Home  >  Wisconsin  >  Senator asks: Do you want this dysfunctional government taking over health care?

Senator asks: Do you want this dysfunctional government taking over health care?

By   /   October 2, 2013  /   News  /   64 Comments

Part 8 of 97 in the series Obamacare
AP file photo

WATCH OUT: Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, says the American people need to keep their eyes open to the dysfunction going on in their government.


By M.D. Kittle | Wisconsin Reporter

MADISON – U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson says if the latest congressional impasse isn’t a wake-up call for American voters, nothing is.

“I hope people have their eyes wide open … that they see the dysfunction here is real,” the Oshkosh Republican told Wisconsin Reporter on Tuesday morning in the hours after the partial federal government shutdown.

“Is this entity what we want to see continue growing, taking over our health care?” Johnson said of the federal government. “That’s why we need to see power devolve back to the states and local governments.”

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats placed the blame for the partial shutdown squarely on the shoulders of “ideological” crusading conservatives fighting against implementation of the Affordable Care Act, the federal health care overhaul that said conservatives have dubbed Obamacare.

Using the same descriptors his party has employed in calling out conservatives in recent days, the president in a Rose Garden address vilified Republicans, charging that they are holding the economy “hostage.”

Democrats and Republicans could not come to terms on a funding bill in advance of the new federal fiscal year, beginning Tuesday.

Earlier Tuesday, Obama sent a letter to federal employees, many of whom are at presently out of work, praising them for their service and apologizing for a “political climate that, too often in recent years, has treated you like a punching bag.” The letter didn’t mention his role in the knot of partisanship strangling federal governance.

“You have endured three years of a federal pay freeze, harmful sequester cuts, and now a shutdown of our government,” Obama wrote. “And yet, you persevere, continuing to serve the American people with passion, professionalism and skill.” It’s just not fair, the president said.

Johnson said he was surprised by the shutdown, calling the impasse pushing the latest federal crisis beyond the brink a “head scratcher.”

He sounded incredulous that the Democratic majority in the Senate quickly killed three House proposals, as well as a move to conference, to “sit down and talk about the issues in good faith.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., before the clock struck midnight Monday said Republicans were simply spinning their wheels if they thought Democrats would vote for any measure that would defund or delay Obamacare. On Tuesday he reiterated he wanted a “clean” continuing resolution bill that will fund the government for a several weeks while the two sides work out their deep differences.

Johnson said he supported a short-term funding bill, in the one-week range, to keep the government going, no strings attached, but Reid would have none of it.

“I’m just scratching my head. I’m surprised we’re shut down,” the senator said. “Maybe there were a couple of members in their heart of hearts hoping for it, but I certainly wasn’t. The uncertainty of Washington has been ladled on top of our economy. I didn’t want any more brinksmanship.”

Contact M.D. Kittle at [email protected]

