Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 73

Thread: Rand Paul Plan to Repeal and Replace Obamacare

  1. #1

    Default Rand Paul Plan to Repeal and Replace Obamacare

    Paul, Trump upend GOP's Obamacare repeal plans

    By BURGESS EVERETT - 01/09/17

    After Rand Paul spent the last week urging the GOP not to repeal Obamacare without having a replacement plan ready, his phone rang on Friday night with a call from a new supporter: Donald Trump.

    “He called after seeing an interview that I had done [talking about] that we should vote on Obamacare replacement at the same time,” Paul said in an interview on Monday. “He said he was in complete agreement with that.”

    With Trump going out of his way to bless the Kentucky senator’s approach, Paul’s week-long campaign to hold a vote on replacing Obamacare alongside a simultaneous repeal measure has seemingly upended the GOP’s long-sought plans for a cathartic and immediate vote to gut the health care law. As news broke that Trump backed Paul's play, several other Senate Republicans were also beginning calls for a new strategy — threatening the trajectory of the party’s rush to repeal the law.

    Paul said he wasn’t trying to slow the process down, but instead said it’s a “matter of speeding up” the replacement efforts. He’s putting together an initial proposal containing the GOP’s best ideas and will ship them this afternoon to Trump’s administration after getting buy-in from the president-elect.

    ...
    read more:
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...nd-paul-233351

    --------

    A Health-Care Plan the GOP Could Get Behind
    by Michael Tanner - January 11, 2017

    The GOP needs an alternative to Obamacare. Rand Paul’s plan is a good start.
    ...
    Paul wants to repeal Obamacare root and branch, of course, but he also wants Republicans to offer a replacement plan on day one. Democrats may block it, but then the political fallout will be on them.

    Paul’s proposal draws liberally from the best ideas in other Republican plans, while avoiding many of the pitfalls that make some of those plans unworkable. He would, for example, dramatically expand health savings accounts (HSAs). HSAs shift control of health-care spending from employers to employees. Paul’s expansion would allow much larger tax-free contributions to these accounts, and would allow them to be used for a wider variety of health-related expenses, including insurance premiums. That would mean that you — not your boss — would be able to choose your insurance plan. Expanded HSAs would also mean increased portability for health insurance. Because you could use your HSA to pay your premium, you wouldn’t be as likely to lose your insurance if you changed or lost your job.

    This would replace many of the subsidies in Obamacare without the dangers of government-designated insurance inherent in some of the tax-credit proposals that some Republicans have backed. (If the government offers a credit for insurance, it has to define what insurance qualifies for the credit.)

    Paul would also greatly expand competition and choice in the health-insurance market. He would expand association health plans and allow individuals to purchase health insurance through non-traditional groups, such as churches and civic associations. In theory, any person who wanted to purchase group insurance would have the opportunity to do so. And he would legalize the purchase of health insurance across state lines, challenging both the insurance cartels and overzealous state regulators, while allowing individuals to shop for the best price and quality they can find.

    Importantly, Paul avoids one of the most significant pitfalls of many Republican plans by not retaining Obamacare’s pre-existing-condition rules. These provisions, which prohibit insurers from denying coverage or charging more to people who are already sick, are among the few popular parts of Obamacare. Yet they are also the reason behind some of the most damaging and unpopular provisions, such as the individual mandate.

    Some Republicans are discussing ways to preserve the pre-existing-condition requirements as long as a person maintains continuous coverage, or creating an open-enrollment period during which the rules apply. But those proposals would still encourage people to game the system, jumping to more comprehensive plans or those with the best specialists after they become sick, knowing that insurers could not refuse them or increase their premiums. If Republicans simultaneously eliminate the mandate, this will only accelerate the adverse-selection death spiral that is already besetting Obamacare.

    Paul would eliminate the pre-existing-condition regulations altogether (after a transition period), while his other reforms would significantly reduce the number of people who genuinely cannot buy health insurance because of a pre-existing condition. For those who still need help, Paul envisions responsibility for covering them being shifted to the states, possibly in conjunction with proposals to block-grant Medicaid.

    This would give states the freedom to experiment with ways to cover people who are unable to buy their own insurance for whatever reason, whether pre-existing conditions or low income. Importantly, it prevents a small number of high-cost cases from distorting the rest of the insurance pool. It wouldn’t try to insure the uninsurable, but would provide their health care more directly. After all, it is health care that counts, not health insurance.
    ...
    More: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...plan-rand-paul
    Last edited by Brian4Liberty; 01-11-2017 at 09:35 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Rand Paul is off to one hell of a start this new term.
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  4. #3

    Default

    nice.
    The bigger government gets, the smaller I wish it was.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jllundqu View Post
    Rand Paul is off to one hell of a start this new term.
    And it's really a plus to see the incoming President agreeing with him.
    Last edited by Natural Citizen;

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    That's right.

    ...not something we 2nd amendment supporters want to hear, but right.

    The idea that the 'oi polloi should have the same weaponry as the army is quite insane.

    ...a relic of well intended but irrational Enlightenment thinking about the nature of the people (can't work against their own interests, etc).

