Podcast for 07-09-2012 (ObamaCare special)

[MrBogosity]

[mp3]https://bogosity.podbean.com/mf/web/nrmn5/BogosityPodcast-2012-07-09.mp3[/mp3]


ObamaCare Special

This Week's Co-hosts:

• Jonathan Loesche (FSBlueApocalypse) http://www.loesche4fl.org/
• Tim Dyson (Lord T Hawkeye) http://www.youtube.com/lordthawkeye

References:

• The actual, honest-to-FSM Supreme Court ruling: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf
• The actual, honest-to-FSM full text of Obamacare: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ148/pdf/PLAW-111publ148.pdf
• Efforts to implement ObamaCare law raise concerns of massive government expansion http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/03/efforts-to-implement-obamacare-law-raise-concerns-massive-government-expansion/
• US Debt Clock http://www.usdebtclock.org/

This Week's Quote: "There was a time when health insurance was available to everyone at a modest price. But after 40 years of government intervention, insurance companies have had to restrict their policies and charge far more—which has led Congress to pass bills forcing insurance companies to do what they once did gladly." —Harry Browne

[evensgrey]

Small correction:  Private clinics are definitely legal in Canada.  You can even pay for services yourself rather than go through your provincial medical payment system.  And the best part is the court ruling that blocked government prohibition of private payment for medical services is sacrosanct for the Progressive movement because it's the Morgentaler decision (the same one that struck down government abortion bans).  The Morgentaler decision ruled that all people have a right to access needed medical services in a timely manner, and government policy may not interfere with that right.  With abortion, the cumbersome and time consuming approval process blocked timely access to the service, so it wasn't permitted.  Prohibitions against private provision and private payment for any medical service (at least, any medical service with a medically significant waiting list) have also been determined to violate this right.  Essentially, it ruled that universality is, in itself, a human rights violation when applied to medical services because universality actually prevents people from accessing medical services.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

They seem to flip back and forth on it though so it's hard to keep track.

I'll bet you anything the fed tries to harrass the private clinics out of existence as much as it can.

[evensgrey]

They seem to flip back and forth on it though so it's hard to keep track.

I'll bet you anything the fed tries to harrass the private clinics out of existence as much as it can.

That'll be quite difficult to do, as they have no jurisdiction over medical service provision.  That's why the Canada Health Act uses withholding of Federal transfer payments as the lever to control provincial medicare programs.

[MrBogosity]

That's why the Canada Health Act uses withholding of Federal transfer payments as the lever to control provincial medicare programs.

Hmmm, sounds like an Individual Mandate to me. Just call it a "tax" instead of a withholding.

[2k]

Hi Shane, long time listener, first time questioner. One of your guests (I believe Lord T Hawkeye) remarked on ~8:28 that there was a page that specifically exempts everyone in congress and a couple other select groups from all the terms in the bill. I wanted to know what page he was referring to so I could verify it.

[MrBogosity]

I don't remember where it is, but basically you're exempt if you have a health care plan that meets certain requirements, and the health care plan that Congress gets for life of course meets that.

[2k]

Hopefully you'll forgive me if I can't really accept that and would like to see the writing myself. I spent a little under two hours looking through that pdf. The closest I can find to anything relevant is (d) APPLICABLE INDIVIDUAL (pg 246), (f) MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE (pg 248) and (D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE (pg 183). None of these appear to exempt congress, although the last appears to require the government offer members of congress a plan through an Exchange.

I don't look at bills often and perhaps the legal jargon is going over me, but I would like to verify the claim as I find it quite damning.

[MrBogosity]

I don't remember exactly (Hawkeye? Maybe you remember?) but I'm pretty sure the Minimum Essential Coverage refers to the amount of insurance you have to have in order for the mandate to not apply to you.