Part of 97 in the series Obamacare
  1. Obamacare compliance means less money for TN service agencies
  2. The mystery of Obamacare spending in Arkansas
  3. Obamacare raises questions for MD small business owners
  4. Kansas official on Obamacare: ‘Let someone else be the guinea pig’
  5. Obamacare insurance marketplace has plenty of kinks on first day
  6. OR’s Obamacare insurance marketplace hits technological snag
  7. Fail: Day 1 of the New Mexico Obamacare rollout
  8. Senator asks: Do you want this dysfunctional government taking over health care?
  9. Jobs, coverage at risk with Obamacare, MN union health official says
  10. Oregon’s Obamacare ads resemble middle school art
  11. VIDEO: Obamacare vs Affordable Care Act: Comedy triumphs in court of confusion
  12. Patience is key to navigating Illinois’ Obamacare marketplace
  13. Hawaii residents, lawmakers frustrated with health connector glitches
  14. Healthy young, key to Obamacare, aren’t buying it
  15. NM’s health exchange tries to lure ‘young invincibles’
  16. Obama drama: Senator blames governor for big rate hikes
  17. Progressive group navigates Oregon students through Obamacare
  18. Maddening: Trying to log onto federal health care site
  19. You know that one guy who successfully signed up for Obamacare? He didn’t
  20. What’s wrong? It’s been a week, and Obamacare website still not working
  21. HHS Secretary Sebelius back in FL after embarrassing Obamacare rollout
  22. Health centers enroll Floridians in Obamacare as application problems persist
  23. VIDEO: Stewart skewers Sebelius on Obamacare
  24. Obamacare effect? 9 companies exit Nebraska’s health insurance market
  25. Obamacare: Children of undocumented parents face an uncertain future
  26. Which way do we go? Obamacare navigator registration in TN in question
  27. NM health exchange tries to ease problems with Obamacare website
  28. CPA says hype over Obamacare small business tax credit is misleading
  29. Obamacare navigator under fire for arrest warrant
  30. Reports of Obamacare fraud emerge in Tennessee
  31. After two weeks, FL online Obamacare enrollees are hard to find
  32. Illinois state governor touts 100K Obamacare enrollees, all in Medicaid
  33. Kansas lawmaker calls for crackdown on Obamacare navigators
  34. WI health care exchange seeing few getting through
  35. Hawaii’s Obamacare exchange relaunches with more glitches
  36. We’ll know next month how many people in NM signed up for Obamacare — maybe
  37. Zero: Number of Nebraskans Obamacare navigators have signed up
  38. It took this Delaware woman 11 days to sign up for Obamacare – and she was the first
  39. How many people have signed up for health insurance in VA? Who knows?
  40. What else? NM federal health exchange ads stalled due to website problems
  41. Blue Cross hires temp workers to deal with Obamacare glitches
  42. If Obamacare is the next Medicare, will physicians leave en masse?
  43. Three problems that won’t be solved by fixing the Obamacare exchange glitches
  44. Plenty of Oregonians interested in Obamacare, but none can enroll online
  45. Criticize this: Obamacare premiums a near match to WI disclosures
  46. Report: Missourians will see sharp rise in premiums under Obamacare
  47. Kansas navigators say they’ve enrolled no one in Obamacare
  48. Obamacare too costly for rich Coloradans, Democrat congressman says
  49. Study: Kansas premiums to spike following Obamacare rollout
  50. Hang on to your candy: Creepy Uncle Sam is back
  51. Obamacare or bust: NM Watchdog turned back again
  52. Medical journals, experts refute claim that Medicaid cuts ER use
  53. Arkansas spends $4M on Obamacare ads, wants more
  54. LOL: In July video, HHS bragged about being ‘on schedule’ with Obamacare
  55. Illinois uses Day of the Dead to market Obamacare
  56. Sebelius denies GOP’s Terry ‘unreliable’ Obamacare info
  57. About 290,000 Washington residents lose health insurance plans
  58. Broken promise: Obamacare cancels almost 20,000 Kansas health care plans
  59. Top hospitals opt out of Obamacare
  60. Obamacare moves to intensive care
  61. Obamacare provision could lead to more Medicaid fraud
  62. Obamacare: Religious groups want to ‘move mountains’
  63. Obamacare hitting Wisconsin residents with double whammy
  64. Kansas AG: Obamacare threatens consumer privacy
  65. 1,500 in New Mexico have to move out of the high-risk insurance pool
  66. Cover Oregon website fiasco creates jobs, but costs millions
  67. For Florida’s Obamacare small business exchange, it’s crunch time
  68. Only 877 Wisconsinites have signed up for Obamacare, federal report says
  69. Just 172 in NM have completed Obamacare applications: ‘Woefully inadequate,’ says NMIX board member
  70. With only 346 Oklahomans signed up, leaders decry ‘Obamacare debacle’
  71. Defying Obamacare: ‘Send them the bill,’ NM insurance official says
  72. Kansas Obamacare enrollment dwarfed by nearly 20,000 cancellations
  73. Numbers don’t lie: In Illinois, Obamacare means Medicaid
  74. Wisconsin governor proposes insurance plan to address Obamacare rollout failure
  75. Tennesseans might know Tuesday if they can keep canceled health insurance
  76. People demand answers over Oregon’s Obamacare fail
  77. Calif. says ‘no’ to Obamacare freebies, makes own law
  78. HI health exchange violates federal law, League of Women Voters say
  79. Obamacare video winner: ‘Forget about the price tag’
  80. Harvard study finds ‘striking’ rejection of Obamacare by young Americans
  81. HI health exchange has signed up 574 people, for about $348,000 apiece
  82. Are the uninsured getting Obamacare coverage in Illinois?
  83. Secret Obamacare handbook the feds don’t want you to see is online
  84. Lost in translation: Once-supportive Hispanics turning backs on Obama, ACA
  85. HI Obamacare exchange not fiscally sustainable, lawmakers told
  86. Illinois’ latest Obamacare targets: gold diggers and momma’s boys
  87. Now Democrats are bashing California’s Obamacare exchange, too
  88. Obamacare: For $1.37M we get Richard Simmons in lurid web stream
  89. Obamacare: A welcome mat for IRS horrors
  90. California senator seeks audit of state Obamacare exchange
  91. Report: Hawaii ranks worst for Obamacare signups
  92. CA senator sues Obamacare exchange for causing policy cancellations of 1M
  93. Failure of Maryland Obamacare exchange could mean higher premiums in North Dakota
  94. Video: Watch Creepy Uncle Sam make it rain
  95. Five bright spots surrounding the Obamacare exchange failures
  96. Obamacare architect admitted in 2012 states without exchanges lose subsidies
  97. Architects of Richard Simmons Obamacare dance-off rehired in $156M PR campaign


