Discussion: Governors: No Clear Plan If SCOTUS Rules Against Obamacare Subsidies

Discussion for article #233535

If Roberts thought the ACA was constitutional under the taxing clause, shouldn’t it also be constitutional under the spending clause?

1 Like

The republican arsonists want to burn down the (ACA) house and then complain they have no place to live. And expect the Democrats to figure it out for them.


“…‘it falls in the hands of the leaders right here in Washington,’ said Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker…”

Leaders in the Republican Congress? Where? Where?

Too funny. Scott Walker now says we should count on the federal government to solve the economic ruin they will be responsible for creating and can easily avert.

“Government is the solution. -Ronald Reagan”

I guess Reagan was right. Walker says so.


Why cant the states just outsource the operation of their exchanges and call it good? This is insanely stupid.

1 Like


Of course there is a plan. That plan being that if SCOTUS trashes the subsidies the GOP will not suffer. The folks getting their heath care canned live in states where their collective outrage will not keep GOP’ers from getting re-elected. GOP’ers are safe doing this and that’s why they have no motive to fix what they’re up to.

They do have a “clear plan” and that is to sabotage anything that comes from a Democrat. They can deny that but actions speak louder than words.


Since the Republicans seem to think that President Obama doesn’t love America, then maybe just a name tweak will resolve everything.
Obama love America a lot Care,
Obama’s Patriot Plans for America.
Hussein Health and Freedom for America.
Barack Built That Not Terrorists Health Plans.

1 Like

I’m as far left as they come but I have a hope that the supremes rule against ACA just to watch the crud sucking Repubes scurry around covering their asses.

Okay I’m confused. I thought it was written into the law that states could co-venture in forming health insurance exchanges or even regional exchanges made up of multiple states. Is this article wrong or am I mistaken?

Okay here it is in an ACA study commissioned by the Commonwealth fund and explained in great detail by Tim Jost.

“• State, regional, or national exchanges? Although the ACA favors the creation of state exchanges, it also confers authority to create a federal exchange as well as a multistate insurance program, and it provides for the possibility of regional exchanges. Important policy choices will need to be made concerning which avenues particular states should pursue and how the federal government should react to state action—or inaction.”

The authors of this article didn’t even mention how easy it would be for the states covered by the Federal Exchange to just change a few words and make the exchanges their own. I don’t think they wanted to explain how easy it would be because it would counter the narrative being set up by GOP Govs that accepting the ACA is a very difficult thing to do when in fact it could be done quickly and easily if the political will was there. That’s if the Supremes agree with the plaintiffs in the ACA suit.

1 Like

If you actually hope that, either you’ll need to reconsider the company you keep or what it means to be “far left”

Here’s a clear plan. The ® Govs could talk to their Reps in Washington and let them know just how sinister their plans are.
Screwing over tens of millions of people just to hurt our own President is insanity.


This is actually kinda good news, because some of these guys seem to recognize that their jobs might be on the line if they cause early deaths for thousands of their citizens.

1 Like