So – can/must they do that? Are these health-care exchanges government agencies, or are they not?
Waitaminnit, Congressman – if “The position of the question could lead some to think voter registration is somehow tied to healthcare eligibility” – where’s the harm in that? All good patriotic Americans like you and me, concerned with the civic health of our great republic, which of course depends on maximum citizen participation in it, want all eligible citizens to register to vote – don’t we? Eh?! [prods Boustany’s chest with index finger repeatedly] Eh?!
The Republicans should celebrate poor people registering to vote in this fashion. Agter all, isn’t voter fraud the thing that Republicans are trying to combat when thay make registration difficult? These applicants will have all of their necessary paperwork and info handy. You just can’t please some folks, I guess.
These exchanges are just web sites, right? So the state-run web site to choose health insurance will have a link to an already-existing state or county run web site that allows voter registration? Boustany is an idiot.
I read his letter of dissent. Looks like he just doesn’t like the idea that the two are linked directly, and to him it appeared that “voter registration” would be inherent to, and perhaps considered a requirement for, ACA subsidized health insurance. That doesn’t sound like such a bad thing to say “Hey, watch out for this possibly unintended consequence, I don’t think those two things should be so close to one another”
Mebbe?
FWIW, I am as politically neutral as you can get, as I have no idea what any particular politician thinks, believes, wants, hates, etc. 'Cept maybe O’BLAMMA.
I’m speculating that Boustany is concerned that some citizens who are registering for government assistance for their health care expenses might not fully appreciate how evil these programs are and might inadvertently vote the wrong way as a result.
I can see a argument that it can be used to obligate a person to vote under deception. When a applicant files and may be told it is required that they be a registered voter and participate in the election process. That part of what the applicant is told would be a lie, but elections are a dirty game on all sides, so I could see it happening in some form, perhaps strong suggestions that they vote to keep their benefits - which quite ironically persuading them to vote may help that - if they would tend to vote for those who would seek to maintain/strengthen such a system.
But is that a reason not to do it? Because of the possible few abuses that really just have people do what they have a right to do anyway.
Haha. Sorry for casting a bit of humor onto your Dear Leader. I may be in this boat with you, but it’s by pure coincidence, and I couldn’t give two shits who’s at the helm.
Well, it’s a confusion easily dispelled with a single question. If someone thinks not to ask it, then someone (1) gets the health insurance and (2) registers to vote – nope, no downside.
Here’s your mistake. You seem to think that your poor sixth grade dropout is stupider than a Republican Congressman from Louisiana.
Here is an actual downside. The California website asks about one’s current health to help in estimating the level of coverage someone might need for next year. Totally optional, but it is possible to worry about the government collecting pre-existing condition information. But I’m hard pressed to see how a link to an application would make anyone thing being registered is required.