looks like mandated purchase of insurance is the law of the land.
Doesn't feel very free to me, but then what is anymore?
SCOTUS Health Care Decision is coming in...
Started by
Tim the Beek
, Jun 28 2012 02:13 PM
63 replies to this topic
#9
-
- VibeTribe
- 12,915 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 02:21 PM
Been following it here:
http://www.scotusblo.../cover-it-live/
Last post there:
http://www.scotusblo.../cover-it-live/
Last post there:
The court reinforces that individuals can simply refuse to pay the tax and not comply with the mandate.
#12
-
- VibeTribe
- 23,358 posts
- LocationShoreline, CT
Posted 28 June 2012 - 02:23 PM
CSPAN says it was upheld.
CNN says the same thing.
The Supreme Court announced, Thursday, that the entire Affordable Care Act is upheld. They did issue some limits on the Medicaid portion of the bill. Chief Justice John Roberts appears to be the crucial fifth vote. This is the final case of the 2011 term.
CNN says the same thing.
[Updated at 10:16 a.m. ET] Kate Bolduan reports that the Chief Justice John Roberts issued a long opinion in which he said the controversial individual mandate may be upheld and is within Congress’ power under the taxing clause rather than the commerce clause.
[Updated at 10:15 a.m. ET] The Supreme Court has upheld the entire health care law by a vote of 5 to 4, Supreme Court Producer Bill Mears said. That includes the medicare provision
[Updated at 10:06 a.m. ET] In a landmark decision that will impact the nation for decades, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a key provision of President Barack Obama's health care law, ruling that requiring people to have health insurance violates the Constitution.
Chief Justice John Roberts had noted that however that the mandate would have been struck down based on the commerce clause , saying it would "open a new and vast domain" for Congressional power.
#13
-
- VibeTribe
- 23,358 posts
- LocationShoreline, CT
Posted 28 June 2012 - 02:33 PM
SCOTUS blog:
Justice Ginsburg makes clear that the vote is 5-4 on sustaining the mandate as a form of tax. Her opinion, for herself and Sotomayor, Breyer and Kagan, joins the key section of Roberts opinion on that point. She would go further and uphold the mandate under the Commerce Clause, which Roberts wouldn't. Her opinion on Commerce does not control.
#14
-
- VibeTribe
- 23,358 posts
- LocationShoreline, CT
Posted 28 June 2012 - 03:01 PM
From Roberts's opinion:
Under the mandate, if an individual does not maintain health insurance, the only consequence is that he must make an additional payment to the IRS when he pays his taxes. See §5000A(
. That, according to the Government,means the mandate can be regarded as establishing acondition—not owning health insurance—that triggers atax—the required payment to the IRS. Under that theory, the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance.Rather, it makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income. And if the mandate is in effect just a tax hike on certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance, itmay be within Congress’s constitutional power to tax.
#24
-
- VibeTribe
- 828 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 03:22 PM
I see the individual mandate as simple fairness.....for years now I (and many of you) have been paying higher insurance premiums to subsidize health care for those who do not have insurance and use the emergency room as their primary care physician.
Yes, single payer would be better. A penalty for not buying insurance that is actually enforcable would also be super. But this is a step in the right direction.
Yes, single payer would be better. A penalty for not buying insurance that is actually enforcable would also be super. But this is a step in the right direction.
#25
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,266 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 03:32 PM
Clearly the wrong forum based on past practice of moving all threads that are political. But it's a positive for Obama and those threads are usually allowed to remain here longer.Is this in the wrong forum?
Personally I think it should be allowed to stay here (IMHO all political threads should) but if political threads aren't allowed here then it should be moved just like any other thread.
#33
-
- VibeTribe
- 9,763 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 04:19 PM
Here is some irony..... People that say they are moving to Canada because of this decision....
http://www.buzzfeed....se-of-obamacare
http://www.buzzfeed....se-of-obamacare
#35
-
- VibeTribe
- 12,915 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 04:31 PM
Here is some irony..... People that say they are moving to Canada because of this decision....
http://www.buzzfeed....se-of-obamacare
Though, again, I would rather have seen a single-payer system than this.
#36
-
- VibeTribe
- 14,112 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 04:44 PM
Here is some irony..... People that say they are moving to Canada because of this decision....
http://www.buzzfeed....se-of-obamacare
Yeah, good luck with that!
It slays me that people think they can just "move to Canada" and collect health care "for free"
This is the best one:
I'm moving to Canada, the United States is entirely too socialist.
#38
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,266 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 05:26 PM
Statement on Supreme Court Obamacare Decision 
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Ron Paul issued the following statement on the Supreme Court's decision to uphold most of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
"I strongly disagree with today’s decision by the Supreme Court, but I am not surprised. The Court has a dismal record when it comes to protecting liberty against unconstitutional excesses by Congress.
"Today we should remember that virtually everything government does is a 'mandate.' The issue is not whether Congress can compel commerce by forcing you to buy insurance, or simply compel you to pay a tax if you don’t. The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of a free society should be the rejection of force. In a free society, therefore, individuals could opt out of “Obamacare” without paying a government tribute.
"Those of us in Congress who believe in individual liberty must work tirelessly to repeal this national health care law and reduce federal involvement in healthcare generally. Obamacare can only increase third party interference in the doctor-patient relationship, increase costs, and reduce the quality of care. Only free market medicine can restore the critical independence of doctors, reduce costs through real competition and price sensitivity, and eliminate enormous paperwork burdens. Americans will opt out of Obamacare with or without Congress, but we can seize the opportunity today by crafting the legal framework to allow them to do so."
http://paul.house.go...=1987&Itemid=28
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Ron Paul issued the following statement on the Supreme Court's decision to uphold most of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
"I strongly disagree with today’s decision by the Supreme Court, but I am not surprised. The Court has a dismal record when it comes to protecting liberty against unconstitutional excesses by Congress.
