ADVERTISEMENT

5 Thoughts for Monday - Obamacare dead edition?

ABaumli

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 3, 2005
33,861
32,906
66
Ok, so the big thing that happened last week (other than the Chiefs being screwed) was that a Texas Federal Judge ruled that Obamacare is unconsitutional, so lets start there:

1. Texas Judge on Obamacare. I have tried to read through the opinion, but have been busy, so I didn't do what they required in law school on it. On the first point, I think the Judge is correct that the individual mandate is now unconsitutional at least that is how the SCOTUS would rule it now. Roberts ruled that it was unconstituational, but saved through Congress' taxation power. For the record, I think Roberts is correct (I also think he is one of the best Justices on the SCOTUS in the last 50 years, I would rank him #1 right in my SCOTUS power rankings for current Justices). The ACA had a fine/tax if you didn't buy insurance. The Tax Cut of 2017 repealed that fine. So there is no punishment for refusing to buy insurance even thought the ACA requires that you buy insurance. Now that kind of leaves a couple issues. 1. Is there standing to challenge the individual mandate that has no teeth, in other words, it exists only on paper, but no one has to comply (I'll come back to this). 2. If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then is the entire ACA unconstitutional? As some have used against Trump on his Muslim Ban, rhetoric can be used. Here the Judge used Congress, Obama, even Justice Roberts to make the determination that if the mandate is unconsitutional, then the whole law is constitutional. I think the Mandate is severable in my opinion. The costs will be unpredictable and skyrocket due to that unpredictability, but I think it is severable. Where I think the judge is wrong is that I am not sure standing exists here. This wasn't briefed by the parties, but only through Amicus Briefs. So it was only discussed at Oral Arguments. I could see the 5th Circuit remanding this down to readdress this issue. If not the 5th Circuit, then maybe SCOTUS. If they make it on the standing issue, I think Obamacare is dead, as in unconstitutional. No coverage for pre-existing condiitons, no coverage for at home 26 year olds, no exchange, no 2% tax on income over $250K. I don't know what happens to federally owned student loans. Also, medicaid recipients get bumped.

Now my thoughts on the issue. I think Obamacare needs to be repealed. The exchange is a nightmare for small businesses and persons. First off, I'll give you my example. The cheapest plan available to my family is $18,600/yr. Our out of pocket deductible on that plan would be $6500 individual, $13000 family. That is for a family of 5, I am 37, wife is younger and we have 3 young kids. Personally, I am sick of subsidizing you old mofos who enjoyed way cheaper insurance, way cheaper tuition for school, and better wages. When your generation was young, you received a 1 out of 7 ratio for being young and in health for your insurance. That ratio significantly reduced in Obamacare. I am fine covering pre-existing conditions and those who have poor health due to no cause of their own. But for the old fvcks who received the benefit of being young when they were young, they can go pound sand if they think I should have to pay for them now when they are old.

Now, what does my insurance provide me? The answer is very little. What has happened is that hospitals won't take insurance from the Obamacare exchange, so now after you pay a ton for insurance, you don't even get to use it the majority of the time. #ThanksObama. These issues are why it needs to be repealed. I have actually supported states providing a Medicare for All solution. I think it is cost effective. I think both Dems and GOP should want this law destroyed and then select the components that are good and move on.

2. The chiefs lost, DAMNIT. It felt very Kentucky like for Mizzou and Chiefs fans. The Pass Interference was BS. I would have been pissed if they did call helmet to helmet. I think that would have been a weak call and the refs made the right choice there. Lastly, the TD was a push off. Now the Chiefs did receive a ton of bad calls that went their way earlier, so I get that. The point is that the refs were terrible and basically hurt what was a really good game. Secondly, the Chiefs secondary is a bunch of dummies who desperately need Eric Berry out there to tell them how to line up.


So the Chiefs will only go as far as Berry can help them on defense.

3. Holiday Season: Please tip your delivery drivers and mailmen/women. We always try to put out some gift cards. I hope that our regulars get them. But the Amazon random drivers often grab them. The regular drivers bust azz during the holiday season and deserve some recognition because they basically are Santa Clause getting some of these deliveries on time.

4. Free Speech: Congress and "Hate Speech," Journalism under attack, and Trump threatens legal action on SNL, OMG, I can't stand Trump being allowed to speak or tweet. First off, he is at least on twitter a toddler throwing tantrums all the damn time. Secondly, Trump does not know the constitution (neither does half of congress either (as I pointed out on Bernie on the Obamacare ruled unconstitutional thread)). This is what we get when we allow our government to destroy the FIRST amendment. Many support the censorship of "Hate Speech." I do not. My First Amendment Law Professor (Christina Wells at Mizzou) would not support such censorship either. Prof. Wells (a super liberal prof) often defended the rights of the Westboro Baptist Church. I really thought and still do think a lot of her for doing that. 1. It was unpopular; 2. she received backlash; and 3. She fought for an unpopular belief because the law demanded that it be protected. The problem is that when you decide that government has the right to censor hate speech, you are now giving that power over to someone who may not have the same determination as you as what constitutes "hate". Let's revisit Trump and SNL. What if Trump decided that hate speech was mocking the government? Now he could violate the constitution and sue SNL or worse, go after journalists. Remember, the strength of a law (to stand the test of time) is if you support it if the other side of the political isle were in power and enforcing it. So in my opinion, any government official, and university, etc. that tries to ban "hate speech" should not receive government money. We want people to have comfortable life and we do not want to infringe on their rights, but we don't pick and choose who gets rights and who does not. The First Amendment is a right for everyone to be protected from the government.

5. Holiday Travel. I don't leave for family events until after Xmas. We have Xmas at our house for the kids, then take off the following day or so. I think this is fine while your kids believe in Santa, but after they are past that stage, I think belief in family is more important. I used to love going to my grandmother's for Xmas, playing with my cousins, my grandma making the best fried chicken ever and Lemon Meringue Pie. I don't think my kids will get that as much as my family is spread all over the country, but I hope that when my kids grow up, they will make it back to the parents for Xmas every year.

That's all I have this week, but it is a lot, so you may want to digest in multiple sittings.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Go Big.
Get Premium.

Join Rivals to access this premium section.

  • Say your piece in exclusive fan communities.
  • Unlock Premium news from the largest network of experts.
  • Dominate with stats, athlete data, Rivals250 rankings, and more.
Log in or subscribe today Go Back