Home › Forums › Open Discussion › SCOTUS & ACA…
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 10, 2014 at 4:29 pm #816099
wakefloodParticipantSo, this just disgusts me. And if you believe in the Constitution and the impartiality of the rule of law, you should feel so as well.
November 10, 2014 at 7:26 pm #819279
JanSParticipantwhen healthcare is taken away from hundreds of thousands of people, and there is no alternate plan (because we all know the GOP ain’t got one), will those who voted for the Repubs think again about their choices? I doubt it…but I’m cynical. And I doubt the GOP in congress gives a damn.
November 10, 2014 at 7:33 pm #819280
skeeterParticipantCan’t Congress just fix the wording and vote again? Even Republicans would support the change since it’s only the red states that would be losing out on the subsidy if kept as-is.
Look, I won’t suggest that dirty politics aren’t at play here. But it does raise a relevant question. If a law intended one thing but was written incorrectly, then which becomes law? The intended law or the written law?
November 10, 2014 at 7:52 pm #819281
JanSParticipantyes, skeeter, it does raise that question. It IS Congress job to do exactly that…but…Obama…why do what’s right, when you can obstruct once more to make him look bad.
November 10, 2014 at 8:47 pm #819282
dobroParticipant“Can’t Congress just fix the wording and vote again? Even Republicans would support the change since it’s only the red states that would be losing out on the subsidy if kept as-is.”
Surely you’re joking. Republicans don’t care about red or blue states, they care about busting Obama’s chops. Period. They would NEVER change only the disputed wording and vote again. They’d fill the bill with enough poison pills to kill a rhinoceros!
November 10, 2014 at 9:50 pm #819283
wakefloodParticipantI seem to remember Lawrence O’Donnell discussing a misplaced comma in a big omnibus funding bill in Clinton’s early years. If memory serves, the interpretation used by the affected agencies was based on the original intent and nobody on the GOP side wanted to push the issue because it would open the door to LOTS of re-reading of laws to question grammar.
Of course, this was back when some measure of civility and reasonableness reigned in Congress. Those halcyon days of the…1990’s.
November 10, 2014 at 9:54 pm #819284
HMC RichParticipantWell, here is what the people who crafted this said about the ACA and the stupidity of the electorate. http://www.ijreview.com/2014/11/200263-obamacare-architect-boasts-law-passed-thanks-stupidity-american-voter/
November 10, 2014 at 10:04 pm #819285
HMC RichParticipantIt matters what the definition of “is” is. Remember that?
I was once a juror. The Judge said that the law a man was being tried on was a bad law, but it was the law. He encouraged us to write the city to get it changed, but because it was the law it had to be enforced. So if you want it changed you need to write and send letters to the people you elected and represent us.
Laws need to be followed until they are changed. If there is precedent, maybe it could be changed in a court, but considering how it was passed which I have informed you before, I bet there will not be compromise. I am not saying it is right but I don’t think it will be worked out to everyones best interest.
November 10, 2014 at 11:34 pm #819286
Jd seattleParticipantCouldn’t Obama issue an executive order to correct this?
November 11, 2014 at 12:08 am #819287
wakefloodParticipantNope. Laws are passed by Congress and ACA is a law. It’s interpreted upon legal request by SCOTUS, who can USED to not generally legislate from the bench by upholding parts and not others in their judgements but now they’re completely ABOUT legislating from the bench.
Obama could issue a signing statement (and may have on this?) that says this is how the law should be interpreted by departments in the gov’t. But he has no particular sway over the states implementation of that law and they could disregard a signing statement if they felt like it.
Bush issued SS’s on a billion laws that passed by the D’s in Congress – usually neutering them if they required enforcement from Fed depts.
November 11, 2014 at 12:52 am #819288
skeeterParticipant“Surely you’re joking. Republicans don’t care about red or blue states, they care about busting Obama’s chops. Period. They would NEVER change only the disputed wording and vote again. They’d fill the bill with enough poison pills to kill a rhinoceros!”
Wha? Republicans have been bending over backwards working with President Obama to successfully implement the ACA.
November 11, 2014 at 1:23 am #819289
wakefloodParticipantWhere’s the rimshot for Skeets??!! ;-)
November 11, 2014 at 4:40 am #819290
JanSParticipantand 50+ and counting ;-)
I was going to say something about the Repubs bending over, but we need to keep this classy:D (it certainly wasn’t backwards)
November 12, 2014 at 3:31 am #819291
JoBParticipantNovember 12, 2014 at 8:38 am #819292
HMC RichParticipantFunny how an investment adviser who believed Obama about keeping their insurance… who lost his doctor and insurance . . . did a better job of finding out what he architects said about the ACA than our oh so informative non biased press.
November 12, 2014 at 3:26 pm #819293
wakefloodParticipantRich, I’ll read your poor guy’s post if you promise to read a few hundred thousand posts from folks with pre-existing conditions who could finally get insurance and prescription meds in the states that actually participated in the exchange. Deal?
November 12, 2014 at 4:06 pm #819294
JoBParticipantthose that will feel the most pain are those who voted for the current crowd of clowns
i find that incredibly sad
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.