"Today we should remember that virtually everything government does is a 'mandate.' The issue is not whether Congress can compel commerce by forcing you to buy insurance, or simply compel you to pay a tax if you don’t. The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of a free society should be the rejection of force. In a free society, therefore, individuals could opt out of “Obamacare” without paying a government tribute.
"Those of us in Congress who believe in individual liberty must work tirelessly to repeal this national health care law and reduce federal involvement in healthcare generally. Obamacare can only increase third party interference in the doctor-patient relationship, increase costs, and reduce the quality of care. Only free market medicine can restore the critical independence of doctors, reduce costs through real competition and price sensitivity, and eliminate enormous paperwork burdens. Americans will opt out of Obamacare with or without Congress, but we can seize the opportunity today by crafting the legal framework to allow them to do so."
http://paul.house.go...=1987&Itemid=28
#40
-
- VibeTribe
- 710 posts
Posted 28 June 2012 - 06:54 PM
This thing being run by the IRS has me scared. Just think, the IRS can now create regulations involving your personal wellbeing, or more accurately speaking, their interpretation of your wellbeing with no oversight.
This also doesn’t address cost issues, only plays the walnut shell game with who finances big pharma and the like.
This also doesn’t address cost issues, only plays the walnut shell game with who finances big pharma and the like.
#42
-
- VibeTribe
- 8,284 posts
- LocationWhisky a Go Go
Posted 28 June 2012 - 10:06 PM
May surprise some, but I'd rather see a single payer system than this huge corporate subsidy.
I see the individual mandate as simple fairness.....for years now I (and many of you) have been paying higher insurance premiums to subsidize health care for those who do not have insurance and use the emergency room as their primary care physician.
Yes, single payer would be better. A penalty for not buying insurance that is actually enforcable would also be super. But this is a step in the right direction.
I agree, but the Republicans in the House and Senate made sure that didn't happen.
I don't see how mandating demand is going to reduce the price of supply.
economies of scale
#44
-
- VibeTribe
- 8,284 posts
- LocationWhisky a Go Go
Posted 28 June 2012 - 10:13 PM
http://www.washingto...3bl9V_blog.html
sore losers
what's really ironic is that Mitt Romney wants to repeal it now... he's the one who first created it in Massachusetts.
#46
-
- VibeTribe
- 14,112 posts
Posted 29 June 2012 - 12:39 PM
http://www.washingto...3bl9V_blog.html
sore losers
what's really ironic is that Mitt Romney wants to repeal it now... he's the one who first created it in Massachusetts.
Romneycare'd.
#47
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,582 posts
Posted 29 June 2012 - 01:40 PM
Hope this plan helps folks nationwide like Romneycare does in Mass. I don't know the specifics of the Mass plan, but I do know I've met several restaurant workers using the program who have decent coverage at an affordable price for the first time in their adult lives. To me, that's a good thing.
#48
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,266 posts
Posted 29 June 2012 - 02:19 PM
From a 3 page article at the link below
Massachusetts' health care plan: 6 years later
8% more of the population in Mass has become insured (from 90% to 98%).
Premiums have gone up from $331 to $401 from 2006-2010
Also "since the reform, overall health spending has risen from as a piece of the state budget pie, from 36 percent in 2006 to 43 percent in 2011, and Massachusetts spends $9,278 per person per year on health care, more than any other state."
http://www.cbsnews.c...ain;contentBody
Massachusetts' health care plan: 6 years later
8% more of the population in Mass has become insured (from 90% to 98%).
Premiums have gone up from $331 to $401 from 2006-2010
Also "since the reform, overall health spending has risen from as a piece of the state budget pie, from 36 percent in 2006 to 43 percent in 2011, and Massachusetts spends $9,278 per person per year on health care, more than any other state."
http://www.cbsnews.c...ain;contentBody
#49
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,582 posts
Posted 29 June 2012 - 02:32 PM
Is that a monthly premium or yearly? Most folks I have spoken with who are on Masshealth pay between $1000-$1500 a year.
I had a gap last fall when I did not have health insurance. The cost for a Cobra plan from my prior employer was $350 per month. Private options were much more.
I now pay $1100 a year as a full time student in Mass as a NH resident. Thank you mass tax payers.
I had a gap last fall when I did not have health insurance. The cost for a Cobra plan from my prior employer was $350 per month. Private options were much more.
I now pay $1100 a year as a full time student in Mass as a NH resident. Thank you mass tax payers.
#50
-
- VibeTribe
- 7,580 posts
Posted 29 June 2012 - 02:35 PM
We'll see how this all plays out, but currently we spend about 18% of GDP on healthcare and have a huge amount of uninsured - far, far more than any country with some semblance of socialized healthcare.
As an independent contractor, I cannot possibly afford comprehensive healthcare insurance as it stands now. It would cost me ~1/3 of my typical wages a month. Can you afford that? And if I were ever to get cancer or something I could be kicked off Anthem Blue Shield or any other comparable plan. By most estimates, this might bring my costs down significantly and offer me a little assurance that the money I'm spending isn't going to waste if I really get sick. I don't have the benefit of being in an insurance "pool" like most people who have employer-based healthcare.
As an independent contractor, I cannot possibly afford comprehensive healthcare insurance as it stands now. It would cost me ~1/3 of my typical wages a month. Can you afford that? And if I were ever to get cancer or something I could be kicked off Anthem Blue Shield or any other comparable plan. By most estimates, this might bring my costs down significantly and offer me a little assurance that the money I'm spending isn't going to waste if I really get sick. I don't have the benefit of being in an insurance "pool" like most people who have employer-based healthcare.
