Originally posted by Mountain Man
View Post
Does that make what Tillis is doing right? Does that make my statement that he is lying to try to undo one of the most important provisions of the ACA wrong?
More to the point, the above comment having even an ounce of relevance hinges on your assumption I am somehow defending the ACA as a whole. And that is wrong. I'm only defending this specific aspect of it and calling out the republicans who are lying to try to undo this aspect of it. The way the pre-existing conditions clause was handled before the ACA has ALWAYS been wrong, and if the ACA did nothing else right - they did that part of it right. Insurance companies should never have been allowed to leverage the pre-existing condition clauses to force people to lose coverage for treatment they otherwise had when they lost a job or just got a better job using a different insurance provider.
Jim
ETA: And you are doing your own bait and switch. That link is talking about problems in an entirely different sort of category than what Tillis is doing. Again, there is no equivalence, even though you are claiming there is one. As I said before, implementing something like the ACA is bound to have mistakes made, policies that need adjusting and so on. Red tape and paperwork mistakes, policies that looked good on paper but lead to intractable problems, that sort of stuff is going to happen and is not evidence of lying. Tillis is just plain flat up-front lying.
Comment