Shutdown

[mrsleeve]

It doesn't work without the individual mandate. If you delay it you have to delay the whole thing. It doesn't make since to delay the entire bill. Hospitals, states and everyone is geared up to proceed. They had years to prepare and now all of a sudden the GOP wants to delay it for a year, as if that will make things better?It makes no since.

Any party, no matter what side, that uses the economy as leverage to repeal bills that have already been through the democratic process, is a threat to democracy. Any sane republican with half a brain should be appalled by what a radical minority faction is doing to the country, even if you agree 100% with their ideologies. It's not right. You can disagree with the ACA all day long, but do you really think this is a good tactic for a minority party, to fuck up the entire economy until the minority gets what they want? It doesn't seam to me to be a very democratic process.

who cares delay the whole thing, your right they have had years to get ready yet the state exchanges have been mostly down and giving everyone hell whos trying to comply with the law. Why not delay it another year and work out most of the kinks in that time.

[z31maniac]

Now these responses make sense, I have to admit, I'm not as up on the business vs individual mandate as I should be. I'll be honest and say I've got company sponsored insurance that is fantastic and not changing, so I haven't paid as much attention as I should have.

I would agree that the R's continue to generally fuck everything up.

But the D's aren't free of blood from their hands either.

[herbivor]

Hardly. It's a genuine question.

Why is delaying the business mandate not detrimental to the law, but delaying the individual mandate (for the same length of time) detrimental to the law?

It doesn't work without the individual mandate. If you delay it you have to delay the whole thing. It doesn't make since to delay the entire bill. Hospitals, states and everyone is geared up to proceed. They had years to prepare and now all of a sudden the GOP wants to delay it for a year, as if that will make things better?It makes no since.

Any party, no matter what side, that uses the economy as leverage to repeal bills that have already been through the democratic process, is a threat to democracy. Any sane republican with half a brain should be appalled by what a radical minority faction is doing to the country, even if you agree 100% with their ideologies. It's not right. You can disagree with the ACA all day long, but do you really think this is a good tactic for a minority party, to fuck up the entire economy until the minority gets what they want? It doesn't seam to me to be a very democratic process.

[BraveUlysses]

Hardly. It's a genuine question.

Why is delaying the business mandate not detrimental to the law, but delaying the individual mandate (for the same length of time) detrimental to the law?

Because it directly undermines the exchanges coming online this exact week!

The exchanges only work if people are expected to be buying insurance through them.

You are conflating two separate parts of the ACA.

[z31maniac]

Oh, there's that strawman you were talking about. It was yours all along.

Hardly. It's a genuine question.

Why is delaying the business mandate not detrimental to the law, but delaying the individual mandate (for the same length of time) detrimental to the law?

[BraveUlysses]

So, Obama undermined his own exchange by delaying the business mandate? And giving special exemptions to hundreds of businesses?

Oh, there's that strawman you were talking about. It was yours all along.

[10Toes]

So the shooting is nuts, but I was perusing that site. I think I have a new favorite news site.

So the shots came from the police as they were trying to stop this person ramming the gate

[ajhostetter]

Whelp, things are really shut down now.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/8383...oter-arrested/

So the shooting is nuts, but I was perusing that site. I think I have a new favorite news site.

[z31maniac]

huh? so you agree?

the senate amended, voted, and passed the funding bill. At that point, the ball was in the house's court. that's indisputable. the question isn't whether you or I like what the senate passed - it's what did the house do and why?

The House created and passed a bill and sent it to the Senate. The Senate then CHANGED the bill and passed it.

Then the House didn't vote on it.

So it's OK for the Senate to change/ignore bills, but it's not OK for the House?

I guess I'm just confused by your apparent position, am I reading you wrong?

[slammin.e28]

Whelp, things are really shut down now.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/83837-breaking-gunshots-fired-outside-u-s-capitol-injuries-reported-shooter-arrested/

[nando]

huh? so you agree?

the senate amended, voted, and passed the funding bill. At that point, the ball was in the house's court. that's indisputable. the question isn't whether you or I like what the senate passed - it's what did the house do and why?

[z31maniac]

of course they did! why wouldn't they have?

it still doesn't answer the question. So the house didn't like the Senate bill, right? Then why didn't they vote on it?

this is the answer:



the answer is they won't vote, because they know it will pass, even in the house with a conservative majority.

Because they didn't like it. Just like Reid tables bills that go to the Senate all the time.

[z31maniac]

Ask yourself "what the reason behind this effort to delay the individual mandate?"

It has nothing to do with fairness or because businesses received a delay in implementing it and everything to do with undermining the new insurance exchanges.

So, Obama undermined his own exchange by delaying the business mandate? And giving special exemptions to hundreds of businesses?

[BraveUlysses]

Delaying the individual mandate for 1 year, like has been done for businesses, is NOT repealing Obummercare.

Ask yourself "what the reason behind this effort to delay the individual mandate?"

It has nothing to do with fairness or because businesses received a delay in implementing it and everything to do with undermining the new insurance exchanges.

[nando]

of course they did! why wouldn't they have?

it still doesn't answer the question. So the house didn't like the Senate bill, right? Then why didn't they vote on it?

this is the answer:

Boehner is reportedly blocking a vote on a Senate-approved measure to fund the federal government for the next six weeks, fearing backlash from the most conservative members of his party

the answer is they won't vote, because they know it will pass, even in the house with a conservative majority.