M.D. Kittle is bureau chief of Wisconsin Watchdog and First Amendment Reporter for Watchdog.org. Kittle is a 25-year veteran of print, broadcast and online media. He is the recipient of several awards for journalism excellence from The Associated Press, Inland Press, the Wisconsin Broadcasters Association, and others. He is also a member of Investigative Reporters & Editors. Kittle's extensive series on Wisconsin's unconstitutional John Doe investigations was the basis of a 2014 documentary on Glenn Beck's TheBlaze. His work has been featured in Town Hall, Fox News, NewsMax, and other national publications, and his reporting has been cited by news outlets nationwide. Kittle is a fill-in talk show host on the Jay Weber Show and the Vicki McKenna Show in Milwaukee and Madison.

  • conradshull

    Don’t take this as an endorsement of the ACA, but excuse me Senator, the US Government and Congress are not the same thing. By-in-large most US Government agencies are significantly more competent than Congress – for a simple reason: everything is significantly more competent than Congress.

  • tony

    If anyone needs to keep their eyes open it’s Sen. Johnson and his ilk!

  • Coupon Master

    Its not running the healthcare.. its running insurance reform..big difference that makes a big lie…

  • Mary Nash Ferry

    There screwing with people lives … They really don’t care about real people it all in what I get. There not going to be using obamacare not good enough for there family . But what about caring about the rest of the people !

  • csuspargood

    I can hardly wait to vote this clown out of office. Ask him about his stance on global warming!! You’ll see how obtuse he is.

  • csuspargood


  • greeneggs

    Hey senator,,HOGWASH!!

  • Linda Nissen

    Dysfunction starting with the GOP and the one shouting his garbage out!

  • SixSixSix

    Oh God, I love it. So raw. So bare. So farcical. The Repub have sabotaged the US government. They have shut it down. Now just like Bin Landen they claim every time you damage it, that proves it is no good. Don’t take the word of political terrorists about their own handiwork unless you are as drunk as they are on abuse of power. Kick these creeps out! As for Bin Landen, Obama already took care of that one.

  • SixSixSix

    Damn site more competent than Republican political terrorists. That’s for sure.

  • SixSixSix

    Yuwho, editors: Harry Reid, D-Nev is Senate MAJORITY leader. Small detail to get wrong at this critical time, huh?

  • Jocelyn Long

    You all are a bunch of idiots and your spelling and grammar prove it. Go drink some kool aid and maybe try to educate yourselves.

  • Doctor-x

    Terrorists – hardly.

    If the law is so good, why has the big “O” given out so many

    Why did the big “O” delay the employer mandate?

    Why isn’t the big “O” the first one in the pool?

    And what pray tell is so affordable about this law?

    Why didn’t the Dems just write a policy for the uninsured

    Tweak the insurance companies for the pre-existing
    conditions and the few other items that people wanted?

    Why didn’t they do anything for tort reform and fraud?

    Because the end goal is to take over your healthcare and
    then they can control you.

    Oh, not right away, but it’s coming, Smoking bans, sodium
    bans, sugar bans, fatty food, forced exercise.

    And “If you don’t do what we say, you don’t get your

    Similar to the mayor of NY … He was just testing the water.

    The founders didn’t include healthcare in our rights … And healthcare
    is not a right.

    Healthcare is a good and or service provided by licensed,
    trained professionals.

    Simple economics 101.

  • SixSixSix

    First, it should have been single payer. Second, if not full single payer, it should have had a public option. Third, administrative decisions including timing are part of the law. It is call administration which is done by the Executive. Obama is paid likely another executive to make decisions. End of story.

    The Congress and its aids are uniquely singled out by the ACA. They are the only employment group specifically cut off from their prior employer coverage. You weren’t, I wasn’t but they were.

    Congress and its aids have to go to the exchanges. The ACA never prohibited employers, including the US Federal government, from subsidizing insurance purchases. What the Repukes proposed cynically denied their own staff any assistance whatsoever, making them uniquely punished. It also means the Congress is uniquely exempt from the Employer Mandate. Only with the cynical measure does Congress get totally special teatment. It so cynical that the millionaires in Congress who self insure would not be harmed but their staff who work for a living would be severely hurt. More proof how much Repuke politicians hate the very idea of the working person. Not happy until wage slavery returns to the real slavery. The Confederacy shall rise again! This is its first breath. The Union’s government is down!

