HELP: to write unifying statement to Congress reps Sanders, Paul, Cruz and Pelosi on revising ACA

[emilynghiem]

Rand Paul calls for total repeal and immediate replacement of Obamacare - CNNPolitics.com

Bernie Sanders displays giant Trump tweet on Senate floor

Rand Paul warns Republicans not to repeal-and-delay Obamacare

Dear USMB:
Can I ask help to write a united statement to our Congress members about saving the benefits of ACA as a voluntary equal option, for citizens who believe in public health care through govt,
by changing the mandates so that people who believe in free market alternatives can invest taxes there.

Thus ALL citizens restore EQUAL choice to fund the programs consistent with our beliefs about health care and govt.

I believe the solution to ACA is to divide and offer two equal choices to the American public and taxpayers:
A. to shift the mandates and existing exchanges as a PUBLIC OPTION on one track, that citizens are FREE to support, but are mandated to follow the rules of these exchanges if they want to keep the insurance benefits.

The Democratic Party members and leaders who support this will be mandated to fund and finance the reforms, which I suggest by stopping the waste and freeloading by conflicts of interest with the prisons, mental health systems and pharmaceutical industries profiting off addiction, sickness and dependence instead of curing these.

So the people and leaders who BELIEVE in this system can continue to develop it with likeminded supporters,
and not interfere with those who BELIEVE in other means of reforming health care to be cost effective and sustainable.

B. for States to allow taxpayers the choice of funding either
1. right to health care programs tied to prison and mental health budget reforms,
(where people who would rather fund health care instead of executions and drug war costs
can fund this option in line with the liberal platforms modeled after Democratic and Green principles)
2. right to life policies and benefits tied to VA reform,
where people who would rather pay for Veteran help rather than welfare or prisons,
and who DON'T believe in paying for abortions, or problems from recreational drug use,
can BAN these and require OTHER conditions for health care coverage instead of insurance mandates.

Because people do NOT agree on
* health care policies and conditions
* terms for paying for welfare
* terms of marriage and social benefits

Can we write a SIMPLE statement demanding that Congress and States
DIVIDE THESE TRACKS BY POLITICAL BELIEFS
and allow Liberals and Conservatives EQUAL CHOICE of which track to fund and be under?

Thank you!

Why can't we HAVE BOTH, just like people CHOOSE which parties
to fund and represent values and principles in platforms. Why can't
THAT be used as the basis for dividing health care into public and private options?

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

Elections have consequences and RaTz can sit at the back of the bus. Barry said that. Guess what we're going to say to Barry and the RaTz?

 

[Moonglow]

Elections have consequences and RaTz can sit at the back of the bus. Barry said that. Guess what we're going to say to Barry and the RaTz?

You need foot powder?

 

[yiostheoy]

They don't need to change anything.

Schumer just needs to filibuster the GOP on this.

 

[emilynghiem]

Elections have consequences and RaTz can sit at the back of the bus. Barry said that. Guess what we're going to say to Barry and the RaTz?

ZZ PUPPS if DEMOCRATS forced this dependence between insurance and govt,
can DEMOCRATS be sued to cover the costs of preserving the existing programs that
the DEMOCRATS voted for in Congress?

Both Congress and the Supreme Court were split close to 50/50 on ACA.
Why can't the PEOPLE LEADERS and PARTIES who SUPPORT this
be required to pay to preserve if for THEIR members who BELIEVE in it?

We can NAME the people who pushed to impose this faith based policy through federal govt,
including
* Obama and Pelosi
* Congress members who voted YES (as opposed to those who voted NO
and deemed it unconstitutional and/or requiring a Constitutional amendment first
before expanding federal authority to this degree)
* Justice Roberts and SC Justices who voted YES (as opposed to the 4 voting NO)

And if Ted Cruz wants to accept responsibility for the 24 billion dollar federal shutdown,
then CRUZ and the Republicans voting NO instead of REPLACING the mandates
with a protective OPTION to preserve it by pushing it onto the parties who believe in it,
can be held to paying back taxpayers 12-24 billion of that and invest in preserving
health care for those wanting to keep and fund the plans through govt, but just make
it optional for those who believe in free choice in these matters.

Why can't we argue that both parties owe it to their members and to the public
to set up the programs THOSE people BELIEVE in, and give taxpayers a CHOICE,
while only the parts and plans that BOTH sides AGREE ON will be govt policy.

Where people and taxpayers DON'T AGREE, that is managed separately,
where taxpayers per state can direct their taxes to different programs that
respect equal beliefs, free choice, states rights and civil liberties of individuals.

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

No, the RatZ cannot be sued.

Congress was not split on ACA. Not a single Republican vote was obtained when it passed - in either house.

RaTz are free to set up any charity they wish to hand out free healthcare - using their OWN money, not tax revenue or deficit spending.

 

[emilynghiem]

No, the RatZ cannot be sued.

Congress was not split on ACA. Not a single Republican vote was obtained when it passed - in either house.

