Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 278
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70793
biomed163227
Yssup Rider60924
gman4453294
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48646
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42574
CryptKicker37215
The_Waco_Kid36989
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-26-2015, 06:43 AM   #1
Whirlaway
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
Encounters: 28
Default FOUR LITTLE WORDS.......

The statutory weight of Obamacare hangs on four little words:

“...established by the state.”

The supreme court will decide what Congress meant when they drafted the law. So far, Democrats and their Administrative State (chiefly the IRS) have decided to ignore the law as written.

How / What will SCOTUS decide?

Were those 4 words a "drafting error"?
Whirlaway is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 06:45 AM   #2
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 60,924
Encounters: 67
Default

ONE LITTLE WORD......

SPAM!
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 06:59 AM   #3
Whirlaway
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
Encounters: 28
Default

As always, we can county on Assup to contribute with his well thought out replies.
Whirlaway is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 07:18 AM   #4
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

I think the Court will double down on their previous incredibly stupid decision by twisting words, logic and common sense, and rule in favor of Obamacare, further diminishing the credibility of the Court, and continuing our long strides into statism.
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 09:48 AM   #5
chefnerd
Just a ROFF with CRSS
 
chefnerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 11, 2011
Location: Hiding somewhere in the hills
Posts: 1,194
Encounters: 7
Default

It actually comes down to which definition of the word "state" that gets used. One of the definitions used by the Oxford Dictionary is as follows:

'A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.'
chefnerd is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 08:21 PM   #6
timpage
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
I think the Court will double down on their previous incredibly stupid decision by twisting words, logic and common sense, and rule in favor of Obamacare, further diminishing the credibility of the Court, and continuing our long strides into statism.
Logic and common sense dictate that all persons living in the USA, the most powerful and the richest country in the history of the world, should have access to decent healthcare, regardless of their finances.

That said, the language in the statute is problematic.

>>>What matters, Justice Antonin Scalia has said, is “not what Congress would have wanted, but what Congress enacted.”<<<<
timpage is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 08:32 PM   #7
IIFFOFRDB
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 19, 2011
Location: Dixie Land
Posts: 22,098
Default

States Rights! fuckers, ask Romney...
IIFFOFRDB is offline   Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 09:20 PM   #8
shanm
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 13, 2014
Location: houston
Posts: 1,954
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Logic and common sense dictate that all persons living in the USA, the most powerful and the richest country in the history of the world, should have access to decent healthcare, regardless of their finances.

That said, the language in the statute is problematic.

>>>What matters, Justice Antonin Scalia has said, is “not what Congress would have wanted, but what Congress enacted.”<<<<
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/stor...alth-coverage/

New study finds 45,000 deaths annually linked to lack of health coverage

Wonder how many Americans ISIS is killing each year.
shanm is offline   Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 12:49 AM   #9
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

Seems like a simple piece of legislation would solve the problem. Since Obamacare has been such a resounding success, and immensely popular, I'm sure Congress will pass a bill straightaway, to avoid the public outcry if Obamacare is rejected.

If the Justices have any integrity, they will adopt the definition that Congress obviously intended. Well, not Congress, none of those clowns read the damn thing. What Gruber intended. This was to be a hammer to force the states to enact exchanges. The states refused. Now the Administration is saying that the term "state" means the federal government. Well, a bill of this size probably has a definition section. What does that say? How is the word used elsewhere in the document? It refers to a "state".


I used to write legislation. You never use vague terms. You write legislation to accomplish a purpose, and you structure the language to that end. You write in a way to avoid judicial challenges, so people won't pervert your legislation.


And we have Gruber.
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 01:19 AM   #10
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
Seems like a simple piece of legislation would solve the problem. Since Obamacare has been such a resounding success, and immensely popular, I'm sure Congress will pass a bill straightaway, to avoid the public outcry if Obamacare is rejected.

If the Justices have any integrity, they will adopt the definition that Congress obviously intended. Well, not Congress, none of those clowns read the damn thing. What Gruber intended. This was to be a hammer to force the states to enact exchanges. The states refused. Now the Administration is saying that the term "state" means the federal government. Well, a bill of this size probably has a definition section. What does that say? How is the word used elsewhere in the document? It refers to a "state".


I used to write legislation. You never use vague terms. You write legislation to accomplish a purpose, and you structure the language to that end. You write in a way to avoid judicial challenges, so people won't pervert your legislation.


And we have Gruber.
And now you write incoherent drivel on the internet. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 06:52 AM   #11
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WombRaider View Post
And now you write incoherent drivel on the internet. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
I thought it was pretty spot on. You can't please everyone, as I'm sure you know, WormRaper.


CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 07:04 AM   #12
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
Logic and common sense dictate that all persons living in the USA, the most powerful and the richest country in the history of the world, should have access to decent healthcare, regardless of their finances.

That said, the language in the statute is problematic.

>>>What matters, Justice Antonin Scalia has said, is “not what Congress would have wanted, but what Congress enacted.”<<<<
This has nothing to do with healthcare but health INSURANCE.
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 07:52 AM   #13
Jackie S
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 31, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 15,054
Encounters: 15
Default

The wording is very problematic, it would not have got as far as the SCOTUS if it were not.

In just about every other section of the ACA, any time the word State is used, it is referring to One of the 50 States, not some ambiguous entity.

But the SCOTUS showed in it's initial ruling on the ACA that it can become very Political. The Democrats spent years telling the American People that the penalties or any other punitive parts of the ACA were NOT taxes, nor was any othe part of the funding for the ACA taxes.

Then the SCOTUS says that Congress has the power to levy taxes, (not mandates), and bingo, they suddenly become taxes, the law is Constitutional, and everybody is happy.

It's "Bizzarro World".
Jackie S is offline   Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 08:32 AM   #14
Old-T
Valued Poster
 
Old-T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 20, 2010
Location: From hotel to hotel
Posts: 9,058
Encounters: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
I used to write legislation. You never use vague terms. You write legislation to accomplish a purpose, and you structure the language to that end. You write in a way to avoid judicial challenges, so people won't pervert your legislation.
That is what SHOULD be done. Too often we have careless/incompetent people writing the legislation--careless I believe is the more common. I have read a lot of proposed legislation and almost always I point out ambiguous wording, or cases where the author THINKS they covered all the options, but have missed some. The good ones say "thank you" and tighten it up--not always the way I would like, but at least make it more well defined.

The devious ones make changes too--only they try to hide the loopholes that they want to leave in there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn View Post
This has nothing to do with healthcare but health INSURANCE.
Healthcare and insurance are intrinsically linked unless you truly want free healthcare. The real question is, when the current poorly thought out ACA is repealed/voided, will we finally get an intelligent alternative, or will the RWWs try to drive us to the equally bad (just in different ways for different people) previous condition?
Old-T is offline   Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 07:21 AM   #15
Whirlaway
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
Encounters: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old-T View Post
.. Too often we have careless/incompetent people writing the legislation--careless I believe is the more common.
"Careless" isn't what occurred in the drafting of the AHCA. The language (in question) was intended.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/24/wa...e#.h1g6ww:Jd66
Whirlaway is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved