Buzzlightyear3
New Member
Does anyone know that if the Republicans take back the house after the November elections can they get rid of the so called Affordable Health Care Act?
Affordable health Care Act.
- Thread starter Buzzlightyear3
- Start date
chernmax
NOT Politically Correct!!
That's correct, they can not fund it!!!
Tilted
..
I suppose they could refuse to appropriate money for anything for which money wasn't already appropriated in the PPACA. I'd have to go back through the bill to figure out what all that might apply to (which I'm not likely to do anytime soon
); however, my recollection is that money was already appropriated for some things.I suppose that they could also, in theory, refuse to appropriate the (otherwise) normal funds to departments that are charged with overseeing and implementing various aspects of the PPACA, such that they wouldn't be able to function and do what they've been directed to do to administer those aspects. I think it's very unlikely that will happen - it would create a mess with regard to government function generally, and would essentially mean a stalemate between Congress and the White House that would shut down the government or large portions of the government.
Furthermore, some of the provisions of the legislation aren't really things that need money appropriated for them - the new tax provisions, for instance.
It's more likely that the Republicans, assuming they seize control of the House, try to find specific pieces of the legislation that they can get the Democrats to go along with repealing.
Pete
Repete
Did they include a poison pill that the bill cannot be amended or modified?I suppose they could refuse to appropriate money for anything for which money wasn't already appropriated in the PPACA. I'd have to go back through the bill to figure out what all that might apply to (which I'm not likely to do anytime soon
I suppose that they could also, in theory, refuse to appropriate the (otherwise) normal funds to departments that are charged with overseeing and implementing various aspects of the PPACA, such that they wouldn't be able to function and do what they've been directed to do to administer those aspects. I think it's very unlikely that will happen - it would create a mess with regard to government function generally, and would essentially mean a stalemate between Congress and the White House that would shut down the government or large portions of the government.
Furthermore, some of the provisions of the legislation aren't really things that need money appropriated for them - the new tax provisions, for instance.
It's more likely that the Republicans, assuming they seize control of the House, try to find specific pieces of the legislation that they can get the Democrats to go along with repealing.
Tilted
..
Not really - something like that wouldn't mean much anyway. They could just pass legislation repealing it.
The bill does contain one section which purports to require a 2/3 vote to change things. That part of the bill relates to the Independent Medicare Advisory Board. We discussed the situation briefly here and here. I don't think those provisions amount to much of a barrier though, a new Congress could use similar iffy tactics to reverse their effect.
EDIT: It's actually a 3/5 vote not a 2/3 vote.
Last edited:
Pete
Repete
I can't see how a provision forbidding amendment would be constitutional anyway.
Tilted
..
Well, if it was just legislation forbidding amendment, that legislation could be repealed - so it wouldn't mean much.
In this case, it really amounted to a change to the rules of the Senate and House. They just pretended that it wasn't such so that they didn't have to follow certain rules to get it passed to begin with (rules that would have meant they weren't able to get it passed). When it comes to Congress's internal rules, the courts have generally stayed out of it - leaving it up to Congress to decide what its internal rules are.
Justme2
Member
If this is true??? They will get the funding
Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home etc.
When did this happen? It's in the healthcare bill. Just thought you should know.
SALES TAX TO GO INTO EFFECT 2013 (Part of HC Bill)
REAL ESTATE SALES TAX
So, this is "change you can believe in"?
Under the new health care bill - did you know that all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax? The bulk of these new taxes don't kick in until 2013 (presumably after obama's re-election). You can thank Nancy, Harry and Barack and your local Democrat Congressman for this one. If you sell your $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation who often downsize their homes. Is this Hope & Change great or what? Does this stuff makes your November and 2012 votes more important?
Oh, you weren't aware this was in the obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren't alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren't aware of it either (result of clandestine midnight voting for huge bills they've never read). AND, there are a few other surprises lurking.
Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home etc.
When did this happen? It's in the healthcare bill. Just thought you should know.
SALES TAX TO GO INTO EFFECT 2013 (Part of HC Bill)
REAL ESTATE SALES TAX
So, this is "change you can believe in"?
Under the new health care bill - did you know that all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax? The bulk of these new taxes don't kick in until 2013 (presumably after obama's re-election). You can thank Nancy, Harry and Barack and your local Democrat Congressman for this one. If you sell your $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation who often downsize their homes. Is this Hope & Change great or what? Does this stuff makes your November and 2012 votes more important?
Oh, you weren't aware this was in the obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren't alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren't aware of it either (result of clandestine midnight voting for huge bills they've never read). AND, there are a few other surprises lurking.
Justme2
Member
Tilted
..
There is no real estate sales tax in the health care bill. What there is (and what this seems to be inaccurately referring to) is an additional 3.8% tax on certain investment income.
As that relates to the sale of real estate, it would mean that the profits from the sale of real estate - not the sales price - would be taxed at a rate of 3.8% in some circumstances. That tax would not apply to individuals making less than $200,000 a year or couples making less than $250,000 a year. Further, the same rules apply to this tax as currently do with regard to excluded gains from the sale of a principal residence. So, when someone sells their home, the first $250,000 ($500,000 for couples) of gains (that's gains again, not the sales price) is effectively exempted from this tax.
This additional investment income tax was in the reconciliation bill.
Get enough dems to go along with it and you don't have to worry about what the guy in the oval office says.