Congrats - You Get to Keep Your Bad Apple Policies

had the law been in effect, I'd agree he bypassed congress and changed the law without the proper protocol, under his own authority, but that's not the case now, or when he delayed the law the first time ... "in effect" .. the key words, and Jan is the date the law is in effect ... said date IS THE LAW. Originally Posted by CJ7

Yes, the January date IS the law. So, how does Obama get to push it back a year?

The ACA law says the certain provisions go into effect in January 2014.

So what is Obama's legal authority for saying "Nope, we will do it in January 2015 instead"?

if it went into effect the moment it was signed, regarding mandatory insurance for all, why the timeframe of this Jan ? Originally Posted by CJ7

The effective date of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Pub.L. 111–148, 124 Stat. 119,) is March 23, 2010.

It has been the law of the land since then.

Some provisions have already taken effect. Most major provisions are phased in by January 2014. Others are phased in by January 2020:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient...dable_Care_Act

The dates are part of the law. Unless there is a provision built into the law that permits the President to delay those dates, he can't.

Is there such a provision?

Yes, the January date IS the law. So, how does Obama get to push it back a year?

The ACA law says the certain provisions go into effect in January 2014.

So what is Obama's legal authority for saying "Nope, we will do it in January 2015 instead"? Originally Posted by ExNYer

yup, certain provisions are in effect... same argument as before, that argument withered on the vine in two days ... if I remember correctly the answer was" because he signed the law, and he is the President, its his law to change before it takes effect"

I'll give the rage two days to vanish again.

...if I remember correctly the answer was" because he signed the law, and he is the President, its his law to change before it takes effect" Originally Posted by CJ7

WHAT?

It's "his" law to change?

The last time I checked, Congress passed the law. So it belongs to the USA, not to one individual.

And the Constitution requires the chief executive to EXECUTE the laws of the land, not execute what he thinks he should execute.

WHAT?

It's "his" law to change?

The last time I checked, Congress passed the law. So it belongs to the USA, not to one individual.

And the Constitution requires the chief executive to EXECUTE the laws of the land, not execute what he thinks he should execute. Originally Posted by ExNYer

he signed the law... aka his law, he owns it.

if he broke the law today, what happened to the first time he delayed the law?

he signed the law... aka his law, he owns it.

if he broke the law today, what happened to the first time he delayed the law? Originally Posted by CJ7

When was the first time he delayed it?

And he doesn't technically break it until he fails to enforce it in January 2014.

About the only thing he can get away with is not assessing penalties for companies or individuals who are not complying with the law. And that's only because the government isn't set up to operate the exchanges (defense of impossibility).

Let the yahoos keep their useless insurance plan.

When was the first time he delayed it?

And he doesn't technically break it until he fails to enforce it in January 2014.

About the only thing he can get away with is not assessing penalties for companies or individuals who are not complying with the law. And that's only because the government isn't set up to operate the exchanges (defense of impossibility). Originally Posted by ExNYer

when he delayed the business requirements ... now its the personal requirements

( 1st time) the law was delayed



A one-year delay in requiring firms with over 50 workers to provide insurance
Scrapping a long-term care insurance program (for nursing home care, for example) called the CLASS Act
Lifting the requirement on businesses to file a form called a 1099 for a variety of business expenses

I read an article from the WSJ saying the POTUS didn't change the law, he changed the enforcement date ...

soooooooo, take it any way you want to

The insurance companies CAN'T let the people keep their insurance policies, and Obama knows this. It was a cred fix, that's all.

The insurance companies priced their plans for '14 based on these people losing their plans and the young policy holders going through the exchanges and paying more to compensate for the sick that that they knew would sign up. Call them substandard if you want, but the fact is that these plans only existed because they did not have to pay for the high risk candidates and all the coverage the sick need and the healthy did not. The majority will still lose their plans, as planned.

I'm guessing the Senators, although not that bright, will still move once somebody explains they are still going to lose in '14 if they don't do something real to fix the problem.

I'm guessing the Senators, although not that bright, will still move once somebody explains they are still going to lose in '14 if they don't do something real to fix the problem. Originally Posted by nwarounder

The probably can't "fix the problemS" .... it's like trying to FIX a blow out ...

.. that damn thing is in shreds.

The probably can't "fix the problemS" .... it's like trying to FIX a blow out ...

.. that damn thing is in shreds. Originally Posted by LexusLover

HAHA, true. I should have said "fix their problem". They have to do something before the '14 elections or they are toast. Not only are you going to see the few that kept their insurance for a year, losing it again, but they are also going to have to face the millions losing their insurance from their employers. It doesn't seem that the "you had shitty insurance anyway" strategy is working out so well.

LLidiot... What are your parents gonna do? Do you get a discount on a family plan if parents and children are all over 70?

LMAO @ LLLyingIdiot!

But what is his legal authority for doing even that?

This exact point was made by Howard Dean of all people earlier today. Obama may have promised to implement a bunch of fixes that he cannot legally do unless Congress approves.

The ACA is a law, not a suggestion. Originally Posted by ExNYer

had the law been in effect, I'd agree he bypassed congress and changed the law without the proper protocol, under his own authority, but that's not the case now, or when he delayed the law the first time ... "in effect" .. the key words, and Jan is the date the law is in effect ... said date IS THE LAW. Originally Posted by CJ7

Not sure either of you are correct. The way I interpret it is there is no change in the law and there is no delay in the law. The administrative policy says that the insurance policies will not be considered "out of compliance" by his administration. Meaning, the law will stay the same and there is no delay in when the law will go into effect, only that they will not be prosecuting insurance companies for ignoring the law and for selling the same policies they once did. A free pass if they choose.

I don't see this as any different from not enforcing immigration, the CSA, or any other law, or part of any law, that a president chooses not to prosecute.

Donktards made a deal with the devil... Time to pay up.

Not sure either of you are correct. The way I interpret it is there is no change in the law and there is no delay in the law. The administrative policy says that the insurance policies will not be considered "out of compliance" by his administration. Meaning, the law will stay the same and there is no delay in when the law will go into effect, only that they will not be prosecuting insurance companies for ignoring the law and for selling the same policies they once did. A free pass if they choose.

I don't see this as any different from not enforcing immigration, the CSA, or any other law, or part of any law, that a president chooses not to prosecute. Originally Posted by nwarounder

he changed the enforcement date ...