In response to:

Obamacare Is Still Vulnerable

edbutmyfriendscallmeed Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 12:39 PM
also, if a state says no and the feds set up an exchange, there can be no mandate, since there are no subsidys, groups and individuals would be exempt from the penalty since they get no assistance. in other words, someone made a grave mistake with this language in the law and it could be the downfall of it. no states can pay for this awful law anyway, all the better.

President Obama has won reelection, and his administration has asked state officials to decide by Friday, November 16, whether their state will create one of Obamacare's health-insurance "exchanges." States also have to decide whether to implement the law's massive expansion of Medicaid. The correct answer to both questions remains a resounding no.

State-created exchanges mean higher taxes, fewer jobs, and less protection of religious freedom. States are better off defaulting to a federal exchange. The Medicaid expansion is likewise too costly and risky a proposition. Republican Governors Association chairman Bob McDonnell (R.,Va.) agrees, and has announced that Virginia...