Messages

Yeah, I remember that rant. I think the Paul supporters for the most part understand the corruption of the Republican party. In fact so much that hearing them complain about unfairness can be kind of annoying after a while. But I think the idea is to try and influence some of the party platforms and take what power can be obtained at local levels.

The biggest problem with supporting a 3rd party like the Libertarian party is that first past the post voting pretty much always makes it impossible for a 3rd party to have significant influence - or at least to win office. Change would have to come from the people first, and then both parties would have to change their platforms to placate the people. But that's probably true for most forms of democracy/republic regardless of voting method.

[(d) APPLICABLE INDIVIDUAL]

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.

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.