Obama delays another part of health care reform...

[BlueDemKev]

How long is this nonsense going to continue? As Bloomberg aptly stated, if President Obama won't stand behind his signature achievement, what makes him believe that anybody else will?


http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-03-06/will-obama-ever-enforce-his-health-law

[Laelth]

1. Well-written and insightful essay. k&r n/t

-Laelth

[BenzoDia]

2. The author is obviously pretty biased

http://www.bloombergview.com/contributors/megan-mcardle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan_McArdle

"Once the government gets into the business of providing our health care, the government gets into the business of deciding whose life matters, and how much."

She has also written articles as to why we shouldn't raise minimum wage.

[geek tragedy]

3. LMAO.

https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&q=megan+mcardle+is+always+wrong

She's a libertarian fuckwit.

[busterbrown]

4. I always make it a habit to check the credentials of any author used by a republican publication.

Bloomberg is not to be trusted when it comes to their editorials.

[Wounded Bear]

5. You need to be vigilant about creds around here, too...

Not all "Democrats" on Democratic Underground are created equal.

Anything linked here (or anywhere) has to be taken with grains of salt.

[BlueDemKev]

6. I thought Bloomberg...

...was a left-leaning publication? At least that's what every right-winger I know has said. Still it's not cool that Obama keeps unilaterally delaying key parts of his signature achievement. What kind of precedent is the setting? The next republican president could simply say "I'm not going to enforce any of it" and Democrats will have no leg to stand on insofar as arguing against that.

The lawn needs to be implemented and FIRMLY ESTABLISHED in society to become immune to repeal.

[geek tragedy]

7. McArdle is a libertarian twit nt

[Proud Liberal Dem]

8. My understanding is that there will be no further changes for the next two years

I think that stevenleser had an OP around here about this. I sort of agree with you but I also think that any huge law like this has got to be phased in slow enough for people and businesses to adjust and avoid any major disruptions. Also, the whole "If you like your plan....." thing really hit us bad at the end of last year, so I can see why he would be a little nervous about this during these upcoming midterms and willing to allow them to go for a little while longer. Same goes with the employer mandate, which has got to be handled even more carefully. Still, it's not like he's changing huge, massive chunks of the law unilaterally. The meat of the bill is either already implemented or is being implemented (the Exchanges being the big piece), so I'm not really too worried about it. Plus, the law is already showing some positive results and is no longer- at least at the moment- seen as a huge electoral liability for the Dems in the upcoming midterms, so there is that as well. The only people really worked up over the changes/tweaks in the law seem to be the Ted Cruz "Obama is a dictator" types, which fortunately don't include huge swaths of the public.

[busterbrown]

9. Such a complicated process. For God’s Sake....

Playing as it goes is surely o.k... What alternatives do we have...Let it fail by giving the right issues to make it fail? Should we go back to the beginning and let the freaking Insurance Companies have their way with us.. They are murderers of hope...... our right to live in a Country which healthcare is a right..... not something one can afford

Any MSM outlet which focuses on the market leans way to the right.. Deregulation of all things which pertain to our economy is the their number 1 message..

[quadrature]

10. the alternative is to enforce the law as written....nt

[busterbrown]

11. Laws are constantly amended..or changed, if you will..

Besides ,whats your objection to improving the ACA?..The whole structure is amazingly complicated especially since the right wing is doing the best they can to bring it down,, Suspending a controversial part of the law makes definite sense..

[quadrature]

13. legislatures, amend laws all the time....but that is not

what we are talking about here.

Obama has decided that he can
not enforce certain law.
the dates were written into law by Congress.

[busterbrown]

14. can’t figure out what your problem is..

Of all the shit Republicans have done to destroy Obama’s attempt to bring medical care to people w/o insurance, you are concerned with his attempt to ratchet down some of the criticism.. Perhaps you could point out some of the benefits..except you seem to have another agenda..

[quadrature]

15. 'benefits' of what? please elaborate...nt

[busterbrown]

16. Ah, a lover of Heath care for Profit is in the house..

Keep up the good work..

[phleshdef]

12. Nothing was aptly stated. Its total horse shit because the vast majority of the law is in effect.

Huge overhauls are often met with delays and changes to certain aspects of said overhaul. That's just the way the fucking world works.

Take this conservative wishful thinking nonsense elsewhere.

[JohnJohn]

17. A two year delay puts us into 2016

I agree with the OP. Regardless where the article came from some of it makes sense. This new delay puts us into 2016. If a Repub gets in office in 2016 what is going to stop him from unilaterally making his own "changes" exactly as the President is doing now? It will be much easier for a Repub to neuter the law if it hasn't even gotten off the ground yet.