  • Cheryl Roberts

    OK – LETS HAVE SOME SOURCES OF YOUR ARGUMENT. the government is NOT taking over healthcare in any respesct. i have a copy of the law in my office – have your even read the damn thing????????? the exchanges are set up by the governments but the players are blue cross, aetna, all the companies you usually see. YOU YOU YOU go to the exchange and YOU pick the policies YOU want to cojmpare and YOU make that selection, if YOU want. if YOU chose NOT to participate, YOU pay a small penalty. $95 the first year. and what power does the mighty IRS have to collect that – NOT NOT NOT the powers it usually has but ONLY the ability to deduct ONLY the penalty amount from any refund you may get. IF you dont get a refund, they DONT get the penalty moneyl. NO LIENS< ETC. the IRS gets NO health info on people. either your employer, the exchange or the insurance company gives you a certificate that you file – they will never never never get access to your health info. so WHERE THE HELL IS THE GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER????????????.. and by the way YOU YOU YOU YOU get to choose providers – there is no mandate about providers at all.

  • Cheryl Roberts

    for heavens sake especially if you claim to be a Christian, stop spreading the lies and get an education about the bill. LEARN what it says and does. spreading lies is the same as originating them in my BIble. This is a law that allows persons to buy their own insurance. And do things like make sure preventative care is at NO COST so that women can get a cervical cancer screen and mammogram at no cost. and children can get their immunizations at NO COST. and did you know my dears that part of the law gives you the entire compliance history of providers at your fingertips along with patient survey results. that is VERY handy if yoiu need to shop care facilities for a relative. just go to http://www.healthcare.gov and look for the ability to compare providers.

  • Perry

    How many pages is the bill now? I need to read it.

  • Cheryl Roberts

    ummm it is huge – nothing has changed in that regard. go to http://www.healthcare.gov and you can get wonderful summaries and discussions.

  • Bill w

    Stop the shut down the affordable care act has been voted on get over it you have better things to do with your time

  • Larry Walther

    What? Like most of the communists posting here, your English is so atrocious as to be unintelligible.

  • Larry Walther

    You have no idea what “single payer” is. Take a third-grade level remedial history course (and English, too). In the meantime, remember, six-six-six it really is better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open your big mouth and remove all doubt.

  • SixSixSix

    I grew up when the first single payer system was introduced in Saskatchewan, The national medicare scheme replaced it several years later. I remember great noise that disappeared within weeks of it going into effect. I have also worked on data processing systems that support it. Single payer is MUCH easier to implement. I have also worked as Chief Architect for the 2nd largest Health Insurer in the US.

    No Canadian politician would try to remove it now; it would be more devastating than an American politician trying shut down the Pentagon, which after all does not much effect most people’s daily lives so Tea Pots would deem it “unessential” by that standard. I remember being amazed that the Kennedy-Johnson version was so wimpy being limited to over 65. Most naturally assumed it would become universal. So troll, you lose, splash into the gorge for you.

  • kathy hummel

    i’m ashamed of the person in the oval office. but i definitely think he has no business with this healthcare- there are organizations out there better equipped to figure this out at lower prices. i was told by my health insurance where i had to go friday for a cat scan. they place they sent me was a business partner of theres’, and they told me it was more cost effective to go there than the hospital . i had been to the hospital the last time for the same test- it cost $ 99.00 for the cat scan. when i asked how much it was at this facility that was with the insurance, i thought it would be the same or cheaper- the cost was $ 400.00 for the same test. obamacare in a nutshell-supposed to be cheaper , but 4 x the cost.

  • aclay777

    Oh, you mean the Democrats, the government is funded, just not the illegal ACA. It’s being implemented just as Justice Roberts says it can’t be. It was ruled on as a tax, that means it Returns to the House, since House Republicans has sided with democrats they can’t easily get rid of it, Politics over the people is whats going on here. The Government was funded, the democrats refused the money, (which would be 7 trillion under Obama) THAT’S A FACT,” SO it’s the democrats that is the terrorist, even giving illegal guns to the Mexican cartel (proven) and the Syrian rebels (proven) so, watch the typo’s, we have enough lies flying around as it is.

  • aclay777

    What a narrow twisted bunch of crap. the same has happened to millions of Americans, Kentucky had 30 Insurance companies, they vacated, now 3, and one doesn’t cover out of state. So this crazy story you tell has happened to millions of Americans and I get less coverage for 187% more cost, that’s what’s going on, not this Amoeba has an itch that has an itch that has a spot that needs to be scratched, as the Republicans being at fault, but they got exempted, we got worse, our insurance companies, through an obvious agreement with Democrats left the state, now why can’t I be exempted and buy across state lines, better yet, KEEP MY COVERAGE. I CAN KEEP MY DOCTOR BUT THE DEDUCTIBLE IS SO HIGH, I’LL ALWAYS HAVE TO PAY CASH AND BUY THE POLICY. You mother goose story has her in menopause.

