Will House Republicans try to impeach Obama?

[windjammer]

Article

[Earthling]

Off course they will try. Not suprising.

[t_host1]

 I did not go to the article; is it about the judiciary pow-wow going on now, discussing the arbitrary, at-will law being imposed without legislative or executive privilege available - too arrest the tyranny currently in play?     

[Gass3268]

Seriously they should do it and then we'd see Obama's numbers jump up.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Individual Republicans, of course.  The Republican Leadership, of course not.

[Sbane]

See, this is the reason why it is way too early to declare 2014 as not being a good year for Democrats.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

See, this is the reason why it is way too early to declare 2014 as not being a good year for Democrats.

It's probably too early even without this.

[Sbane]

See, this is the reason why it is way too early to declare 2014 as not being a good year for Democrats.

It's probably too early even without this.

Yeah, true but the problems with Obamacare are being revealed. They really need to make maternity care an option again. It's making premiums jump like crazy. I can get a plan for less than half the premium with a lower deductible and lower annual limit on out of pocket costs now in December because I don't have to pay for maternity care. If I include that on my plan, the costs jumps to be almost the same as the Obamacare plans. 

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

See, this is the reason why it is way too early to declare 2014 as not being a good year for Democrats.

It's probably too early even without this.

Yeah, true but the problems with Obamacare are being revealed. They really need to make maternity care an option again. It's making premiums jump like crazy. I can get a plan for less than half the premium with a lower deductible and lower annual limit on out of pocket costs now in December because I don't have to pay for maternity care. If I include that on my plan, the costs jumps to be almost the same as the Obamacare plans. 

Yeah they must get the things ironed out that are aggravating people, because Obamacare is always going to be a political football no matter what else it is as well.

[Earthling]

Individual Republicans, of course.  The Republican Leadership, of course not.

The Republican Leadership is weak. If the hard-rights wants a vote on impeachment of the President then they will get one.

[7,052,770]

See, this is the reason why it is way too early to declare 2014 as not being a good year for Democrats.

It's probably too early even without this.

Yeah, true but the problems with Obamacare are being revealed. They really need to make maternity care an option again. It's making premiums jump like crazy. I can get a plan for less than half the premium with a lower deductible and lower annual limit on out of pocket costs now in December because I don't have to pay for maternity care. If I include that on my plan, the costs jumps to be almost the same as the Obamacare plans. 

Sorry, but none of this is true.  Forcing women to pay a higher rate for a preexisting condition undermines the whole point of Obamacare.  Your rate is going up because previously-denied risky people are entering the market, and because cheapo low-benefit plans are no longer available,   not because maternity costs are being spread around now, just like other risk factors.

[Sbane]

See, this is the reason why it is way too early to declare 2014 as not being a good year for Democrats.

It's probably too early even without this.

Yeah, true but the problems with Obamacare are being revealed. They really need to make maternity care an option again. It's making premiums jump like crazy. I can get a plan for less than half the premium with a lower deductible and lower annual limit on out of pocket costs now in December because I don't have to pay for maternity care. If I include that on my plan, the costs jumps to be almost the same as the Obamacare plans. 

Sorry, but none of this is true.  Forcing women to pay a higher rate for a preexisting condition undermines the whole point of Obamacare.  Your rate is going up because previously-denied risky people are entering the market, and because cheapo low-benefit plans are no longer available,   not because maternity costs are being spread around now, just like other risk factors.

First of all the plans that I am finding now have lower deductibles and lower out of pocket maximums than the bronze level Obamacare plans. And yet the premium is less than half of the cheapest Obamacare plan. Of course they don't cover maternity care, or dental coverage for kids but I don't need any of that. I understand that some of the higher rate in Obamacare plans is due to the covering of pre-existing conditions, and I am perfectly fine with that. I just don't think I should have to subsidize someone else's maternity care. And I don't see who maternity care is a pre-existing condition. Women have the choice of not signing up for it as well.

And it is obvious that covering maternity care is leading to a higher rate since if I include maternity care on my current plan, the premium almost doubles. Obamacare should be made more like auto insurance. Some things should have to be covered by insurance, and there can be limits on deductibles and out of pocket maximums, but things like maternity care should be optional. Just like collision or road side coverage is option in auto insurance plans.

[DC Al Fine]

Just curious, but was/is it possible to get a plan where you'd pay for the standard hospital stay/painkillers/doctor yelling push but would be covered for something going horribly wrong?

[Sbane]

Just curious, but was/is it possible to get a plan where you'd pay for the standard hospital stay/painkillers/doctor yelling push but would be covered for something going horribly wrong?

That's called a high deductible plan.

Though no, there is no separate deductible just for maternity coverage. That would be an interesting concept.

[7,052,770]

I don't know if your insurance company is jerking you around or what.

Yes, maternity coverage is a lot more expensive than non-maternity coverage,  because only people who know they need it will buy it, and maternity is relatively expensive. However, when maternity costs are spread around to everyone, the increased costs are only about 4-5%. (I just ran some numbers to verify those stats. )  Thus maternity now being an essential healtg benefit is only a small contributor to rate increases.

You could make the same argument if cancer were an optional rider.  Cancer insurance would be very expensive,  and non-cancer insurance would be a little bit cheaper.  It's better for everyone to spread all of the costs out evenly (except by age), and it's fairer too, since medical costs are more often than not due to circumstances beyond your control.

Paying 5% extra so that every baby has its prenatal visits and is born in a an appropriate medical environment is no big deal to me, and if I ever get cancer,  I'll be glad everyone paid a little more to cover me.

[Sbane]

I don't know if your insurance company is jerking you around or what.

Yes, maternity coverage is a lot more expensive than non-maternity coverage,  because only people who know they need it will buy it, and maternity is relatively expensive. However, when maternity costs are spread around to everyone, the increased costs are only about 4-5%. (I just ran some numbers to verify those stats. )  Thus maternity now being an essential healtg benefit is only a small contributor to rate increases.

You could make the same argument if cancer were an optional rider.  Cancer insurance would be very expensive,  and non-cancer insurance would be a little bit cheaper.  It's better for everyone to spread all of the costs out evenly (except by age), and it's fairer too, since medical costs are more often than not due to circumstances beyond your control.

Paying 5% extra so that every baby has its prenatal visits and is born in a an appropriate medical environment is no big deal to me, and if I ever get cancer,  I'll be glad everyone paid a little more to cover me.

Look, I am just telling you what I am seeing. Of course, if everyone paid for maternity coverage then perhaps the increase would not be as high. So is the huge jump in premiums for Obamacare plans mostly due to community rating and guaranteed issue? And yeah, the jump is huge. I have a $2,500 deductible, $4,500 annual out of pocket maximum, 20% coinsurance and $35 copay for preventative care which, except for the preventative care part, is much better than many Obamacare plans. And the premium is way lower. No pre-existing conditions coverage of course.

[7,052,770]

Hmmm, something looks screwy with those numbers.  It's not that I don't believe you or anything, just seems like an unusual case.  You're a man in your 20s, right?  We are the big losers of Obamacare, at least in the short term.  Maybe you're currently enrolled in a product only available to healthy people in their 20s, so it's a very low-cost risk pool?  Obamacare completely eliminates products like that and puts everyone into the same risk pool, which is the better deal for society at large.

But yes, the main reason for the PPACA rate increases is the previously denied are now covered, which is going to ding everyone.  The rest of the reasons (minimum standards for health insurance plans, no sex rating, compressed age rating, same rate regardless of preexisting conditions, etc.) will cause some's premiums to rise and others to fall.

I'm assuming you aren't eligible for subsidies?  If you aren't, but don't have a job that provides health insurance, combined with being a healthy young man, you've really drawn the Obamacare short stick, but over the years the system will work out for you.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Maybe a few nutters like Kucinich and Co. tried with Bush, but it won't get far.

[ElectionsGuy]

They might try but they won't get anywhere.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Maybe a few nutters like Kucinich and Co. tried with Bush, but it won't get far.

This. Im fact, I'm pretty sure he already has had impeachment articles brought against him.

[Vosem]

Highly doubt it; while a 'majority of the majority' of the Committee on the Judiciary might be in favor of impeachment, there's a permanent contingent of moderates and leadership-Republicans who will oppose it, and whatever the tactical benefits of a serious Obama impeachment attempt, no Democrat can support it at any point in the process, which is what it would need. Now, is a Bush-'07 style attempt possible? Yes, though I doubt even that would occur. But Democrats have been salivating at the mouth about a Clinton-'98 style attempt since 2011; they need to get over that it won't be happening unless some more substantial scandal erupts.

Individual Republicans, of course.  The Republican Leadership, of course not.

The Republican Leadership is weak. If the hard-rights wants a vote on impeachment of the President then they will get one.

End of the shutdown? Sandy funding? Pretty sure every time the right has tried to fight the leaders, the leaders have won.

[cinyc]

Maybe a few nutters like Kucinich and Co. tried with Bush, but it won't get far.

This. Im fact, I'm pretty sure he already has had impeachment articles brought against him.

Kucinich brought his impeachment charges to the House floor in June 2008.  He then moved to send the charges to the House Judiciary committee.  It passed, largely on a party-line vote.  No Democrat voted against referring the charges to the committee.  24 Republicans voted for referral.  The bill ultimately died in committee.

No Republican has drafted impeachment articles against President Obama.  No vote has been taken in committee.  No vote has been taken on the House floor.

[Sbane]

Hmmm, something looks screwy with those numbers.  It's not that I don't believe you or anything, just seems like an unusual case.  You're a man in your 20s, right?  We are the big losers of Obamacare, at least in the short term.  Maybe you're currently enrolled in a product only available to healthy people in their 20s, so it's a very low-cost risk pool?  Obamacare completely eliminates products like that and puts everyone into the same risk pool, which is the better deal for society at large.

But yes, the main reason for the PPACA rate increases is the previously denied are now covered, which is going to ding everyone.  The rest of the reasons (minimum standards for health insurance plans, no sex rating, compressed age rating, same rate regardless of preexisting conditions, etc.) will cause some's premiums to rise and others to fall.

I'm assuming you aren't eligible for subsidies?  If you aren't, but don't have a job that provides health insurance, combined with being a healthy young man, you've really drawn the Obamacare short stick, but over the years the system will work out for you.

My problem is that I am in grad school right now at a school that doesn't provide insurance and while I work, I don't work enough to go above 100% of the FPL. Which means that pending whatever the screwups in the Tennessee legislature come up with, I don't get Medicaid or the subsidies right now. I needed insurance starting this month and I found something much cheaper than the Obamacare plans. I don't know if it is only restricted to those in their 20's or not. It's possible. I don't mind covering people with pre-existing conditions or helping lower premiums for older people but it's still a sticker shock, especially when I myself have to keep accruing more debt at the moment. And I definitely don't want to pay for things like maternity care which in my opinion is elective. If you want to have a baby, you should pay for it.

[NewYorkExpress]

They'll try to impeach both Obama and Biden and they'll fail miserably... (I would think the Hard Right would prefer a President Boenher to a President Biden)