I firmly disagree with Carson. Yes, there were pre-Obamacare statist problems in health care, but not reason we need a plan b4 repeal
-
-
Replying to @RMConservative
@RMConservative Just playing devils advocate, don't you need replace so people won't just lose plans, etc, & know rules of road post ACA?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DavidMDrucker
@DavidMDrucker maybe Carson meant this, but repeal would be paired with immediate insurance surge allowing any type of plan to b offered1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @RMConservative
@RMConservative Law would have to be changed for "any kind of plan" 2B offered - that cld constitute "replace" maybe he meant that1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DavidMDrucker
@DavidMDrucker but repealing o-care means not just the honey but the bitter pill of mandates. correct, not all, but at least o-care ones1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @RMConservative
@RMConservative You might B right. Were other regs pre-Ocare. & Insurers wld still need time to prepare covg products. Trying 2 figure out1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DavidMDrucker
@DavidMDrucker sure, that's within the margins. but cons are rightfully suspicious that "replace" b4 repeal is really excuse 2 eschew repeal1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes
@RMConservative Fair point and different issue.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.