@emlynaddison @UniteRight for many it will be higher cost. For source, please see the link you provided.
-
-
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed For some, not many. And the aim is to bring down healthcare costs overall, not just premiums.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed By at least acknowledging this http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/us-health-spending-breaks-from-the-pack/ … as an American problem, not a party one.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison ACA does not equal free health care. People still have to pay for care which means people will still default on payments.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed Who on earth said healthcare would be free? They're wrong. The ACA was designed to move us away from skyrocketing costs.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed ...on ones that have a proven track record. But the status quo could not have been allowed to persist forever.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison fundamental change of our current system is hard and will impact our economy in ways unimaginable. Not saying changes arent...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@emlynaddison needed, but we cannot scrap the whole thing&start fresh. ACA was f'd due 2 2 parties not working together. That needs 2 change
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@WillNotBeSwayed We *aren't* starting fresh--remember? The ACA is *already* the Republican compromise.
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.