The red states were caught up in the tea party's plan for the great budget
uprising and replacement of Obama that failed.
Reference the rollout of the ACA, in states (like Kentucky and Washington) where
it as planned for and a state website used, the rollout has been without much
Sorry, should have said "was planned for"
". . .a benefit offered to Americans on the federal dime." Spoken like
a true liberal who thinks government assistance is free.Yes, if you
want a bankrupt state like California or New York vote for Democrats, not
"If you don’t vote, it might behoove you to get informed this time. If
you tend to vote for everything with an (R) behind it, stop voting against your
own self-interest."Sherrie is encouraging even more of us to
vote for politicians who will continue to run up debt so that we can have the
things we desire, now. Thus far, we've "voted for" 17 trillion
dollars in debt and over 100 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities (money
we're committed to spend, the source for which we haven't a clue).
These are dollars that we are essentially stealing from future generations by
voting FOR our "own self-interest".
Oh, too funny!Sherrie, you highlight all the people who are unable to get
insurance under the horrible legislation known as obamacare and you blame the
party who had no input into it and did not vote for it. It appears from those
comments that you may the one who is uninformed.If obamacare is so
wonderful, why does it leave so many people out? Blame those who wrote it, not
those who had nothing to do with it.It is obamacare that leaves out
the most vulnerable among us. The GOP had nothing to do with obamacare, other
than to get rid of it.
Sorry, chilly, but voting for Republicans will ensure more debt. Democrats
actually want to increase revenues to help pay for government spending, which is
about where it was during the Reagan years, as a percentage of GDP (even with
all those nasty entitlements Republicans vilify but secretly love). It's
revenues that have fallen off the cliff, thanks largely to the Bush tax cuts.
Because of their compact with Saint Grover, Republicans will never vote to raise
taxes. They will also refuse to make significant cuts to government spending,
because their constituents will not allow it. This has been the Republican modus
operandi since Reagan. Cut taxes but don't cut spending. This is the recipe
for growing debt, and it has been the GOP that has peddled this recipe for
decades now. Time to see the truth.
The rollout in blue states has gone quite well. WA and OR people are pleased. I
have family in Seattle who much prefer ACA over the ridiculous hoops they had to
jump thru with their former insurer.
Kent, The Democrats you speak of must live in another universe. They certainly
aren't our Democrats. Ours constantly push for higher taxes, ceaselessly
invent new and "better" social programs and excel at creating greater
dependency. Most of our Republicans, wanting to be popular too, don't want
to be outdone and are not much better at governing than the Dems. The result for
us is a slide toward mediocrity and poverty achieved by other countries of the
present and past who have clung to Utopian dreams.
"much prefer ACA over the ridiculous hoops they had to jump thru with their
former insurer."ACA neither provides insurance nor health
benefits, all insurance required by mandate of the ACA is through existing big
To "Sherrie" you should realize that the expansion of Medicaid came with
strings attached. The biggest was that the Feds would boost funding for a few
years, then the states had to take over funding and maintain the new levels. Do
you think it is wise to raise taxes on people that already feel overtaxed?
Oh, too very serious!Sherrie, you point out all the people who are unable
to get insurance under the horrible legislation known as the old insurance free
enterprise for big profit mess and you blame the party who had fought like mad
to keep it did not vote for it. It appears from those comments that you may the
one who is better informed than most others in these two states.If
"free enterprise health care" is so wonderful, why does it leave so many
people out? Blame those who wrote it, not those who tried to fix it by writing
the ACA.It is the insurance industry that leaves out the most
vulnerable among us. The GOP had nothing to do with obamacare, other than to
make it necessary lest too many Americans be driven into bankruptcy.
Sal: You have to try to stay more on top of the news. California is now running
a budget surplus AND with a Democrat in the State House. Best look for another
example of fiscal irresponsibility, it is possible to see the light. So I
encourage Utah to follow the lead of California and set up a State Insurance
exchange and accept the expansion of Medicaid.
Who would demand that government provide "personal welfare"? There is
no "personal welfare" in the Constitution. One swing vote, John
Roberts, cannot declare that the Constitution is null and void because he
prefers to listen to the powers in Washington rather than to abide by his duty
to uphold the Constitution.No one in America has the right to demand
that someone else pay for his/her health care. The Constitution does not allow
that option. Obama knows that. Reid knows that. They don't care. Those
who listen to them don't care. All of them put personal preference above
personal responsibility.No insurance company is duty bound to offer
anyone a health-insurance policy. They are duty bound to pay for all things
covered under the policy for those that they have chosen to insure. Obama would
have us believe that he can force a company to give away its assets. He knows
better. We should know better. Shame on us if we let Obama define
"freedom" when what he really means is subjugation by the government.
As usual Mike R. ignores the obvious in search of a partisan slant on any issue.
"He would have us believe he can force a company to give away its
assets." Sounds like the insurance industry is hanging on by a thread,
right? Well not exactly. Insurance companies are among the biggest
supporters of the ACA. How could that be when he is trying to force them do what
they don't want to do? They support it because along with lots of sick
folks who will cost them money comes large numbers of young healthy people,
previously uninsured. What could be better than record profits that the
Insurers have racked up lately?? More and bigger profits from the millions of
previously uninsured who now will be paying premiums. Shame on Mike if he
can't craft a better slippery slope argument than the one above.
Re: Mike Richards "No insurance company is duty bound to offer anyone a
health-insurance policy." Moreover, no health care will be provided to
anyone unless a profit is made. If no profit is made - die already. AND that
is what is wrong with private sector health care. Only socialized medicine can
meet the public health needs of the American people.