• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

POLL: Do you think the Affordable Care Act will be repealed within next 4 years?

ACA over next four years?

  • No vote, or no options below are acceptable to me

  • ACA destroyed or reduced so much it's effectively dead over next four years

  • ACA substantially curtailed over next four years

  • ACA essentially unchanged over next four years

  • ACA substantially expanded (more legislation) over next four years

  • ACA hugely expanded (more legislation) over next four years


Results are only viewable after voting.

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
2
0
Personally, I think there's essentially no chance of it. If Obama wins election, it's not going anywhere. I also am not a complete idiot to believe that Romney, who championed a similar approach in his home state, will ever get the votes needed to repeal.

I'm reserving the idea that after 4 years something else could come to take its place; either it's such a catastrophe it does get resolved, or perhaps some superior universal care approach comes in. But for the next four years we're living with it.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Personally, I think there's essentially no chance of it. If Obama wins election, it's not going anywhere. I also am not a complete idiot to believe that Romney, who championed a similar approach in his home state, will ever get the votes needed to repeal.

I'm reserving the idea that after 4 years something else could come to take its place; either it's such a catastrophe it does get resolved, or perhaps some superior universal care approach comes in. But for the next four years we're living with it.
If republicans gain control. I see a strong chance of it getting repealed.


If it does not get get repealed within 4 years, I see zero chance of it getting fixed. It will just exploded into another goverment money pit, like SS & medicare.

Dems will keep saying we need to spend more money (because thats all the know), and will keep telling you how the evil republicans are for trying to kill you by cutting back on the program.

The end of the program will be when USA debts become unmanagble.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
We're stuck with it and the principle of the "punishment tax". It's what the people deserve.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,145
9
81
Hell no.

IF say for some slim chance Romney gets in (won't happen) He will change his mind once the donations from health insurance company's flow in and the jobs for his friends/family start.

we are stuck with this pile of turd. I think we need UHC but not sure this is the plan we should use.

though maybe this will be a good starting point and we can actually make it something more then a way to line the pockets of insurance company's
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
What the government enacts is talked about, attacked by its opponents, praised and defended by its supporters, but at the end of the day it is, ultimately, not repealed or even significantly altered.. by either party.

Why?

Neither party is for a smaller, less expensive government.
 

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
9,658
1,602
126
I don't know... Lots of tea bagger loonies getting voted into congress every cycle.
If they passed a repeal, and it hit Romney's desk, yes he would sign it.
And that is where any reform, good or bad, would end. Period.
The huge mistake is believing Romney, after elected, would nix on his promises.
When Sheldon Adelson and Karl Rove invest 1 billion into the Romney candidacy,
they expect payback. Think of it as owing the mob.
You either cooperate, or Mitt has a little visit from Vic the exterminator.

You should not be asking what Romney would do, might do, or could do.
You should be asking the real presidential candidate Sheldon Adelson that question.
 

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
9,658
1,602
126
PS... 1 billion dollars buys hell of a lot of puppet strings (don't you know?).
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,145
9
81
a better question is why would the goverment give up so much power? what does romney get for doing it?

He would already be president. for re-election? oh we might hear about it before his 2nd term.

I don't see ANYONE repealing it willingly. It gives up to much power.


Also they wouldn't want to piss off the Insurance industry. that's a lot of cash flowing in..
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,587
23,685
136
Even if Romney wins they could remove the individual mandate through reconciliation, but the rest of it they would have to use standard Senate procedures for and it seems highly likely that the Senate Democrats would filibuster such changes.

If they repeal the mandate though you still have the ban on pre-existing condition exclusion, etc, etc. Having one without the other will fundamentally screw up the whole system. Maybe they get rid of the 'mandate' part and replace it with something functionally similar that they can call 'not a mandate', but I would still count that as essentially unchanged.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
30,111
3,649
126
Unless the House uses reconciliation to obliterate this 'tax', then there will never be 60+ Senators required to repeal it. So long as the filibuster is in place no one can meet the requirement to exercise power, just look at Obama in early 2009. This country remains ungovernable.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
no... but I'd expect current and future Presidents to be generous with providing waivers to their respective corporate bases.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
I picked the last option. However, UHC will not come here as the U.S. gov will have collapsed by then. It's just going to be more and more bureaucrazy.

One thing to keep in mind is that those who profit from warfare state will not so easily give up their subsidies and the right will easily be able to show that the rich would not be the ones paying for UHC. The politicians would not want UHC because they know that if it screws up, then they won't have anyone to blame for it but themselves. Having profit-based corporations gives the politicans someone to blame when they don't do it right.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,992
96
91
I don't forsee any significant changes in the next four years. Many portions will take that long just to go into effect. If you expand the time window, I do think that we will see some significant changes in 10 years. We need to see the effects of the ACA in the real world before we go changing it.
 