    The people should be armed so as to defend themselves from criminals, not so as to overthrow the government,

  6. #5

    Default

    Now the tough part, getting Rand's 'replacement' and not another doomed to failure intervention that will lead to public support fo Single Payer in 4-8 years.
    Freedom index

    ~Resident Badgiraffe





  7. #6

    Default

    This is a good sign!
    +
    'These things I command you, that you love one another.' - Jesus Christ

  8. #7

  9. #8

    Default

    The best part would be if it turns out the call did not happen. Troll level: master.
    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

  10. #9

    Default

    Paul said he wasn’t trying to slow the process down, but instead said it’s a “matter of speeding up” the replacement efforts. He’s putting together an initial proposal containing the GOP’s best ideas and will ship them this afternoon to Trump’s administration after getting buy-in from the president-elect.
    Nice.
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  11. #10

    Default

    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    Oligarchy delenda est

    “If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams

  12. #11

    Default

    Any healthcare system that relies upon licenses, prescriptions, regulations, approvals, patents, and care mandates will ALWAYS depend upon the government for funding.

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    it's obviously going to have to be a political transition, not a full blown repeal and replace with nothing. This is a smart move for Rand to understand this and make sure he starts paving the way for competitive free market health care and not just another cobbled together special interest boondoggle.

    This puts libertarian ideas front and center in the public debate on what to do about healthcare.

    What is your problem anyways?

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    Have you read his replacement plan? If so, what is your issue with it?

  15. #14

    Default

    If the replacement law removes regulations and opens the market, then that might be less government.

    Trump is listening.
    "There are two freedoms - the false, where a man is free to do what he likes; the true, where he is free to do what he ought."~~Charles Kingsley

  16. #15

    Default

    threatening the trajectory of the party’s rush to repeal the law
    No $#@!ing around here...repeal this disaster, now, stomp a mud hole in its ass and salt the earth where it stood.

    There never has been a more dangerous precedent set before: buy this product or else.

    It is a tax on living.

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    No this is a very valid point.

    Knowing Rand I am willing to bet that his "replacement" is 98% free market or more. He is doing a piss poor job of communicating that, as usual though.

    And lots of the conservatives are starting to buy into the narrative that he is trying to actually delay replacement.

    Rand is getting flanked on both sides, from the conservatives that don't think it should be replaced, and from conservatives that think that he is trying to stall and delay repeal. His communication is lousy, but then again, this is the norm.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    Hah, you're being ridiculous. Rand is replacing it with some free market reforms. He can't go to congress and say, "hey let's repeal Obamacare and institute some free market reforms" if he wants any of those fools to take him seriously. He has to call the free market reforms a "replacement" so that it is palatable. It is the best strategy for instituting free market reforms in our healthcare system. If you had a better strategy, then we would be seeing some action happening from your corner. But instead you are playing armchair quarterback and doing a really bad job at least in this instance.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Knowing Rand I am willing to bet that his "replacement" is 98% free market or more. He is doing a piss poor job of communicating that
    Um, ya, that's the whole point. Know your audience.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    How the hell did you're obnoxious ass get back in here?
    Last edited by Natural Citizen;

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    That's right.

    ...not something we 2nd amendment supporters want to hear, but right.

    The idea that the 'oi polloi should have the same weaponry as the army is quite insane.

    ...a relic of well intended but irrational Enlightenment thinking about the nature of the people (can't work against their own interests, etc).

    The people should be armed so as to defend themselves from criminals, not so as to overthrow the government,

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    No $#@!ing around here...repeal this disaster, now, stomp a mud hole in its ass and salt the earth where it stood.

    There never has been a more dangerous precedent set before: buy this product or else.

    It is a tax on living.
    Don't you think free market principles should be laid out now instead of leaving a huge gaping hole for the statist to rush in and fill with something just as bad or worse?
    Last edited by Natural Citizen;

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    That's right.

    ...not something we 2nd amendment supporters want to hear, but right.

    The idea that the 'oi polloi should have the same weaponry as the army is quite insane.

    ...a relic of well intended but irrational Enlightenment thinking about the nature of the people (can't work against their own interests, etc).

    The people should be armed so as to defend themselves from criminals, not so as to overthrow the government,

  22. #21

    Default

    Last edited by Natural Citizen;

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    That's right.

    ...not something we 2nd amendment supporters want to hear, but right.

    The idea that the 'oi polloi should have the same weaponry as the army is quite insane.

    ...a relic of well intended but irrational Enlightenment thinking about the nature of the people (can't work against their own interests, etc).

    The people should be armed so as to defend themselves from criminals, not so as to overthrow the government,

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    No $#@!ing around here...repeal this disaster, now, stomp a mud hole in its ass and salt the earth where it stood.

    There never has been a more dangerous precedent set before: buy this product or else.

    It is a tax on living.
    When most of the GOP is talking repeal, they aren't talking about yanking it out, root and branch. They want to trim a few branches and give it fertilizer.

    Repealing the mandate and leaving pre-existing conditions intact may well collapse the insurance industry, and the replacement could be single-payer.

