General Discussion

still_one

(92,224 posts)

24. at least what I have come to understand, may be wrong, the filibuster rules could be changed anytime

Fri Apr 26, 2013, 10:15 PM

Apr 2013

Last edited Sat Apr 27, 2013, 03:46 AM - Edit history (1)

However, let's assume I am wrong, which I could be. At the time what bothered me the most was when the talks for healthcare started they did everything to exclude those advocates for a public option a seat at the table. Even before they started, they already caved into the special interests.

The next criticism I had was they complicated it with a tremendous amount of rules, such as back-loading a lot of BASIC things, such as pre-existing conditions, and waiting 6 months of having no insurance before you could be eligible for the bridge. What ethical person would right that into the 1200 pages of legislation?

After it was written they did not even market it. There are polls out today that indicate people do not even know what benefits they are entitled to under it. There is no excuse for that.

and the last point, in 2010 most of Congress ran away from the ACA, what does that imply?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

29 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Pre-existing condition -- does anybody know . . . ? [View all] pnwmom Apr 2013 OP

Basically, it's any condition -- diagnosed or not -- that you had before you had insurance coverage unrepentant progress Apr 2013 #1

Thanks for the link, unrepentant progress. pnwmom Apr 2013 #3

I know unrepentant progress Apr 2013 #5

and the blame for this falls squarely at the Democrats. If you lost your still_one Apr 2013 #6

Why blame the Democrats because the Republicans filibustered it? pnwmom Apr 2013 #16

they could have, and still can change those rules anytime, with an up or down vote. Everything I still_one Apr 2013 #18

It's anything the insurance company wants Glitterati Apr 2013 #2

This is one of the largest disgraces of the ACA, and damn the democrats who allowed it to happen still_one Apr 2013 #4

Let's be fair, preexisting exclusions were around long before Obama, and Hoyt Apr 2013 #8

Let's be fair, they could have NOT backloaded it into the healthcare plan, and to pour salt into the still_one Apr 2013 #9

There are folks right here on DU who have coverage right now who didn't before. Hoyt Apr 2013 #10

and that is good, but they also didn't not help a lot of other people who they should have still_one Apr 2013 #11

Why are you so angry with Obama for a situation that was beyond his control? pnwmom Apr 2013 #12

First of all I blamed the Democrats in the Senate mostly if you read my comments. repukes were NOT still_one Apr 2013 #13

How do you know there was a better option that could get 60 votes? pnwmom Apr 2013 #14

I stated if they wanted to they could have changed the filibuster rules. This legislation was still_one Apr 2013 #21

Hindsight is wonderful. They would have had to have changed the rules pnwmom Apr 2013 #22

at least what I have come to understand, may be wrong, the filibuster rules could be changed anytime still_one Apr 2013 #24

I don't like any of that, either, though I'm glad for all the children who immediately pnwmom Apr 2013 #25

Because the repugs would never have voted for anything, remember this plan was essentially the still_one Apr 2013 #27

So the blame falls squarely on the DEMS because the Republicans are worse. pnwmom Apr 2013 #28

That clause is horrible. In the meantime, see if you can help her get counseling through the County Hekate Apr 2013 #7

Thanks, Hekate. pnwmom Apr 2013 #23

Don't forget to look for a Federally Qualified Health Clinic in your area for her Recursion Apr 2013 #15

THANK YOU! I didn't think of this at all. pnwmom Apr 2013 #17

Depends on the state. Nye Bevan Apr 2013 #19

My wife and I are uninsurable. hunter Apr 2013 #20

If you have ever had a cold, all colds are pre-existing conditions. kestrel91316 Apr 2013 #26

If the insurance does not want to pay they won't - period. KentuckyWoman Apr 2013 #29