-But not in this thread about food stamp fraud.

Let me put this as nice as I can ... ..I'll talk about anything I want anywhere I want anytime I want.

Using any alias of my choosing.

And stomp on your puny neck at the same time if I'm in the mood

-There, did I do better?

My Eberly alias is thinking about it.

75

You wanted that message to go out to NFL and college football fans?

I think you may be right in that ad campaign may have been by far the single biggest reason for the Harris defeat but it's was a lock to work in trumps favor.

Easy to Monday morning quarterback it now but the Trans issue was a total loser for the democrats at the time.

-Even to the point of turning off body-cams in some circumstances.

I wasn't referring to that.

I was referring to when cops legally arrest and prosecute criminals for committing actual crimes ... ... .its racist.

Do better please.

read up dumfuqs......I gotta go

-Before the ACA if you lost your job for any reason and had to change plans with a pre-existing condition you were screwed.

can you make the distinction between group and individual plans?

If you had prior credible coverage, you weren't going to be impacted by pre-existing exclusions.

-The ACA changed this by prohibiting insurers from denying coverage or charging more for pre-existing conditions, making maternity care an essential benefit that must be covered in most plans sold today.

most of what ACA did impacted individual plans.

most of those companies got out of the individual market after ACA.

-Pregnancy was commonly treated as a pre-existing condition, allowing insurers to deny coverage, charge much higher premiums, or exclude maternity care for applicants who were pregnant or had a history of pregnancy.

In the individual markets I think that was the case. Not in groups. I think pregnancy wasn't allowed to be used as a pre existing condition.

while pregnant, we switched plans......never had a problem. Again, we had coverage in place so they couldn't use the pre existing rules against us.

-Aren't you old enough to remember the pre existing condition nightmare that existed before the ACA?

Holy crap....you really don't know. that's why you keep responding with questions.....because you don't know.

I do remember the environment. My point is that there were pre-existing protections in place prior to ACA...but ACA enhanced those protections.

The condition was that if you had credible coverage in place, then the carrier couldn't exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions.

My family had to switch companies 2-3 times prior to ACA......never had a single problem with it. why? because I already had insurance.

This was a good thing ACA did.......I'm just saying there were protections in place prior.

you didn't know that

Your welcome

-Democrats alone are the reason thousands of lives were saved and pre exisiting conditions can't be used against you.

are you saying there were no protections in place for folks with pre existing conditions prior to ACA?

"Unanswered "anti-trans" ads?
That's what went wrong in 2024."

what were they supposed to answer with?

-And the protections you also enjoy were only made available to you by the Democratic Party which had to expend nearly all of its political capital to acquire even that.

This is obviously news to you but healthcare laws and statutes existed years and years prior to ACA.

HIPPA, etc....existed long before ACA.

And I'm not anti- ACA....this is merely a thread about it.

"YOU are welcome"

I'm sorry....do I owe you thanks for something, Boazboy?

Did you do something for me? Do you own something I don't?

WTF do you think you've done for me? Or better yet....WTF have I done to you?

JFC, sans Snoofy.....you might be the poster here most deserving of an actual physical ass whipping.

Where do you get the nuts to have such an attitude?

-Oh no I think it's very informative to have these discussions.

With anybody here except you.

-What's your answer to #176, where America elected a President on mandate of health care reform.

Listen closely ... ... ... ... ..GFY

-That's your party. You built that.

Actually it's YOUR healthcare system.

Enjoy

-It barely got enough votes to pass as it was.

Exactly.

-I think it's a retarded question that shows how much you Republicans hate America.

Gotcha. We can stop talking about it.

-Should Democrats have not allowed the Republicans to participate in the legislative process, since they had the votes?

That's my question.

I think it's a fair question.

maybe the answer is contained inside the $1 BILLION+ in lobbying. One party had the control....where do you think that money was going?

-It's absolutely amazing how we Democrats been talking about health care on this site for over fifteen years

So the ---- what?

It's gotten you absolutely nowhere.

The only thing better was single payer and the democrats wouldn't do it. Not then....not now.

JFC, did anybody even try to introduce single payer? Don't give the "republicans would have killed it" excuse. We have a lot of good thing that the GOP opposed.

The democrats plagerized a republican idea rather than write their own. They let the republicans sit at the table and participate and then got royally screwed over by the GOP after that......not seeing any of it coming.

But you've been talking about it. Good for you, Mr. Helpy Helperstein.

The democrats hate you more than the republicans.

"Democrats on this committee adopted around 160 Republican amendments into the bill. The Senate Finance Committee also held 17 bipartisan sessions with Republican senators."

all in exchange for no support.

"70 Republican-led attempts to repeal, modify or otherwise curb the Affordable Care Act"

I was gonna save that for dessert.

So...they were allowed to add 160 amendments and in exchange, the democrats received ZERO votes and a commitment to kill the entire bill over the next 7 years.

-They changed their minds at the last minute when told to by their leaders

So the democrats admit they were working with the GOP all the way up to the vote allowing their input when they didn't need it.

And then SHOCKER......none of them voted for it?

So offering no votes in favor......they managed to get 160 (some very very very very bad....) amendments to a bill they had zero leverage to get added?

zero leverage...and still got what they wanted in the bill.

-Republicans refused to work with Democrats at all on Obamacare.

just a few posts above it was stated the republican added 160 amendments working with the democrats.

They did work with them......right up to the point where they didn't vote for it.

-They could not allow the Obama Administration to be successful in ANYTHING.

You're not getting it.......I asked what prevented the democrats with coming up with something better.

I didn't ask why the GOP wouldn't support it.

-A bad plan so full of corruption even the Republicans refused to back it.

That was pure partisan politics. It wasn't about the objection to the corruption.

Also.......I don't know much about the rules and nuance of how bills are passed but how did the republicans manage to get the democrats to attach all these amendments? What leverage did they have to get that done?

They didn't need any of their votes to pass it so why the need to invite them to the table and let them destroy the bill?

The GOPs intent was to not support the bill regardless so why did the democrats allow their amendments?