Senate to close ObamaCare loophole for illegal immigrants,media claims does not exist

Status
Not open for further replies.
netrox said:
I don't think you have a clear mind anymore.

It is simply repeating what WH has been saying... no coverage for illegals. Didn't you read that provision? Guess not.

Let me repeat that provision:

SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED
4 ALIENS.
5 Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments
6 for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are
7 not lawfully present in the United States.

Why does that NOT imprint on your mind?
Click to expand...

Because it seems to miss its mark.
 
netrox said:
I don't think you have a clear mind anymore.

It is simply repeating what WH has been saying... no coverage for illegals. Didn't you read that provision? Guess not.

Let me repeat that provision:

SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED
4 ALIENS.
5 Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments
6 for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are
7 not lawfully present in the United States.

Why does that NOT imprint on your mind?
Click to expand...

I have said all along that there were no provisions in the bill on how to prevent illegal aliens from getting into the health care program. I've not said anything different. You can put all kinds of languages in the bill but if there is no mechanisms on restricting the bill only for citizens then the bill is open ended and everybody falls under it.

Still, HR 3200 has enough loopholes to satisfy the abortionists, tort expansion, and allowing even illegals to find a way to get in (which is predictated on the upcoming amnesty bill that'll make illegals into "legal" immigrants....laughable and wholely expected knowing the Dems' real agenda here).
 
netrox said:
I don't think you have a clear mind anymore.

It is simply repeating what WH has been saying... no coverage for illegals. Didn't you read that provision? Guess not.

Let me repeat that provision:

SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED
4 ALIENS.
5 Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments
6 for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are
7 not lawfully present in the United States.

Why does that NOT imprint on your mind?
Click to expand...


I'm only up to sec 202 but I checked and yep, it's there.
 
Legal point: It's common for regulations to be written in a separate code. There is a series of books called U.S. Code which contains all federal statutes. There is a separate series of books called Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations implement statutory provisions. Generally, the regulations for a statute are longer than the statute itself. For example, the IRS regulations are several volumes (and so much fun to read!).

In this case, Congress is creating the statute, which will be published in the U.S. Federal Code. The executive departments and agencies will publish rules in the Federal register. These regulations will be reported in the Code of Federal Regulations. Attorneys use the regulations for legal research.

This is your government at work.
 
Does it say how to verify the ID of those who apply? Where? That is what's missing! There is no enforcement mechanism built in as way to ensure those who get it are indeed citizens.

Not going to give money to illegal aliens?

Ok.

How are they going to ensure that it won't happen?

By not requesting proof of citizenship?

Anyone can apply if that was the case.

That's the big boo boo Obama forgot.

There is nothing in the bill that ensures only citizens will get the health care coverage and not illegals by other means. Just like getting your drivers license, they require you to prove it with a birth certificate of yours proving that you were born in the U.S. Proof of citizenship to get insurance coverage is a requirement that (supposedly so) fulfills section 246.

Which why Democrats scrambled a few days ago to put in that requirement. The CRS report pointed that out quite clearly. Read it.
 
Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
 
Correction

deafskeptic said:
Section 242 that netrox is referring to. His post was a lot more concise than the wording of Sec 242 to which he referred.

Here's a partial quote from that section:
Click to expand...

Quoted the wrong section. Egg is on my face. It should have been Sec 246. :Oops:

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Click to expand...

I've been having problems with notetaking because I keep quoting the wrong section even with the help of highlighters on the website.
 
an individual who is lawfully present in a State in the United States
Click to expand...

The provision is lacking a requirement to show proof that you are legally, not just lawfully, living in the United States. I'm not seeing anything that shows requirements such as

1. Showing an pictured ID

2. Showing proof a legal document that you are truly a legal citizen of the United States.

3. Showing a legal resident, such as a home address (not a P.O. Box, that doesn't show proof of legal resident)

4. Showing a card with your name and social security number. For most employment laws in various states, a social security number is required by law for employment and for the sole purpose of paying taxes.

So, show me the bill that shows those requirement in order to obtain healthcare.

Yiz
 
yizuman said:
The provision is lacking a requirement to show proof that you are legally, not just lawfully, living in the United States. I'm not seeing anything that shows requirements such as

1. Showing an pictured ID

2. Showing proof a legal document that you are truly a legal citizen of the United States.

3. Showing a legal resident, such as a home address (not a P.O. Box, that doesn't show proof of legal resident)

4. Showing a card with your name and social security number. For most employment laws in various states, a social security number is required by law for employment and for the sole purpose of paying taxes.

So, show me the bill that shows those requirement in order to obtain healthcare.

Yiz
Click to expand...

Aka "lawfully." No need to include all of those.
 
What's the difference between "legally" and "lawfully"?
 
Liebling:-))) said:
"You lie!" (in response to President Obama saying health reform would not insure illegal immigrants.)

Joe Wilson of South Carolina said Obama lied, but he didn't


"We rate Wilson's statement FALSE"

PolitiFact | Joe Wilson of South Carolina said Obama lied, but he didn't"
Click to expand...
Your link includes this:

"...FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange — whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said.

But it's worth pointing out that illegal immigrants participating in the exchange would be paying for their insurance like everyone else. That's similar to the current system — we're not aware of any particular restrictions that stop illegal immigrants from buying private insurance now. Under health care reform, illegal immigrants would be able to buy private insurance or the public option...."
 
netrox said:
A legal American applies for insurance and the insurance company asks him, "Are you an American, legally?" "Yes" "You're covered." If an illegal applies, the insurance company will say, "We don't cover you. Sorry." What happens if the illegal lies? He will likely have to foot the bill.

But if an illegal goes to ER, it does NOT matter at all if he is insured or not, he MUST be cared. It's the law. It doesn't MATTER if he has insurance or not.

ObamaCare is all about insurance for Americans. It doesn't provide insurance to illegals.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to grasp?
Click to expand...

Because he simply doesn't want to grasp it. It doesn't fit in with what he has decided he wants the bill to say and do. He has already been proven wrong over and over, and yet continues to spout the same nonsense over and over no matter.
 
sallylou said:
Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
Click to expand...

Evidently. It's called selective blindness. Any information that could be valuable in actually making him a well informed and educated individual is automatically not processed.
 
Yea. :lol:

Kokonut, don't you ever get tired of hanging out in these threads? Do you ever want to venture out into a fun thread just for a laugh? Come on out! We have cookies! :cool2:
 
sallylou said:
Yea. :lol:

Kokonut, don't you ever get tired of hanging out in these threads? Do you ever want to venture out into a fun thread just for a laugh? Come on out! We have cookies! :cool2:
Click to expand...

Candy, little boy? :naughty:
 
jillio said:
Evidently. It's called selective blindness. Any information that could be valuable in actually making him a well informed and educated individual is automatically not processed.
Click to expand...

Is that a psychology term?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top