ADVERTISEMENT

Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 years.

YellowSnow51

HB King
Aug 14, 2002
62,402
4,327
113
"Under the law, employers with 51 to 100 employees will be included in the ACA's definition of small group market starting in 2016. Instead of providing stability, we believe expanding the definition will force those historically defined 'large group plans' into the 'small group market,' where they could experience higher premiums, less flexibility, and new barriers to coverage. We therefore encourage you to delay the effective date in the definition change for two years so the market can more smoothly transition to the new rules."


I wonder if Obama will tell them if they like their plans they can keep it.


Link
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

Hmm weird, seems like we didn't need to pass it to see what was in it. They're just making shit up as they go. Something that inconveniences a political donor ie: unions or makes the party look foolish they simply refuse to implement.


Elections do have consequences, unless you realize you passed a cluster f*ck that may screw up your legacy and make the American people hate your political party. Other than that, nothing to see here...


Oh, and in before we hear "well what plan did the cons have?"


They probably figured it was too big and complicated of a deal to ramrod down the throats of 300 million people.
Ok, I'm good now.... Carry on
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea


Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea


Originally posted by BABiscuit:

Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?
based on all the issues the law has had since it's passing..........Im almost positive that many didn't read it at all. Especially with all the backtracking some have done.
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

Originally posted by BABiscuit:

Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it.  Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it.  They should have never passed it,  until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?


Had they of read this, why wouldn't they fix it right then and there before it was passed?
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

The problem with this law is it was not debated properly and was a one sided issue and if I remember quickly they needed to get it passed quickly because Scott Brown was elected or going to be elected and that would have screwed it up.

Even flaming liberal Jon Stewart made fun of Nancy Pelosi because she really didn't know what was in the law.

The bottom line is 1/2 the country wants government run health care and the other half doesn't.
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

Originally posted by BABiscuit:


Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?
I would bet that almost no one on the Democratic side had read the entire bill. Queen Nancy's famous statement "you have to pass the bill to know what's in it" proves that point. The Dems had a historic opportunity to pass some thing they had been dreaming off since FDR. They were not even going to let a bad piece of legislation get in their way
 
Barack Obama says health care law has led to 50,000 fewer preventable hospital deaths

PolitiFact ruling:

Obama said the Affordable Care Act is "a major reason why we've seen 50,000 fewer preventable patient deaths in hospitals."

Independent experts said the report Obama was using as evidence represents a credible attempt to quantify recent improvements in preventing hospital-patient deaths, even if the numbers are estimates rather than hard figures. They added that it's reasonable to credit the health care law's Partnership for Patients program with accelerating the gains, even if the improvements were already under way at the time the law was passed.

The statement is accurate but needs clarification, so we rate it Mostly True.

Link
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

I'm actually not totally against the ACA

- coverage for pre existing conditions
- students covered by parents until 26

These are situations where I thought they got it right. I do believe they passed this under false pretenses.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by fredjr82:


Barack Obama says health care law has led to 50,000 fewer preventable hospital deaths


PolitiFact ruling:


Obama said the Affordable Care Act is "a major reason why we've seen 50,000 fewer preventable patient deaths in hospitals."


Independent experts said the report Obama was using as evidence represents a credible attempt to quantify recent improvements in preventing hospital-patient deaths, even if the numbers are estimates rather than hard figures. They added that it's reasonable to credit the health care law's Partnership for Patients program with accelerating the gains, even if the improvements were already under way at the time the law was passed.


The statement is accurate but needs clarification, so we rate it Mostly True.
Priceless. You post this in response to the financial clusterf--k that is caused by the ACA in the OP's article? The program you referenced as a part of the ACA could have been done without submarining the entire insurance system. In fact, if you notice the dates of the study, this program is one of the very few from the law that were implemented right away vs. waiting until after the 2012 election.


Also, I noticed that you did some creative editing in your cut and paste above. Here is some relevant information that you left out for some reason.



• These numbers are estimates. Obviously, it's not possible to literally count the number of deaths prevented in the same way you can count actual deaths. So the authors of the report had to use a complicated set of estimating techniques to come up with the 50,000 figure.

