What Should Be Done With Obamacare?

As the House of Representatives schedules a vote on repeal, Patch readers enter a thoughtful debate. Voice your opinion in the latest Patch poll.


Patch coverage of the Unites States Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act drew more than 175 comments spawning a debate about the issue among readers.

and Patch wants to know its readers’ opinion. Please take the latest unscientific Patch Poll at the bottom of this story and keep the debate going.

Within hours after the Court’s decision Thursday, lauded the opinion while and wanted changes. Dold will vote to repeal July 9.

“ bad policy,” Dold said referring to his vote in January of last year. “Unlike the current law, which was the product of a very flawed process and unprecedented partisanship, the American people deserve an opportunity to advance sensible solutions that enjoy bipartisan support.”

That Senate has not acted on the initial repeal vote measure by the House.

Schakowsky made it clear she will vote against repeal and sees the move by House Republican leadership as unnecessary.

“Are the Republicans suggesting that the 3.1 million young adults be thrown off their parents policies,” Schakowsky said? “Or the 17 million children with pre-existing conditions now become ineligible for insurance?”

Dold favors letting children remain on their parents policies until they are 26 and requiring coverage despite pre-existing conditions. Deerfield’s Brad Schneider, Dold’s Democratic opponent in the Nov. 6 general election, wants to let the law become fully operative before making changes.

“When we first passed Medicare it took (some) time to know what parts worked and what parts did not,” Schneider said. “We have to see what works and change what doesn’t.” Schakowsky agrees with Schneider’s analysis.

Patch readers are no less passionate about the issue. John Utah sees merit in the positions of Kirk and Dold. He would go further. “Repeal and replace with free market solutions, not big government,” Utah writes.

Another reader, Irving Drobny, likes Schneider’s approach. “How do you know it will be a disaster,” Drobny writes. “Did you look into your crystal ball for an answer? Why don't you see if it works first before you write it off?”

Marilyn Thompson likes Dold’s bipartisan approach and his support of many of the Affordable Care Act’s provisions but she is disappointed with his decision to vote for repeal.

“He (Dold) supports a lot of it and would work on fixing the parts that he doesn't like. This sort of reasoned approach is what we need in Washington,” Thompson writes. “Repealing the law will eliminate all the good things that are contained therein—and it would be virtually impossible to get them all back.”

The poll will remain open through 5 p.m. Thursday and Patch will publish the results Friday morning.

Richard Schulte July 21, 2012 at 12:58 PM
(Comrade) Sully: "Any definitive proof that Willingham was actually guilty?" Hmmm, well Willingham was convicted by a jury of his peers. In the trial, Willingham did not testify in his own defense-innocent people defend themselves; guilty people know that they can't defend themselves and remain silent. The conviction and sentence of Willingham was appealed 9 times prior to Willinghams's execution. Two weeks before Willingham's execution, he confessed to his ex-wife that he set the fire that killed his two children. I can't think of any reason why his ex-wife would lie about Willingham's confession, can you? That pretty much nails it down for me Comrade Sully. Got any reason to presume that Willingham was innocent and was wrongly executed. No you don't. The purpose of this whole exercise by the Innocence Project (Barry Scheck) was to smear Governor Rick Perry and the State of Texas. Scheck used an expert, Dr. Craig Beyler, who's credibility is questionable. I brought forth evidence of the lack of credibility of Craig Beyler and Craig Beyler has never filed a lawsuit against me for libel because telling the truth about someone is not libel. With respect to the ethics complaint against Dr. Craig Beyler, you know just enough about it to make a fool of yourself. Once again, Beyler has never filed a libel lawsuit against me-it's not libel when you tell the truth.
Richard Schulte July 21, 2012 at 01:06 PM
Sully: "(Comrade) Sully: "Any definitive proof that Willingham was actually guilty?" Ahhh, Comrade Sully, I almost forgot-it's been 2 years since I looked at this. If you read the trial transcript, you will find that Willingham was convicted of supplying adolescents with meth. Quite a guy this Willingham was-giving 12 and 13 years old drugs. Of course, the jury didn't hear this testimony before they convicted Willingham of murder. This testimony was only presented during the sentencing phase of the trial. In my opinion, anyone who gives drugs (meth) to children should be executed, irrespective of whether or not Willingham murdered his two children. To even question Willingham's execution based upon information available is "low-rent".
Guido McGinty July 21, 2012 at 02:30 PM
"Governor Romney is probably a big government Republican..... Perhaps, but that's the best reason to support smaller government." Words fail me.
Sully July 21, 2012 at 03:07 PM
I like you Mr. Weasel. Let me see what I can do!
Richard Schulte July 21, 2012 at 03:15 PM
Da Weasel: "I'm just here to watch." Then, you may also find the article on the American Thinker website and the Towhhall website of interest. The comments section on the American Thinker website are especially good.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »