Welcome to PatsFans.com

Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Charlotte Pats Fan, Jul 22, 2014.

  1. Charlotte Pats Fan

    Charlotte Pats Fan 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,692
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +110 / 1 / -3

    No Jersey Selected

    • Like Like x 1
  2. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    I expect an en banc ruling to follow, and for this decision to be reversed.
     
  3. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    This entire Obamacare crap is a huge fiasco. the government could have simply expanded Medicare availability and health insurance for the poor to include more people. They would have raised taxes to do it but that really does not differ from paying higher premiums anyways. Forcing people to buy insurance and insurance they do not need is wrong.

    The government could have removed restrictions on insurance companies selling insurance across state lines and they could have altered and strengthened the rules stating that people must be covered by new policies when losing the old.

    Of course when you write a law behinf closed doors ... without debate on the House floor in full view of the american public what did we expect. This is reason #1 why the democrats lost the House 2 years later - corruption of the highest order.

    The Obama people have changed the rules voted on by Congress without having the ACA amended by Congress. This is exactly why Boehner has sued Obama who thinks he is above the law of the country. We are a democracy ... we must strive to remain one.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2014
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,799
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +367 / 11 / -27

    Oh happy day another "victory" for the GOP now they can take away eligibility for about 5 or 55million people, so when they go to a hospital, the hospital can absorb the cost instead of the insurance company...

    A very happy day, filled with joy.... that "rebranding" is working well....
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  5. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    By the way, this is about as clear a demonstration of judicial activism as you'll see. You know, that practice only liberal judges are guilty of.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  6. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    yeah ... another thread you comment in without knowing the facts jack ... nothing new for you.

    The subsidies in states that do not have exchanges are illegal ...

    then again when they wrote it behind closed doors they knew there were parts that would not be legal.

    Bring the ACA before Congress and amend it and discuss it on the floor in full view of the American public and get it right ... that is how our system was designed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    I guarantee you I am more well versed in the facts than you are.

    National Assn. of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife (2007)

    Now tell me what facts you have to bring to the table. You know, beyond your nonsensical conjecture that they wrote it behind closed doors because they knew parts wouldn't be legal. Did that even make sense to you when you wrote it?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    Right here Jack: Guess you are not versed as well as you thought.
    Of course I knew that the instant you typed your veiled insult my way.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/36B
     
  9. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,799
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +367 / 11 / -27

    Dick Cheney showed us how to do it when he commissioned the Energy Study in 2001 and met behind closed doors with all of the OIl Big Wigs, and then they all got 6 billion dollars in subsidies... and then they passed favorable legislation and never saw the report, which is still secret to this day.

    I know the standards for Obama are somehow different and we judge him by a different set of standards... the reality is that Obamacare is working and making a positive difference in many people's lives..

    As a conservative judges made this decision is that called an "Activist Court".....
     
  10. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    Perhaps you should avail yourself to the Supreme Court decision I cited. Then you'd understand why this is an activist ruling and why what you posted isn't relevant to that fact.
     
  11. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    You have trouble with the laws as written in this country Darryl?
     
  12. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    apples and oranges .............. I did read it.
     
  13. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    So you read a 48 page legal decision in roughly ten minutes?

    OK.

    Please explain, specifically, how the precedent established in that case does not apply here.
     
  14. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    You're banking on intent Jack and this case is a state's rights issue ... your case was not ... if the law (ACA) had gone through the proper channels and not been written behind closed doors ... then it would have went to conference committee, there the messy drafting gets cleaned up. But they wanted to ram this law through and bully their way with it after.

    The federal court ruled today that the language of the law is important and more so than intent.

    but that's how that congress worked Jack ... it's also why the american public ended it.

    The law and process do matter ... not in your partisan eyes but whatever to some of us it does.

    Now your side has a huge problem ... if they challenge this on the text of the law then all the other language Obama sought to change after is in peril ... such is life when people think they are above the laws of the land.

    How much an utter failure that these blowhards would think a carrot on a stick approach would work in a bill voted upon by congress ... amazing balls. The states stood up for their rights ... I know ... states rights is a huge problem for democrats who prefer authoritarian rule from DC.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2014
  15. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    This from 6 months ago predicted today's outcome:
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304448204579186322449012040
    Oh that Congress thing ... a huge impediment to Obama and his clan.
     
  16. jmur116

    jmur116 On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +58 / 0 / -0

    Jack,

    It does not pertain as the case you cited was the resolution of a dispute between two conflicting federal statutes. There is no conflicting statute in this case. The law, unfortunately, states that subsidiaries are via state run exchanges. If there were additional language in a subsequent statute that allowed for discretionary subsidies via the federal exchange, then the dispute between the statutes would use the case you cited as precedent to allow them. However, this case does not have a secondary statute to act as the means via which the IRS is authorizing these subsidiaries. IRS interpretation of the law as written does not overrule the text of the law. I am sure that this will not be settled until it reaches the Supreme Court, as it is too important to the program to allow it to be stripped without going as far as possible on appeal.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  17. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    Gee I wonder if Jack will take back his "nonsensical conjecture" insult thrown my way as I have proved that the haste at which this bill was written is 100% of the reason a part of it is in court now. Such errors might not have happened if the ACA had been written and followed the path of most other bills voted upon by Congress.

    Not nonsensical conjecture Jack ... just the facts.
     
  18. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    I don't know about that. There are other provisions within the bill where the State is taken to include both the federal government as well as the respective states. I think you'd have to grant an extremely narrow interpretation here (one that flies in the face of common sense if you consider the bill in its entirety) to get the (desired) result.
     
  19. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,124
    Likes Received:
    476
    Ratings:
    +1,051 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    [​IMG]
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,096
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +651 / 6 / -9

    Are you having trouble reading today, Icy? Your nonsensical conjecture was this:

    I will freely admit the rest of what you wrote is simply conjecture.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>