The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

Nov Ballot and State Amendments Banning Govt Health Mandates
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1643		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Adrak [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Nov Ballot and State Amendments Banning Govt Health Mandates
States seeking to ban mandatory health insurance AP
Quote:
The American Legislative Exchange Council says lawmakers in 34 states have filed or proposed state constitutional amendments or laws rejecting health insurance mandates, many targeted for the November ballot.

Kind of a bare bones story but I could see this gaining momentum with the grassroots types.
Author:  Beryllin [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nov Ballot and State Amendments Banning Govt Health Mandates
Adrak wrote:
States seeking to ban mandatory health insurance AP
Quote:
The American Legislative Exchange Council says lawmakers in 34 states have filed or proposed state constitutional amendments or laws rejecting health insurance mandates, many targeted for the November ballot.

Kind of a bare bones story but I could see this gaining momentum with the grassroots types.


Yup. Some folks have enough foresight to try to head off trouble before it gets to them. Of course, I really think the Constitutional challenges to such a mandate will prove successful, but why take the chance?
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
I certainly oppose a mandate if no public option exists.
Author:  Khross [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Monte wrote:
I certainly oppose a mandate if no public option exists.
Serious question: Pelosi and Reid are the two most vocal/visible opponents of portability in insurance. Do you know why, Monte? (Or have any reasonable guesses?) I'm asking, because, honestly ... (pretty much) every analyst in the country thinks real portability would go further toward driving consumer end-costs down than anything else.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
From what I understand, the principle of limiting portability isn't so much an issue once you make sure that insurance companies are required to obey state minimums when they offer insurance across the border. My guess is that it also has to do with industry lobbying.
Author:  Ladas [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
The cyncial response, even though I'm not Monte, is because having portability destroys the argument for a government run plan, or at least one of the major planks that would appeal to those with job based (and currently locked) insurance.

The more cynical reason is that insurance companies are a source of contributions to her campaign (shes in the top 20 of House recipients of Insurance industry funds), and they realize that portable plans hurt them.
Author:  DFK! [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 2:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Ladas wrote:
The cyncial response, even though I'm not Monte, is because having portability destroys the argument for a government run plan, or at least one of the major planks that would appeal to those with job based (and currently locked) insurance.

The more cynical reason is that insurance companies are a source of contributions to her campaign (shes in the top 20 of House recipients of Insurance industry funds), and they realize that portable plans hurt them.


Lil' a column A, lil' a column B.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 2:07 pm ]
Post subject: 
I know they aren't Tea Party conservatives, so they can't possibly have anything else in mind besides cynical selfish goals, but making sure that insurance companies aren't able to avoid state regulations on minimum coverage is column c.
Author:  Stathol [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 2:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Monte wrote:
I know they aren't Tea Party conservatives, so they can't possibly have anything else in mind besides cynical selfish goals, [...]

Ok.

1) I guessed I missed where DFK! has ever said he supports the Tea Party movement.

2) Disregarding 1), so you think he accuses anyone who doesn't adhere to his narrow political views of having nothing but cynical and selfish goals. And this bothers you. This bothers you. Really? That's....interesting.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 2:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yes, of course it does. Don't make the mistake of me thinking the same thing about conservatives. I know plenty of fair minded, decent conservatives. Conservatism has never been my issue. The brand of conservatism most commonly exhibited on this board is another issue entirely.
Author:  DFK! [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Monte wrote:
I know they aren't Tea Party conservatives, so they can't possibly have anything else in mind besides cynical selfish goals, but making sure that insurance companies aren't able to avoid state regulations on minimum coverage is column c.


Except that, within the bounds of the Constitution, legislators can write the law however they want, and your point is thereby moot and irrelevant.

Posturing themselves as "standing up" to insurance companies is, furthermore, dependent upon the presumption that "the people" are retarded, considering how much money these people get from the health insurance industry as a whole AND how much support their reform efforts to date have received from said industry.
Author:  Müs [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Monte wrote:
. I know plenty of fair minded, decent conservatives..


Ones that substantially agree with you, you mean right?
Author:  Khross [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nov Ballot and State Amendments Banning Govt Health Mandates
Montegue:

This is no brand of conservatism common to these forums. Political and social views here are as disparate as they can get. At this point, I can only assume conservative means any political disagreement with you.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
Müs wrote:
Monte wrote:
. I know plenty of fair minded, decent conservatives..


Ones that substantially agree with you, you mean right?



No, ones that substantially disagree with me, all the time. They are still fair minded people.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nov Ballot and State Amendments Banning Govt Health Mandates
Khross wrote:
Montegue:

This is no brand of conservatism common to these forums. Political and social views here are as disparate as they can get. At this point, I can only assume conservative means any political disagreement with you.


Oh, I think you definitely stand apart from the crowd. but most folks here fall within the Fox News "good conservative" range.
Author:  Rafael [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
You're intentionally being an ignorant bigot now.
Author:  DFK! [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Rafael wrote:
You're intentionally being an ignorant bigot now.


Whoa, the mind-reading is catching...
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Rafael wrote:
You're intentionally being an ignorant bigot now.


No, I'm stating what is a pretty accurate observation. There is a variety of conservative opinion on the board, but most of it fits in a pretty decent range of strong right to hard right. Most of the conservatives I have observed on the board would be in swell company at a Glenn Beck luncheon. Many would be in good company at a Tea Party protest. At least one of them is all about just shooting people they disagree with.

The fair minded conservatives I know have never once said liberalism is tantamount to treason, or that it's communism. We have never used words like communist or fascist to describe one another, because we have respect for our differing viewpoints. This is not the case here. There is absolutely no respect for anyone left of center from the conservatives on this board, and there really never has been. And before you mention RD, you guys are perfectly willing to tear his throat out when there are no other leftist targets to hunt. I've seen it for the last 8 years.

You don't find that much here. Perhaps that's just the way it is online. Perhaps people online are more willing to be nasty because they don't have to deal with each other on a daily basis. Perhaps they use a forum like this to test their boundaries when it comes to their behavior. Makes sense.
Author:  DFK! [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
Communism and fascism are disprovable or provable statements of fact. Having "respect" for other people has nothing to do with the usage of those terms.
Author:  RangerDave [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
Monte wrote:
And before you mention RD, you guys are perfectly willing to tear his throat out when there are no other leftist targets to hunt.


*nggh* *ghh* *gurgle* ...

Sorry, couldn't resist. ;)
Author:  Müs [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
Nah, RD's at least coherent, and makes salient points sometimes.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
Not in the way they have been tossed about here. Supporting a strong public health insurance option does not make one a communist. Nor does it even make one a socialist in the vein that such pejoratives are tossed around here. Things get better, then they get worse. It sort of depends on the political mood at the time. Immediately after the election, this place was a minefield for anyone who supported Obama. it's got better at times, but mostly worse. The conspiracy theories about Obama's birth place and his religion (or his wife,ffs) that get tossed around here alone are enough to sully any claims we have to rational discourse.
Author:  Monte [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Müs wrote:
Nah, RD's at least coherent, and makes salient points sometimes.


I make them all the time. The hate just gets in the way of hearing them.
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
No, it simply makes you embracing both a facet of communism and the udnerlying presumptions that lead to establishing total revocation of private property rights protections.
Author:  Khross [ Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
Monte wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nah, RD's at least coherent, and makes salient points sometimes.
I make them all the time. The hate just gets in the way of hearing them.
That's a Freudian slip if I've ever seen one.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/