  • aclay777

    Amen, my friend.

  • aclay777

    And I know Canadians that have moved here for the healthcare, now we have something we don’t want and cost more. I don’t want more government, never voted for it and we should have a choice. Your analogy is that it was bad and got better in Canada, is what we would relate as “we’re in manure up to our eyeballs and now down around our neck, aren’t we lucky” The way this was implemented was a back door conspiracy we, in this country tend to try to control our politicians, so the few nullified that, and we’re fighting now to get back the choice taken from us that we legally had.

  • aclay777

    I’m seeing the same thing, it’s a hackers nightmare, during this time, they are going to screw us as much as possible with the governments, excuse me, the politicians blessing.

  • aclay777

    No, they government is fully funded, Obamacare is implement illegally and wasn’t funded, it’s the law of the land, but specifically stated without the mandate, well they have done what is illegal, The House Republicans are doing whats legal, the democrats are not accepting the money for the legal portion and want to include illegal funding as well, read the United States Court Opinion and you’ll see we’re not funding the unconstitutional implementation, like it or not, this is the House’s sole duty for years and years, yet extortion for more money, another 1.1 trillion making 7 trillion under Obama (now nearly doubling what it took 227 years to accumulate. The mandate is illegal, my insurance went up, they’re are speeches, but the actions of Government are the opposite, clearly publishing is ‘MAKE IT HURT” (SAID BY OMAMA ADMINISTRATION) AND THEY ARE. “ILLEGALLY”

  • aclay777

    Just under 11,000, and it’s been added to since the Supreme Court Ruling, like they can, without a warrant, enter your home, and take from your bank account. That hasn’t been in Court yet, Oh, yeah, penalize you fro not buying insurance, that’s exactly the part that was struck down by John Roberts, but they’re doing it. It’s just been illegally amended via executive order, it has to be passed by the House, but the House, instead of pulling out the big Guns, legal action, the House is willing to negotiate, but Democrats, in true form, flout the law and play politics.

  • aclay777

    Get your facts right, IT’S NOT BEEN PASSED AS A TAX YET, IT FAILED UNDER THE OTHER TWO CLAUSES, so it’s not funded, everything else is FUNDED EVERYTHING THAT IS LEGAL IS FUNDED, SINCE SO MANY WANT WHAT DEMOCRATS WANT, THE REPUBLICANS HAVE TO BE WRONG, LIKE IT OR NOT ALL THIS FINGER POINT AND LYING IS JUST PLAIN WRONG. The Democrats refuse the money, they implemented the law precisely as John Roberts say you can’t. Money to fund Government is there, it’s being stopped by the Democrat terrorist, the same ones (undisputed and your top lawyer lied to congress) “gave guns” to the Mexican cartel, proven and admitted) gave guns to the Syria rebels (proven) hiding witnesses from Benghazi (proven and admitted) So ,you lament you passions behind those with -0- credibility Read the Supreme Court Opinion. States Don’t have to accept this, here is the exact portion of the opinion, and South Carolina has made it a crime to force this as it is, your facts and opinion, what end is this stuff coming out of? not from any facts that exist in law, or real time.

    Summary of Supreme Court Affordable Care Act Opinion

    June 28, 2012


    In a 5-4 decision
    issued today and authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the United
    States Supreme Court has upheld the Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s
    individual mandate — the requirement that most individuals obtain health
    insurance that meets the statutory definition of minimum essential
    coverage. The four traditionally liberal justices — Ginsburg, Breyer,
    Sotomayor, and Kagan — joined Chief Justice Roberts to uphold the
    mandate as a constitutional application of Congress’s taxing authority.
    Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito dissented.

    In reaching this outcome, however, a majority of the Court’s justices —
    the dissenters as well as Chief Justice Roberts — expressly rejected the
    argument that Congress was authorized to enact the individual mandate
    under either the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause of
    the Constitution.

    The Court also issued a fractured opinion on Congress’s authority to
    expand Medicaid to a larger portion of the population (and on Congress’s
    related authority to penalize states that did not wish to participate
    in the expansion). While the Court upheld the authority of Congress to
    expand the Medicaid program to states that wanted to participate, the
    Court also held that Congress could not withhold existing Medicaid funds
    from states in an effort to penalize those states’s refusal to
    participate in the expansion.

    Chief Justice Roberts rejected the constitutionality of the mandate
    under the Necessary and Proper Clause, ruling that even if the
    individual mandate is “necessary” to the Act’s insurance reforms, “such
    an expansion of federal power is not a ‘proper’ means for making those
    reforms effective.”


