AFK for a while, life issues

That is on top of insurance. We pay roughly 275 dollars per paycheck for both of our insurance. Before the ACA, that insurance was sufficient to cover our doctor, etc.

After the ACA, more and more independent doctors are going to the concierge or direct pay method. Most of the reason given is the extra red tape. They apparently would rather charge for the office visits and minor tests via fee/concierge payment instead of trying to wade through the post-ACA insurance hoops.

Here in Texas, it is rapidly splitting into 3 groups. Lower quality doctors that remain independent, good doctors like my old one who are going direct pay/concierge, and doctors that are part of a multi doctor clinic.

Fixed

Yeah, I can only say for certain what has happened here. Most doctors that run private practices and are rated well slowly started transitioning to either a service that charges a large amount of money per patient per year, in addition to insurance, or they simply posted on their website they no longer accept insurance. They call it direct primary care, like you pay a fee per month.

https://reason.com/video/doctors-direct-primary-care/

My doctor joined a concierge service called MDVIP. I just checked and he lowered his rates to 1,800 per year per patient. Whether you go or not. He was a great doctor, but I refuse to pay 3600 per year for my wife and me to see a doctor. Not when they will bill our insurance as well for any actual visits/treatments.

Instead we had to switch to Austin Regional Clinic, who has an amazing lab and bloodwork team, but the doctor situation is as I mentioned before. There is no feeling that I have a personal doctor. Usually they schedule me with whichever one is available or a PA. Every time I have to re-list what meds I am on and what existing conditions I have because they don't remember. You would think they could look at a chart, but they are so busy every time. It's like sex in high school, in, out, and thanks for coming.

We've tried some others, even a few private practices, but none have been up to par. All of them seem to be super busy and have trimmed their staff to the bone.

If the ACA isn't changed or doesn't go away, I don't see it getting any better.

From my standpoint, it is useless and makes my life more difficult. Regardless of how it was passed, I wish it was dead.

*discard

The ACA was passed on party lines, it was going to be screwed up because of that no matter what. What pisses me off about it is that instead of trying to come up with a better solution, the Democrats rammed that fucker through. I can only assume it is because for a brief period they had control of the legislative and executive branches all at the same time. So rather than take a chance to fix it, they figured if they were going to get anything they might as well get it in place.

Obama inherited the situation in the ME. Bush fucked up royally. Obama just took a bad situation and made it worse. Admittedly, there were other fingers in the pie also, but he is still culpable.

The rules for the drone war were decided by Obama's administration. Regardless of what Bush did before, that lays 100% on Obama and his team. Some good articles to read:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/president-obamas-weak-defense-of-his-record-on-drone-strikes/511454/

https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/opinion/bergen-obama-drone/index.html

https://www.propublica.org/series/drones

I just have a feeling. Could be wrong, could be right. It could be argued that since all 3 are supposed to be separate branches that congress adding more justices would be tampering with checks and balances. Then again, precedent might count in favor of it.

War/Secession isn't only a purview of the conservatives. I recall many people saying similar things when Bush/Trump was elected. Especially Trump, as I recall people saying California should leave the union etc. As I've told you before, I honestly think it might be the best solution at this point. Half of us bitterly disagree with the other half and it's getting worse every single election/year.

I'm old enough and jaded enough at this point that I figure it couldn't hurt. The USSR broke up, might as well be our turn.

I'm not arguing the merits of either. I don't think Trump is a good man or President.

It's my firm opinion that Obama chose to play the long game, hoping that the anger over Garland not being confirmed would influence the upcoming election. He believed that they might take the Senate back and then either he or Hillary would then be able to get the nominee they wanted. Plus as @newtboy pointed out, there was no way any pick he chose was going to pass muster with the Republican controlled Senate. Picking another person would likely tarnish them and remove a good liberal pick from future selection.

I consider Obama a good person and a mediocre President. I voted for him the first time because I bought into his mantra of change. It didn't happen. He forced through the ACA on party line votes, fucking up my personal situation in regards to doctors and insurance. He further screwed up the situation with the middle east which directly led to the entire Syria/ISIS situation. He did authorize drone strikes that led to many non combatant deaths and some pretty reprehensible situations. That is including the fact that his administration considered any military aged male in strike zones to be enemy combatants UNLESS they could be verified otherwise after their death. So many of those were not counted. There are other issues I have with his Presidency, but those are some of the big ones.

He did kill Bin Laden. I will give him kudos for that. I also think that once he lost control of the Congress in his second term he had no way to get anything accomplished, so I can't say he wouldn't have done something I liked in his second term. He is also an amazing orator.

As an aside, the last time this was brought up it was in the late 30's.

"Aside from President Franklin Roosevelt’s ill-fated threat in 1937 to add new Justices who sympathized with his policies to the Supreme Court, the number of Justices on the Court has remained stable.

Roosevelt was particularly upset by the Court’s 1935 decision in Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States. The unanimous decision invalidated a key part of the National Industrial Recovery Act, one of the projects passed during FDR's 100-day program in 1933. President Roosevelt did not mince words a week later when he talked to the press. “You see the implications of the decision. That is why I say it is one of the most important decisions ever rendered in this country,” Roosevelt told reporters on May 31, 1935. “We have been relegated to the horse-and-buggy definition of interstate commerce.”

As Roosevelt started his second term, he used one of his fireside chats in March 1937 to make his case to the American people for adding more Justices to the Supreme Court who agreed with him. “This plan of mine is not attacking of the court; it seeks to restore the court to its rightful and historic place in our system of constitutional government and to have it resume its high task of building anew on the Constitution ‘a system of living law.’ The court itself can best undo what the court has done,” Roosevelt said.

The legislation struggled to gain traction and it was opposed not only by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes but also by Justice Louis Brandeis and members of Roosevelt’s Democratic Party."

It would be incredibly likely that any attempt to add new seats to the Supreme Court would be found unconstitutional.

However, it wouldn't be the first time we have had more or fewer judges. This isn't something new as opposing political entities have done their best to stack the court, one way or the other, from the very beginning.

If it happens, it happens. Although I suspect it might lead to another civil war if it is obnoxious enough. Maybe we can end up in Districts this time, with some sort of gladiatorial display to keep the masses calm?

There is no honor in politics.

He chose not to. I can only assume because there was a conservative majority in the Senate.

He had the option. If there had been a Democrat majority, the person could have been confirmed even after Trump won the election.

Just because a sitting President is in Lame Duck status, it does not mean his powers are revoked. Some choose not to do anything after the election and that is their option.

You can't crush a soul here, that's what life on Earth is for.

Truer words were never spoken.