Nov 29, 2006
14,737
2,584
126
It's not going anywhere. Both sides are for it, but only when it is their side proposing it. That is why the GOP is upset. Not because they dont like it, but because they didnt get it passed into law.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
I suspect it will be substantially changed. I believe most popular parts will be retained, but many others will changed or adapted. I think it is subjective whether that would be classified as "curtailed" or whatever, so I voted the 1st option.

Fern
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
638
126
Whether the bill has teeth, whether it has staying power or whether it's a starting point for something grand and good is immaterial because with every passing month I'm more convinced a global financial meltdown is unavoidable. Health care will be low on the list of priorities in the new economy coming our way. There will be nothing with which to fund it.

We're emulating a failed model from Europe. As it crumbles there, we adopt the same policies that have brought them down. UHC is but a piece of that puzzle. Repealing it won't save us and neither will the status quo.

It may be fun to conjecture, but there is no relevance in any of it to our changing world. We have no leader with the balls to tell it like it is.
 

dagamer34

Platinum Member
Aug 15, 2005
2,591
0
71
Democrats: "Repeal it and replace it with what?"

That's why it will never get repealed. Also, there's a TON of stuff in there that all people would like, and it's going to be hard to explain away, especially after they kick in 2014.

1) Can't be denied for pre-existing conditions.
2) 85% of premiums have to be spent on healthcare.
3) Children stay on parents health insurance until they are 26.
4) No yearly or lifetime limits on health insurance.

and lots more stuff. Sure, it's easy to hide behind voodoo slogans about your healthcare changing, but if people start seeing those benefits, I find it hard that people will willingly let Congress take it away from them.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Democrats: "Repeal it and replace it with what?"

That's why it will never get repealed. Also, there's a TON of stuff in there that all people would like, and it's going to be hard to explain away, especially after they kick in 2014.

1) Can't be denied for pre-existing conditions.
2) 85% of premiums have to be spent on healthcare.
3) Children stay on parents health insurance until they are 26.
4) No yearly or lifetime limits on health insurance.

and lots more stuff. Sure, it's easy to hide behind voodoo slogans about your healthcare changing, but if people start seeing those benefits, I find it hard that people will willingly let Congress take it away from them.
I love the fact that only for insurance a 26yr old is considered a child
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
12,193
3,511
136
I love the fact that only for insurance a 26yr old is considered a child
I got a 22 yr old daughter getting her masters next year and already invited into the school's phd program. I love it too.;)

Poll: It seems to me what got settled on prior to its passage is what the ACA could ultimately be at that time, given the innumerable agendas that had to be satisfied. With Obama probably keeping his job/veto power and the probability that the Legislature tips slightly more in favor of the Repubs, it seems a safe bet at this time that the ACA is going to remain as is.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2004
11,429
20
81
If the Republicans gain control, they will be in a pickle. Do they repeal Obamacare and take ownership of the health care situation? Or do they allow it to stand so that they have something to campaign against?

If they repeal Obamacare, taking ownership of the health care problem, what will they offer up as a plan? Would they really offer anything that didn't amount to, "Don't get sick, and if you do get sick die quickly?"
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
Anyone who believes it will be altered in any real way or amount... by either party... has an undue faith in whichever party they support on this issue.

The Democrats won't alter it because they believe fully in the plan as-is.
The Republicans won't alter it because they would rather change their spin than change (re: take ownership of) the ACA and take responsibility for it.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
The insurance companies have proven how much power they wield in washington.

Now that the insurance companies have guaranteed profits, there is no change they will give up that income.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
I know this has been posted before, likely when the ACA first was passed, but here it is again...

No one likes to see how the sausage is made, but here's what you're getting a big bite of...

The inside of the sausage:

 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Whether the bill has teeth, whether it has staying power or whether it's a starting point for something grand and good is immaterial because with every passing month I'm more convinced a global financial meltdown is unavoidable. Health care will be low on the list of priorities in the new economy coming our way. There will be nothing with which to fund it.

We're emulating a failed model from Europe. As it crumbles there, we adopt the same policies that have brought them down. UHC is but a piece of that puzzle. Repealing it won't save us and neither will the status quo.

It may be fun to conjecture, but there is no relevance in any of it to our changing world. We have no leader with the balls to tell it like it is.
lol troll.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Once the government gets power it keeps it. Expect to be ruled like dogs and expect to have to work like a jackass to pay for this sucker.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY