tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post7672893543294437950..comments2024-03-18T21:32:04.061-06:00Comments on Clayton Cramer.: Support For Obamacare Astonishingly LowClayton Cramerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03258083387204776812noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-50534112843417038912012-06-07T22:13:11.471-06:002012-06-07T22:13:11.471-06:00But Nancy told us she read, wrote and understood t...But Nancy told us she read, wrote and understood the entire bill!!! HA HA!<br /><br />She might as well have just came on TV an announced that the American public was a bunch of incestuous and stupid mother f*ckers by presenting it that way! The level of offense was comparable.<br /><br />No question the over-priced health care and insurance premiums (if one can get a policy) is scr*wing most American's, but the Dems alternative form of scr*wing ain't much of a solution either! Nor does it fix the cost problem one iota.<br /><br />I'm also speaking as someone over 40 with no health insurance so regardless of what happens if I get sick I'm better off dead.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-3973893844400425642012-06-07T14:12:46.350-06:002012-06-07T14:12:46.350-06:00Considering what the Supremes have read into vario...Considering what the Supremes have read into various clauses of the constitution over the decades, I fully expect them to be able to read a severability clause into this multi-thousand page bomb before morning coffee, while still in their bathrobes.Windy Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01951254236693386401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-30717525160899140682012-06-07T12:54:12.523-06:002012-06-07T12:54:12.523-06:00Worse, I understand that the legal wizards of the ...<i>Worse, I understand that the legal wizards of the Democratic Party neglected to include a severability clause....</i><br /><br />Of course, the Supremes have established plenty of precedents to ignore the lack of severability clauses....<br /><br />That said, as I've heard it, this is an artifact of its post-Scott Brown passage. The Senate passed their own initial version and then it should have gone into a conference to reconcile the differences between it and the House version, at which time the usual boilerplate like a severability clause would have been added.<br /><br />But with Brown enabling a filibuster, the House had to pass the Senate bill as written or they wouldn't have passed anything.<br /><br />On the other hand, to make guaranteed issue (no preconditions) and community rating (the healthy young pay for the sicker older folks) work you've <i>got</i> to have an individual mandate, otherwise the healthy only sign up when they get sick.<br /><br />So depending on your opinion as to whether it was ever supposed to work or was a stalking horse for a total government takeover after it failed, the lack of the severability clause could be due to this triad.ThatWouldBeTellinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16910231314995266781noreply@blogger.com