With the MLR cap on the insurance companies a sure fire way for them to make more profits is..
Fumesucker
Apr 2012
#105
One of the prime reasons I preferred Barack to Hillary was Hillary's support for a private mandate..
Fumesucker
Apr 2012
#107
I post a link to a Media Matters article that references a Drudge talking point and you ... use it?
joshcryer
Apr 2012
#143
My point being that "personal responsibility" has been a Republican talking point for quite a while.
Fumesucker
Apr 2012
#153
Now that I look more closely I think I better read up before I shoot off my mouth.
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#94
I don't really care that much about it, but I do not like being framed as a right winger...
joshcryer
Apr 2012
#135