The authors of the report made a point of including some caveats, including that "the estimate of deaths averted is less precise than the estimate of the size of the reduction" in hospital-acquired conditions." The report also notes "uncertainty inherent in our statistical extrapolations" and says that it's "clear" that "tens of thousands of deaths" have been averted, which is less specific than the 50,000 figure Obama focused on.

• Preventable deaths had already begun falling even before the health care law was enacted. Periodically, the Centers for Disease Control and Protection has analyzed data on inpatient hospital deaths, with its most recent analysis covering data through 2010. That analysis found that the number of inpatient hospital deaths (not just preventable ones) decreased from 776,000 in 2000 to 715,000 in 2010 -- a drop of 61,000 over a decade.

In other words, hospital deaths in general were already on a downward slope prior to the health care law's passage; it's just accelerated since then. The authors of the report that Obama cited also hedged a bit on the causes for the decline, writing that "the precise causes of the decline in patient harm are not fully understood."
 
In other words, the Dems want to have at least a chance of getting re-elected in Nov. 2016. So predictable.
 
Originally posted by INXS83:
In other words, the Dems want to have at least a chance of getting re-elected in Nov. 2016. So predictable.
You stated the purpose exactly. The Dems want to get this issue past 2016 as it will hurt their chances at the Senate and POTUS. It does beg the question....If this is such a great deal for America, why delay it at all? Shouldn't we want all the good that flow from this law sooner rather than later?
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

Originally posted by aflachawk:
Originally posted by BABiscuit:


Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?
I would bet that almost no one on the Democratic side had read the entire bill. Queen Nancy's famous statement "you have to pass the bill to know what's in it" proves that point. The Dems had a historic opportunity to pass some thing they had been dreaming off since FDR. They were not even going to let a bad piece of legislation get in their way
I get it, you dont like the ACA, but why do you have to take her comment out of context to make it sound like she said something that isnt true? full quote here:

"You've heard about the controversies, the process about the bill…but I
don't know if you've heard that it is legislation for the future - not
just about health care for America, but about a healthier America," she
told the National Association of Counties annual legislative conference,
which has drawn about 2,000 local officials to Washington. "But we have
to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it - away from the
fog of the controversy."
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea

Originally posted by dgordo:
Originally posted by aflachawk:
Originally posted by BABiscuit:


Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?
I would bet that almost no one on the Democratic side had read the entire bill. Queen Nancy's famous statement "you have to pass the bill to know what's in it" proves that point. The Dems had a historic opportunity to pass some thing they had been dreaming off since FDR. They were not even going to let a bad piece of legislation get in their way
I get it, you dont like the ACA, but why do you have to take her comment out of context to make it sound like she said something that isnt true? full quote here:
He doesn't realize he is taking out of context. Most of the posters on here don't realize they are taking her out of context. They are just repeating what they have been told.
 
Re: Dems send letter to Obama asking him to Delay ACA stuff for 2 yea


Originally posted by BABiscuit:

Originally posted by Hawk in SEC Country:
the more I learn and read about the ACA, the more I'm convinced that the Dems wanted to pass it just so they can say they did it. Consequences be damned.

If they truly could not read what was in the law before they passed it. They should have never passed it, until it was thoroughly studied, and revised.
I am not defending the ACA, but do you actually think they couldnt read it prior to passing it or anybody claimed that?
I think most Democrats conceded they hadn't read it. Only a handful of journalists claimed to have read it -- and they all predicted most of the disasters that subsequently occurred, as well as some that haven't yet happened, but will.

Some of the problems were known, and ordinarily would have been fixed in committee. But that wasn't possible in this case because Ted Kennedy had died and Scott Brown had been elected to fill his seat. By the time the bill was sent to the president for his signature, it couldn't have passed the Senate. So they couldn't make changes, which would have required them to run it back throughthe Senate. Thus Harry Reid invoked an arcane rule meant for other purposes and rammed the bill through to the White House, warts and all.

Incidentally, I see somebody claiming that Pelosi was taken out of context. Bullshit. She is being portrayed as admitting that the details of the plan weren't generally known and couldn't be known until the bill was passed, and that's what she did.
 
Dems want another 2 years to read it and figure how to use it to their political advantage.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT