I'll allow you to bone up on your facts I think!
First, I had already said that Republicans as a party hadn't supported the individual mandate since 1994, so I'm not sure why you brought up examples earlier than that, other than to confirm I was correct.
you did notice there are other bills with dates after 1994 that had (R) support and that they weren't just Newt idea right?
OK, I was correct.
I guess not.. you said
"Gingrich is for mandates but he's not representative on that issue. "so let's try showing you that you are wrong...again
1. Nov. 20, 1993
(date introduced) Consumer Choice Health Security Act (SB 1743) (624 KB) Sponsored by Senator Don Nickles (R-OK) & 24 Republican cosponsors
I give you that Newt's big guy, but that's 25 GOP members right there, if nothing else, that proves you were wrong when you said ""Gingrich is for mandates but he's not representative on that issue. "
2. Nov. 23, 1993
(date introduced) Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act (SB 1770) (1.6 MB) Sponsored by Senator John H. Chafee (R-RI) & 20 cosponsors (2-D, 18-R)
That's 19 more GOP members.. if nothing else, that, with the 25 above, proves you were wrong when you said "Gingrich is for mandates but he's not representative on that issue. "
3. Jan. 18, 2007
(date introduced) Healthy Americans Act (SB 334) (427 KB) Sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) & 17 cosponsors (7-D, 1-I, 9-R)
more than Newt there too...hmm I'm seeing a pattern and that pattern in you're wrong when you say "Gingrich is for mandates but he's not representative on that issue. "
4. Feb. 5, 2009
(date introduced) Healthy Americans Act (SB 391) (394 KB) Sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) & 14 cosponsors (8-D, 1-I, 5-R)
there's 5 more..
every time the mandate, that was conceived of by a GOP think tank and brought to congress by GOP congressmen with plenty of GOP support (that was more than just Newt Gingrich) and even supported by GOP member when Liberals brought it up, every time it came up it had some support from the GOP... right up until when?
oh yeah..
until Obama... So when i said
"The individual mandate was around before Hillarycare," I was correct
when I said
" it was what the GOP was going to 'counter' her idea with.. " I was correct
when I said
"The GOP loved the idea right up until Obama used it, then it became evil.. and a r/d issue.." I was correct.
The fact that you ignored all that and still jumped to the "I'm correct" is cute, but it doesn't make you any less wrong..
Now the real "meat" of your post was The Healthy Americans Act. I was scratching my head, thinking I should have heard of such a bill before, so I googled the name...ahhh it was Wyden-Bennett! I had actually brought this up during our Obamacare discussions! It was an alternative to Obamacare. I opposed it too, but at least it didn't' have the private market destroying features of Obamacare. But it also didn't have an individual mandate, it had a tax for premiums, like the Medicare part of FICA. So although I oppose this too, it's not unconstitutional like the Obamacare individual mandate is since it doesn't run afoul of the Commerce clause.
I don't really know why that was thrown in here.. that must be some kid of 'tourettes' or something..because
the 'meat' of my post was informing you on the different bills, with mandates, either created, sponsored by, or supported by the gOP right up until Obama brought it up and then not a single GOP member, even ones around when they used to support it, supported it..
but the 'healthy Americans act'
Healthy Americans Act - Requires each adult individual to have the opportunity to purchase a Healthy Americans Private Insurance Plan (HAPI). Makes individuals who are not enrolled in another specified health plan and who are not opposed to coverage for religious reasons responsible for enrolling themselves and their dependent children in a HAPI plan offered through their state of residence. Sets forth penalties for failure to enroll."
yeah,...
it requires...
it makes...
responsible for enrolling....
penalties for noncompliance... yeah sorry, that's mandate.
Now you know, or used to know, what the individual mandate is, but either you've forgotten or just thought you could bluff me with your hyper partisan website you pulled this info from.
Hyper Partisan website?
HA!
"Who we are..
ProCon.org is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit public charity that has no government affiliations of any kind. Our purpose is to provide resources for critical thinking and to educate without bias. We do not express opinions on our research projects ("issue websites").
Our mission statement is:
"Promoting critical thinking, education, and informed citizenship by presenting controversial issues in a straightforward, nonpartisan, primarily pro-con format."
We accomplish our mission by researching issues that we feel are controversial and important, and we work to present them in a balanced, comprehensive, straightforward, and primarily pro-con format at no charge on our websites.
ok... yep they educate without bias, I can see how that's 'hyper-partisan'.. since your party is sooooo anti-education, but here in the real world, out side the bubble, we like education w/o bias.. and hey, even if you don't like the site, the links go to the actual bills..
So if you are sincere, you will apologize to me since you got your facts wrong.
HAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Haaaaaaaaaaa sure Mike, you're right... you're always right... even when proven so fucking wrong, you're still right..
do me a favor, you can't admit you were rusty on this issue when you opened your mouth and have now been schooled... iow, you can't admit you were in error... so let's just move on and will you explain this to me..
the private market destroying features of Obamacarehow is it destroying the private market...