    Chief Justice Roberts agreed that the mandate was a permissible exercise
    of Congress’s taxing authority, and joined with the four traditionally
    liberal justices to provide five votes for upholding the mandate. Noting
    that the Court does not consider whether a given statute embodies sound
    policies, but rather “whether Congress has the power under the
    Constitution to enact the challenged provisions,” Chief Justice Roberts,
    writing for the majority, held that the ACA “merely imposes a tax
    [that] citizens may lawfully choose to pay in lieu of buying health


    [o]ur precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the
    exaction in §5000A under the taxing power, and that §5000A need not be
    read to do more than impose a tax. That is sufficient to sustain it.”


    The Court’s holding —pieced together from three separate opinions — is
    that while Congress is allowed to expand Medicaid, states that do not
    wish to participate cannot be penalized for this decision by having
    their existing Medicaid funds withheld.

    The first opinion, by three justices (Chief Justice Roberts, and
    Justices Breyer and Kagan) held that the Medicaid expansion was
    constitutional as to states that wanted to accept the additional funds, but that the provision allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to withhold all Medicaid funding (existing as well as prospective) from states that refused to accept the expansion funds amounted to unconstitutional coercion.

    The Court’s holding —pieced together from three separate opinions — is
    that while Congress is allowed to expand Medicaid, states that do not
    wish to participate cannot be penalized for this decision by having
    their existing Medicaid funds withheld.

    The first opinion, by three justices (Chief Justice Roberts, and
    Justices Breyer and Kagan) held that the Medicaid expansion was
    constitutional as to states that wanted to accept the additional funds, but that the provision allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to withhold all Medicaid funding (existing as well as prospective) from states that refused to accept the expansion funds amounted to unconstitutional coercion.

  • SixSixSix

    Grow up and get over it.

  • SixSixSix

    The existing system was a disaster. The most expensive one in the world, heading towards consuming so much of the economy nothing would be left, excluding the most people in the Western world. Nothing could have been more open and discussed than replacing it. As it was the change is still the least possible leaving many of the undesirable aspects in place. The insurance companies are still standing and growing ever bigger. But your side lost. It lost in the democratic process. Oh and here is the part that will really burn you – it is going to work while you and the Fox have the taste of sour grapes in your mouth for years to come.

  • SixSixSix

    You live in a Red State. Insurance is regulated at the State level. Ask your Republican government. All the ACA does is make it more available to purchase while honoring State regulation of insurance. Hell, why not insurance from China for that matter? Why not let the Mafai sell it and get the government out of our business?

    As for State lines, I repeat it is a regulated at the State level. Take it up with the Kentucky Republicans why they don’t allow that if they love the idea so much. I am surprised to see you against State rights but frankly you know cross State border insurance would sink to the lowest level of 50 states and they would stop selling from the other 49. Fortunately for you, that very likely might be Kentucky. Congratulations on your Red State sense of social responsibility.

  • SixSixSix

    I think if there procedure had been wrong the Supremes might just have notice as the life time Conservative lackies did slather at the mouth and try to deny it. But they did not try that. Just not enough lackies this time around. They are much better at throwing Presidential elections.

  • aclay777

    Write paragraph after paragraph but 2 things, it went up to Scotus under the Commerce and proper clause and was deemed unconstitutional, it was decided as a tax, which must originate in the house, the people elected people to the house as a majority and they haven’t yet begun to fight and end it on that basis, but they can refuse funds and they did, Your presumption that I’m a Fox follower is wrong like everything “everything else you write. We don’t want it, money is there and the shut down is owned 100% by the Democrats. It’s a tax, and it originated in the Senate, funding is in the Provence of the House and they have acted legally and in the majority of the people, which you’re not.

  • aclay777

    I like South Carolina, they have deemed the exchanges illegal and those who push it it will be deemed a crime, Since SCOTUS deemed they can’t withhold medicare as it being unconstitutional, they now have right of action against a number of insurance companies for being in business and vacating South Carolina without reasonable cause. It’s pretty simple, I’d bet the lawsuit gets dismissed as they will return and have to offer coverage instead of admit they leveraged as to ACA. I’m betting with Trey Doughty in Congress too, South Carolina is going to expose a lot if this goes forward, they haven’t had any new federal Court appointee’s either so, we’ll see this week in South Carolina.

  • aclay777

    Nice try at avoidance, back to the issue, SCOTUS, it’s a tax, in the Provence of the House, the house, because of Obama care voted in a majority to get rid of Obama care, all this saber rattleing is pissed off minority wanting what’s not being given them, the true will of the people are behind the House and not the Senate, AND THOSE ARE THE FACTS. THE MONEY NOT TO SHUT DOWN IS SITTING THERE, REFUSED BY THE SENATE AND OBAMA, THIS SHUT DOWN IS OWNED BY THE DEMOCRATS, IT THE MEDIA HYPER-BOIL THAT IS BEING DISMANTLED AS WE SPEAK.

