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: White House preparing Executive Orders if HCR is struck down by Supreme Court [View all]1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)89. Isn't that ...
an argument of semantics? As (and I'm not saying that this is a good idea, but) Congress can tax AND use that money to pay those very same insurance companies that you would otherwise not want to do business with.
I would prefer that the insurance middlemen be cut out of the equation, as they add no value to the system. But that said, it will not happen over night, and IMHO, nor should it. It will take time to transition from the current system and any abrupt change will cause dislocation of 1000 of insurance industry workers. This is a consideration that the administration also must consider ... especially during an election year recession.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
106 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
White House preparing Executive Orders if HCR is struck down by Supreme Court [View all]
WI_DEM
Jun 2012
OP
What good is a waiting period to someone who has cancer or just got in a car accident?
pnwmom
Jun 2012
#7
What is a fantasy is to think trashing the current law will make that happen
flamingdem
Jun 2012
#87
I never want to hear again that the liberal courts are activities. What the hell do you
southernyankeebelle
Jun 2012
#27
Thanks, very interesting and informative. And I agree with you on ages, terms, etc. The
RKP5637
Jun 2012
#86
He is worried if the elderly live too long there won't be anything left for him
NNN0LHI
Jun 2012
#57
+10000! Besides, keep in mind that this is coming from those shameless pot-stirrers at Politico
RufusTFirefly
Jun 2012
#13
Thanks for that information!...I wish it were more publicized so they couldn't pass as "nonpartisan"
whathehell
Jun 2012
#76
I agree completely with you and in fact Obama campaigned hard against such mandates.
Bandit
Jun 2012
#24
Even the most cursory examination of the ACA's history shows this to be true. nt
Poll_Blind
Jun 2012
#36
In reality, there has never been any such thing as settled law with any Supreme Court
SickOfTheOnePct
Jun 2012
#69
I don't. I want this President to be able to subvert the legislative branch.
Comrade_McKenzie
Jun 2012
#63
We as Democrats really need to be accurate when we make such statements
SickOfTheOnePct
Jun 2012
#96