    My anti-Rand bonafides should be unquestioned, but he's right on this one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.
    The epitome of libertarian populism

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    Don't you think free market principles should be laid out now instead of leaving a huge gaping hole for the statist to rush in and fill with something just as bad or worse?
    A valid point, but what I see as a bigger threat is the opportunity a "delay" will give the worthless GOP to mince, crawfish and backpedal on repealing this monstrosity.

    A monstrosity they created and their 2012 candidate put in place first.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    No this is a very valid point.

    Knowing Rand I am willing to bet that his "replacement" is 98% free market or more. He is doing a piss poor job of communicating that, as usual though.

    And lots of the conservatives are starting to buy into the narrative that he is trying to actually delay replacement.

    Rand is getting flanked on both sides, from the conservatives that don't think it should be replaced, and from conservatives that think that he is trying to stall and delay repeal. His communication is lousy, but then again, this is the norm.
    He is improving though. He got rid of your ass.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  26. #25

    Default

    Until and unless the Congress rips out all the legislation that protects big pharma from having to compete with drug sales from other countries, forcing hospitals to treat illegal aliens with no ability to pay and thus creating the need for hospitals to suck the financial life out of anyone shut out of getting insurance and thus negotiated rates, shields any and all medical providers from transparency and competition, yes, they damn well better have a meaningful transition for people with preexisting conditions. Many here do not seem to realize that without insurance that has negotiated rates, medical providers can and do charge up to FOUR TIMES the amount for a given procedure. So, once again, over many years and much legislation, government has created this scenario. If you truly want a free market, ALL of it has to be ripped out. Not just rip out Obamacare and believe that it's all fixed now.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  27. #26

    Default

    I thought the whole point of his not supporting the current bill was about balancing the budget? I hope he brings that up as an ACTUAL OPTION during the press he'll likely get for this headline.
    The more prohibitions you have,
    the less virtuous people will be.
    The more weapons you have,
    the less secure people will be.
    The more subsidies you have,
    the less self-reliant people will be.

    Therefore the Master says:
    I let go of the law,
    and people become honest.
    I let go of economics,
    and people become prosperous.
    I let go of religion,
    and people become serene.
    I let go of all desire for the common good,
    and the good becomes common as grass.

    -Tao Te Ching, Section 57

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Now the tough part, getting Rand's 'replacement' and not another doomed to failure intervention that will lead to public support fo Single Payer in 4-8 years.
    I think this is where we finally see Rand's support of Mitch McConnell finally pay a dividend. If not now, I don't know when.

    XNN
    "They sell us the president the same way they sell us our clothes and our cars. They sell us every thing from youth to religion the same time they sell us our wars. I want to know who the men in the shadows are. I want to hear somebody asking them why. They can be counted on to tell us who our enemies are but theyre never the ones to fight or to die." - Jackson Browne Lives In The Balance

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?

    Is there anything less libertarian than a federal government controlling the health care sector?

    (Don't bother to answer, all the people with integrity abandoned this place long ago, and I have zero respect for the legions of hypocrites left.)
    The one thing the federal government actually has a right to do under the commerce clause is to stop states from interfering with interstate commerce. State laws that bar insurance companies from competing across state lines do just that. Also the tax code should be changed (scrapped really, but that's a fight for another day) so that health care expenses are "above the line" deductible. In other words you should get a dollar for dollar reduction in your tax burden for every dollar spent on healthcare, whether that is for paying your deductible, paying your premium, or just simply paying your doctor outright. And yes, the mandate should be sh&^canned.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Suddenly, nobody has a problem with the federal government being involved where it shouldn't be, because Rand.

    Isn't anyone here libertarian enough to wonder what Rand's justification for having a replacement is, when the Constitution could not be clearer that control over health care is not among the powers delegated to the federal government?
    ...
    Yes, because Rand. Some of us have hope that Rand having influence here will result in a better outcome than other options that come from crony politicians and their lobbyist masters. On the surface, a no nonsense repeal sounds good, but this is also an opportunity to do things that open up competition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeman View Post
    Have you read his replacement plan? If so, what is your issue with it?
    You have to pass it before you can see what is in it.

    I believe Rand is pushing for a more open process right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    ...Knowing Rand I am willing to bet that his "replacement" is 98% free market or more.
    ...
    Which is why some of us see this as a step in the right direction.
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonhowe View Post
    I thought the whole point of his not supporting the current bill was about balancing the budget? I hope he brings that up as an ACTUAL OPTION during the press he'll likely get for this headline.
    The amendment he gave to the bill allows congress to repeal obamacare at a future date and balances the budget. He already has the bills that have free market reforms that he has outlined to replace obamacare as well, several have been put forward and have consensus.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast





Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-07-2017, 12:21 PM
  2. Rand Paul: Repeal all of Obamacare and replace immediately
    By Origanalist in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-06-2017, 02:24 AM
  3. Mitt Romney Mitt Romney's repeal and replace of Obamacare???
    By whippoorwill in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-16-2012, 11:03 AM
  4. Rand Paul: Repeal Obamacare!
    By Orgoonian in forum Obamacare
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2011, 11:53 AM
  5. ObamaCare: Repeal, Replace or What?
    By tangent4ronpaul in forum Obamacare
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-28-2010, 01:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •