Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've always heard good things about Costa Rica. Many of the islands in the Carribean are pretty good as well. The smaller islands have almost no crime, beautiful beaches, fairly low cost of living (Dominica...NOT to be confused with the Dominican Republic, Turks and Cacois, St. Kitts and Nevis, Antigua, Guadeloupe, etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to post a story about the rape statistics in Sweden and how much different it is than the rest of Europe, and why Assange could be screwed.

 

Do I need to create a Sweden topic?

 

Or should it be in USA because it is mostly US diplomatic stuff being released? If it is in USA the Europeans will miss it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's interesting for a non usa person reading about the nixon impeachment is it highlights very clearly, more than any thing else, the difference between a westminster parliament and a usa republic/monarchy. I've had the usa system described as a non hereditary monarchy, there are strong signs that lazyphil would agree if he studied this. I am leaning to this definition of the usa system. Is a republic a non hereditory monarchy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's interesting for a non usa person reading about the nixon impeachment is it highlights very clearly, more than any thing else, the difference between a westminster parliament and a usa republic/monarchy. I've had the usa system described as a non hereditary monarchy, there are strong signs that lazyphil would agree if he studied this. I am leaning to this definition of the usa system. Is a republic a non hereditory monarchy?

 

 

You've got those prats who called the Kennedys America's royal family. That only lasted for one generation, since the next generation turned out to be largely wankers. Not much hope of the Clintons fillng the role - they are more like the Beverly Hillbillies.

 

 

:santa::snowman::elf:

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No i disagree. I don't case that on kennedy's but rather on a number of usa government election scholarship people i've spoken with on both sides of politics. sLet's take again nixon seeing as i am studying him now. Many commentated that he was so stupid not to burn the tapes. They often said if it was a shakesphere play he would be caught with the tapes. He had clear escape. He never acted. Ford is seen as a sad stupid character. But He never wanted to be president. He had no idea what to do, and ironically was more loyal than most nixon people, even though they kept him on the outer. One of ford's first questions was to ask of haig, how and what can a president pardon? Given every rat was deserting nixon, this is in hindsight and in non of my material, seen as a rather touching question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's Health-Care Law Ruled Unconstitutional Over Insurance Requirement

 

 

[color:red]

The Obama administration’s requirement that most citizens maintain minimum health coverage as part of a broad overhaul of the industry is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled, striking down the linchpin of the plan.[/color] :santa:

 

[color:red]U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia, today said that the requirement in President Barack Obama’s health-care legislation goes beyond Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce. While severing the coverage mandate, which is set to become effective in 2014, Hudson didn’t address other provisions such as expanding Medicaid.[/color]

 

“At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance -- or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage -- it’s about an individual’s right to choose to participate,†wrote Hudson, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2002.

 

The ruling is the government’s first loss in a series of challenges to the law mounted in federal courts in Virginia, Michigan and Florida, where 20 states have joined an effort to have the statute thrown out. Constitutional scholars said unless Congress changes the law, its fate on appeal will probably be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

‘Lot of Activity’

 

“There’s a lot of activity focused now on alternatives to the mandate,†said Dan Mendelson, chief executive officer of Avalere Health, a Washington-based consulting firm. One option might be to provide access to all people, even ones with pre-existing conditions, to buy insurance and limit the times they could sign up.

 

“It’s using a carrot instead of a stick,†Mendelson said in a telephone interview before the ruling.

 

Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, a health insurers’ Washington lobby group, declined to comment on the record about whether insurers have discussed alternatives with the administration or whether a policy could be designed to replace the effects of losing the individual mandate.

 

Hudson didn’t stop the government from moving ahead with implementing the law while an appeal is pending.

 

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who brought the suit, said in a statement he was “gratified we prevailed.â€Â

 

“This won’t be the final round, as this will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court, but today is a critical milestone in the protection of the Constitution,†he said.

 

Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah called the decision “a great day for liberty. Congress must obey the Constitution rather than make it up as we go along,†he said in a statement.

 

Appeals Court Hearing

 

The government may ask the judge to reconsider his ruling, or seek a hearing by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond. Two opinions from federal judges in Virginia and in Michigan have sided with the government on the law’s constitutionality.

 

Health plans rose as much as 2.7 percent after the ruling was announced, and then fell back. The Standard & Poor’s Managed Health Index of six insurers was up less than 1 percent at 1:44 p.m. in New York trading, led by a 1.1 percent increase for UnitedHealth Group Inc. of Minnetonka, Minnesota, the largest medical plan by sales. Aetna Inc. of Hartford, Connecticut, gained 1 percent.

 

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said at a press briefing today said that the administration still believes the legislation is constitutional.

 

‘Different Decision’

 

“One hundred and fifteen miles away, a different judge in a different district rendered a different decision,†Gibbs said, referring to a Nov. 30 ruling by U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, in Lynchburg, Virginia. That decision upheld the act in a lawsuit brought by the evangelical Liberty University and five individuals.

 

“Our belief is that when all the legal wrangling is done, this is something that will be upheld,†Gibbs said.

 

Mark Hall, a professor at Wake Forest University School of Law, who serves on a federal advisory board set up to help implement the law, said that while the case is certain to go to the high court, the outcome is unpredictable.

 

“Some prominent conservative justices will go against it, but there is no serious indication that every single one will go against it,†he said in an interview before Hudson’s decision.

 

Cornerstone of Overhaul

 

Justice Department lawyers in court papers called the mandatory insurance measure the cornerstone of the overhaul as it pushes younger and healthier people into the insurance pool. Through the individual mandate and expansions of Medicaid and employer-based coverage, the law is estimated to provide 32 million more people with coverage by 2019, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

 

The law bars insurers from denying coverage to people who are sick or imposing lifetime limits on costs. Without payments generated from the required policies, the health-insurance market would face extinction, the government argued. The mandate falls under Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce as $43 billion in unpaid medical bills are absorbed by the market each year, U.S. lawyers said.

 

“If people aren’t compelled to buy insurance and the insurance carriers are compelled to offer it, then many will simply wait until they are sick,†said John Sullivan, an analyst at Leerink Swann & Co. in Boston. “If the Supreme Court were to rule this law unconstitutional, then it would be back to the drawing board. You can’t just pull this part out of it.â€Â

 

Virginia’s suit claimed Congress has only the power to tax, not to force participation in a market. Its case defended the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act, a state law barring compulsory purchase of health insurance by its citizens.

 

Florida Suit

 

Florida, joined by 19 other states, filed a separate lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality and arguing it puts too big a burden on its budget by expanding state-run Medicaid programs. U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson in Pensacola, Florida, is slated to hear arguments Dec. 16 on motions by each side to decide the case in their favor.

 

The Florida case, involving 20 states, has drawn the most attention from outside interests. The states are backed by 63 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, mostly Republicans, in a court brief while incoming House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, and 32 Republican U.S. senators separately submitted papers arguing the legislation represents an unconstitutional expansion of congressional legislative powers.

 

Florida’s Attorney General Bill McCollum said he is hopeful Vinson will strike down the individual mandate and halt the expansion of Medicaid.

 

“The implementation of this law could add more than 1.9 million Floridians to the Medicaid program, a tremendous financial burden on our state at a time when our budget has no room for extra expenses,†he said in a statement today.

 

Economics Scholars

 

A group of about 40 economics scholars, including Nobel laureates Eric Maskin, George Akerlof and Kenneth Arrow, filed their own brief, arguing in favor of the legislative package.

 

The challenges brought by the attorneys general in Virginia and Florida are the most likely to reach the Supreme Court, according to health-care and constitutional lawyers.

 

“The Florida and Virginia cases have both been well briefed and well drafted,†said Peter Urbanowicz, a managing director at Alvarez & Marsal Healthcare Industry Group in Washington.

 

The case is Commonwealth of Virginia v. Sebelius, 10-cv- 00188, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Richmond).

 

 

 

 

Link :elf:

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...