  • aclay777

    Reform, that’s what it didn’t need from this government, and what we have now is so bad there isn’t a word for it. But Reform in area’s like pre-existing, that was the basis and the indigent, that too. We have always taken care of the poor, this has nothing to do with that, it’s pure politics and money. The Big insurance, pay double or more, for bad coverage, or pay the government a tax, what a conspiracy of obvious sorts. and this started as “reform” government needs to be way away from our healthcare, the only socialized medicine that seems to work well is in Costa Rica.

  • aclay777

    Once proven wrong you revert to avoidance, I’d admit you’re better than most (no low mentality name calling, I respect that) but the better Democrats as yourself, true Democratizing of every good point, avoidance, sidestepping the truth, since the truth has always been democrats worst enemy . Obamacare, the tax, hasn’t been passed yet, and not yet funded, to give the American people a say so in it. Great idea, why don’t you call 1-800-whine lol. no insult intended.

  • aclay777

    No, it hasn’t, it was changed and not yet taken up, usually a financial statute hasn’t been deemed unconstitutional since 1937, and apparently they don’t want to bring out the big guns. It was initiated in the Senate under the Commerce clause and deemed unconstitutional by SCOTUS, but was deemed constitutional as a tax. so, then it can only be funded by the House, who sees every year a 1.1 trillion Debt ceiling as unacceptable, and it should be, what about next year and the next year. The shut down doesn’t have to be, the democrats has all the money in needs, this minute, and last Tuesday, nobody had to be furloughed, it’s 100% of the democrats making. The Senate tried to bypass the House calling it something else “Commerce” it failed, but they can tax you if you don’t buy it, but passing and funding, now that it’s a tax, is in the sole Provence of the house. THE BIG DECEPTION IS “IT’S THE LAW OF THE LAND ” (true, very true) BUT, IT’S A TAX, SO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HAS SOLE AUTHORITY OVER TAXES. THEY VOTED OUT THOSE WHO WANTED IT AND NOW THE MAJORITY DON’T WANT IT, IT’S ALL LEGAL, BUT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE A TWO TIERED ATTACK, WHINE AND LIE AND REFUSE ALL THE MONEY FOR THE ALL AMERICA TO RUN, BUT INSTEAD THEY HOLD A GUN TO THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLES HEAD AND THEY SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. THE FUNDS ARE THERE, THE DIRTY LYING POLITICS ARE AT WORK HERE.

  • SixSixSix

    Yada, yada, yada.

  • aclay777

    FOR HAVENS SAKE you stop lying if you claim to be a Christian. It’s nice that the poor will have a policy that does all those great and wonderful things for being an indigent some intentionally indigent. All 11 million of them. But now this acts has a weakness, those that make too much, but not enough, can’t have this same care that the indigent get to have, the “Great lie” being avoided, it appears the uninsured now because of working and not making enough will have 24 Million to 35 Million who could pay before “uninsured” but have to pay the tax and their children will be denied these wonderful things, SO, UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON “If you’re a Christian, for havens sake.” some of us know and obviously you don’t for havens sake read something objective, or give the indigent your money to buy insurance so we can buy ours.

  • SixSixSix

    Blather on my Confederate friend.

  • SixSixSix

    Doubtless South Carolina will also be the first to reopen the slave market they were the last close. Thank you for Colbert, please keep the rest.

  • SixSixSix

    Play games. We will all ignore you. Not even the Tea Pot Confederates terrorizing the shut down the Union government and about to blow up its economy have tried that line of nonsense.

  • aclay777

    avoidance, nice

  • aclay777

    you read all 11,000 pages, you must have forgot what it says in part,

  • aclay777

    Can I go to my insurance agent, that it’s his job, and see that me and my daughter can’t afford the coverage we once had, in fact, that policy don’t exist any longer. it’s a giant hungry monster that will take from your life to in the near future.

  • SixSixSix

    Repeated Hitlerite Big Lie propaganda does not merit anything more than contempt. You are done. Over and out.

  • aclay777

    Leukemia patient loses his insurance coverage because of Obamacare regulations

  • SixSixSix

    Daily does from BS Mountain. “That’s about to change because Michael just got a letter from his insurance carrier saying as of January 1, he would be dropped from coverage because of new regulations under Obamacare.” No details supplied. Pre-existing conditions are mandatory to cover. Can you spell n-o-n-s-e-n-s-e? If you spelled B-I-G R-e-p-u-k-e L-I-E you used the technical term, so that is acceptable too.

