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]patrice
(47,992 posts)52. And you are not stretching far enough, in an extremely complex & dynamic REALITY. nt
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