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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court Agrees to Rule on Insurance Subsidies in Challenge to Obama Health Law [View all]bucolic_frolic
(55,143 posts)5. It's a Goner
This is the GOP's ESCAPE BLAME Clause
We didn't repeal it
The Supreme Court did
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
96 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
Supreme Court Agrees to Rule on Insurance Subsidies in Challenge to Obama Health Law [View all]
Hissyspit
Nov 2014
OP
Meanwhile, the subsidies for tobacco, oil and other connected biz's rock on... nt
JudyM
Nov 2014
#58
Don't underestimate the power of the insurance companies. They do not want to lose that money!
jwirr
Nov 2014
#27
Pre-existing exclusions are illegal and this is not being challenged in this case.
Nye Bevan
Nov 2014
#48
No, their clause will be that they didn't pass a flawed law which should have first been read.
24601
Nov 2014
#96
Mine already died, this country doesn't give a damn about poor people or low income working people
Stargazer99
Nov 2014
#55
im against the speed limit law (being only 60mph), i hate it , but im not doing anything about it
belzabubba333
Nov 2014
#47
The people in those states by and through their representives and corporate media
Iliyah
Nov 2014
#19
And of course that means the Blue States will be subsidizing the expensive Red States
LiberalLovinLug
Nov 2014
#54
They'd really have to contort things to say it was the intent of Congress to give subsidies only
Hoyt
Nov 2014
#20
I agree, although keeping fingers crossed. This case is even easier to rationalize -- Intent of
Hoyt
Nov 2014
#61
The actual law mentions subsides will apply to the state exchanges and neglects to mention
Calista241
Nov 2014
#77
Someone needs to be talking to the media about what the solution; avoid hysteria
Justice
Nov 2014
#62
Folks!! Please see this clip from Chris Hayes' show from July! It's important to see.
boguspotus
Nov 2014
#80