    The ACA does not have terms demanding insurance be dropped. But you know what – he now can get better competitive insurance on the exchanges because pre-existing conditions are covered! No life time caps either. Thank you for this fine piece of work promoting the true advantage of the ACA even when fabricating falsehoods.

  • SixSixSix

    Check the history, it originated as part of a house bill. Geez you people are so gullible to the noise in your bubble.

  • aclay777

    No, it did not.

  • aclay777

    Thanks, I’ll forward this to my insurance carrier and all of what I have received has to be untrue, because you don’t want it to be. Thanks for ending my Financial woows, your a God sent, I’ll forward your Ruling right along, should I address this from you, GOD?

  • SixSixSix

    Yes, thank you. I seriously doubt you are the mysterious Michael Cerpok. What makes it hilarious is you referr to “your insurance carrier”. You are free little man, there is open competition and they can’t stop you. I know real freedom is scary and big lies easier to hide behind, but you can do it. Try freedom, you might like it. Otherwise you can go back to asylum for your daily dose. (Oh Lord, do they have the slightest idea what a self mocking name that is?)

  • aclay777

    Again you’re the great one,. The entire news network says the choices are less than before, since you can’t get on the exchange, So, I should spend “how much” of my time looking for something that don’t “yet” exist to satisfy your merit-less position, reality sets in and what you asked “for me to do” at your continued direction is the continued exercise in futility, no thanks, debating with someone like you turns to a battle of wits, for which you clearly arrived unarmed

  • aclay777

    Posted on 6 October, 2013 by Amy
    via NRO

    Of all the fraud perpetrated in the passage of Obamacare — and the
    fraud has been epic — the lowest is President Obama’s latest talking
    point that the Supreme Court has endorsed socialized medicine as
    constitutional. To the contrary, the justices held the “Affordable” Care
    Act unconstitutional as Obama presented it to the American people:
    namely, as a legitimate exercise of Congress’s power to regulate
    interstate commerce.

    To sustain this monstrosity, Chief Justice John Roberts had to shed
    his robes and put on his legislator cap. He rewrote Obamacare as a tax —
    the thing the president most indignantly promised Americans that
    Obamacare was not. And it is here that our recent debate over the
    Constitution’s Origination Clause — the debate in which Matt Franck,
    Ramesh Ponnuru, Mark Steyn, and yours truly have probed the historical
    boundaries of the “power of the purse” reposed by the Framers in the
    House of Representatives — descends from the airy realm of abstraction
    and homes in on a concrete violation of law.

    It is not just that the intensely unpopular Obamacare was
    unconstitutional as fraudulently portrayed by the president and
    congressional Democrats who strong-armed and pot-sweetened its way to
    passage. It is that Obamacare is unconstitutional as rewritten by
    Roberts. It is a violation of the Origination Clause — not only as I
    have expansively construed it, but even under Matt’s narrow
    interpretation of the Clause.

    It is worth pausing here briefly to rehearse an argument often made
    in these pages before the Supreme Court ruling two summers ago. The
    justices’ resolution, whatever it was to be, would in no way be an
    endorsement of Obamacare; it would merely reflect the fact that our
    Constitution, designed for a free people, permits all manner of
    foolishness. “Constitutional” does not necessarily mean “good.” What
    Obamacare always needed was a political reversal in Congress. Thus, it
    was unwise for Republicans to become passive while hoping the justices
    would do their heavy lifting for them — both because it was unlikely
    that this Supreme Court would invalidate Obamacare and because a ruling
    upholding it would inevitably be used by the most demagogic
    administration in history as a judicial stamp of approval for socialized

  • aclay777
  • SixSixSix

    Please do not paste your spam after my posting. I am not responsible for the raving of idiots.

  • SixSixSix

    Washington State is working just fine. Since your quote Faux News, obviously you haven’t tried yourself. Apparently freedom of choice scares you. If anybody needs socialized medicine it would be timid people afraid of helping themselves. The insult contest I will ignore and leave you to demean yourself.

  • aclay777

    I didn’t quote Fox News, and I’m not a Republican, two things you need to cut and paste from someone that can almost spell’s comments; obviously not your own. I just posted the Supreme Courts Ruling which you, like Obama, slandered. At some point say is law of the land, but makes Obamacare unconstitutional, that even Harry Reid said so way back then before it was deemed a tax by SCOTUS, Again you arrived to do a battle of wits and again arrived unarmed, cut and pasting someone else post not relating to anything I posted is just brain dead. True Democrat dumb as sh*t

  • SixSixSix

    Crank your insult machine to full, look in the mirror and see yourself. Bye Troll.

  • Cheryl Roberts