RaTz are free to set up any charity they wish to hand out free healthcare - using their OWN money, not tax revenue or deficit spending.

^ Dear @ZZ PUPPS
the votes in Congress WERE split
* half voting yes were DEMOCRATS
* the rest voting NO were Republicans
I heard of some Republicans crossing over, such as one whose constituents were all Democrats
so to represent the largely Democratic district, that Congress person was planning to vote YES
(but I was told all Republicans voted NO)

So YES we CAN ARGUE that this vote was BIASED BY BELIEFS.
And this violated First Amendment principles against govt
either establishing or prohibiting free exercise of beliefs.

SEE TDP Platform declaring this is political ***BELIEF***:
(that health care should be managed through govt to ensure equal access and protection to all people as a public institution) Texas Democratic Party - Healthcare

Texas Democrats believe health care is a right, not a privilege reserved for those able to pay for it.

Well, half the nation, whether Conservative Republicans Libertarians or others who believe in civil liberties or free choice don't believe that the ACA insurance mandates are Constitutional.

So why aren't both POLITICAL BELIEFS treated equally?
What happened to passing Amendments to AGREE to expand federal govt?

Forcing the mandates without representation of taxpayers affected
either violated Constitutional principles and process OR BELIEFS in Constitutional principles and process. That was what went wrong with this.

There is NOTHING wrong with setting up options where taxpayers have a choice
and voice in the policies and process. But this involves Constitutional beliefs, liberties
and free choice that requires DUE PROCESS or DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.
And that was NOT respected.

These ACA mandates were imposed without first establishing consent of taxpayers
to extend federal functions of govt to this degree. That requires Constitutional
amendments or process directly involving citizens since our liberties, income and labor
is affected.

Why don't you think the Democrats can't be SUED?
Didn't those leaders CONSPIRE to abuse federal authority
to VIOLATE EQUAL CIVIL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS OF CONSTITUTIONAL BELIEFS?

IF DEMOCRATS' beliefs in right to health care through govt can be enforced by federal govt, WHY WEREN'T THE EQUAL CONSTITUTIONAL BELIEFS EQUALLY ENFORCED
AND PROTECTED FOR THE TAXPAYERS WHO BELIEVE IN THOSE PRINCIPLES ***EQUALLY***???

This shows a DISCRIMINATORY bias that VIOLATED the beliefs of other citizens
and subjected us to tax penalties if we didn't comply with the beliefs forced through govt on us
without our consent, due process, or democratic process of reforming federal govt Constitutionally.

Shouldn't the RESPONSIBILITY PARTIES be required to pay the costs of correcting this breach?

Why CAN'T we demand a national class action lawsuit,
where the Singlepayer sue the DEMOCRATS to set up their OWN system they have ADVERTISED and PROMISED to constituents in exchange for donations and votes,
ie without corporate insurance as the middle man but make DEMOCRATS raise the money to develop these programs as promised (such as reforming the prison
system as also promised to party constituents); and those who believe in Free market and charity sue to RESTORE the religious freedom and right to build programs under THOSE beliefs. And demand reimbursement for ALL costs of ACA
1. the billions if not trillions paid to corporate insurance interests
2. the 24 billion est. cost of the federal shutdown
3. and sue BOTH parties to refund the costs to taxpayers of
unauthorized corporate profits by corruption and abuse (such as rampant
with the prison system and military contracts) and use THAT money to pay for health care instead of charging taxpayers for the costs of mismanagement.
Why can't we sue to set up a CREDIT system through the federal reserve
where money owed to taxpayers for past wrongs and abuses is credited
BACK, and those credits are used to fund the reform programs, instead of charging
us more and more for the costs of corruption and abuses passed to taxpayers!

 

[owebo]

Burn it publicly for all to behold...

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Congress was not split on ACA. Not a single Republican vote was obtained when it passed - in either house.

That statement is a staggeringly stupid contradiction. First you claim Congress was not split then follow on explaining how it was split along party lines!

 

[BluesLegend]

Democrats had to threaten and bribe their own Democrats to pass ACA FACT! Here's another, the moderate Democrats who voted for ACA got their asses thrown out of office in the 2010 election. There was a huge voter backlash, they did not want ACA and Dem's passed it in spite of clear voter opposition. Result, the Dem's lost a staggering 56 House seats.

It was worse in 2014, once voters learned Obama lied his ass off about ACA, that in fact you could not keep your doctor and plan, that you did not save $2,500 a year on health insurance, voters again screamed at Democrats. It got so bad Democrats yelled at Obama to go on tv and take the blame for his ACA lies to save them, which Obama did but to no avail. Voters again wiped out the Dem's in the 2014 election handing the Senate to the Republicans.

A clear majority of this country was vehemently against ACA. Dem's passed it ignoring the will of the people and they paid a terrible price, it pretty much destroyed their party. Incredibly the more liberal Dem's bragged that they didn't like the moderate Dem's who lost their elections anyway so good riddance wow.