ACA (a.k.a. Obamacare) Upheld

[IndyColtsFan]

Yay for the system working and opinions mattering but in the end... not really.

The system is working? Passing a crappy law with a few good points is a victory?

Please enlighten me on the cost containment provisions of this law. And no, "But..but..but...Republicans gave no alternative!!!" is not the answer.

 

[sactoking]

From SCOTUSblog, the "money quote" on why the Commerce Clause argument failed:

"The power to regulate commerce presupposes the existence of commercial activity to be regulated."

 

[ichy]

This may actually help Romney get elected. Obamacare is not especially popular.

Except that most Americans are too stupid to understand what the ACA even does. Most people support most of the law's individual provisions.

 

[sactoking]

In other news, the Stolen Valor Act is unconstitutional.

 

[lopri]

You are thinking small. Mandating abortions for poor women would seem to be perfectly constitutional now, so long as the punishment is a "tax".

U.S. Military actually had such a practice up until 1970's. A female soldier had to make a choice of retirement or abortion in order to serve the country. It was Justice Ginsberg took it to the court to fix such an injustice. Ironic, isn't it?

 

[umbrella39]

Welcome to being on the wrong side of history again mother fuckers... Keep spewing the FUD... how's that shit working out for ya? GTFOOTW

 

[IndyColtsFan]

If you don't force people to buy coverage when they're healthy then covering those with pre-existing conditions is also the unaffordable thing to do. I'm curious (not being sarcastic here, I'm no mindless ACA fanboy) how else you suggest making it feasible to require coverage for the uninsured?

I apologize, I was not clear and that's my fault. I see the confusion I've caused. What I meant was that insurance companies should not be able to deny policies to people with pre-existing conditions. IIRC, ACA has that provision and caps the premium increase for those folks to x% over the rates of "normal" people.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Welcome to being on the wrong side of history again mother fuckers... Keep spewing the FUD... how's that shit working out for ya? GTFOOTW

LOL, when costs continue to skyrocket, I look forward to hearing about how the Republicans are to blame. Likewise, I look forward to your whining when I Republican president eventually pushes through a mandate like this. It will happen, trust me. You give these guys an inch and they take 10 miles.

 

[ThePresence]

One this is for sure, no one can say Roberts is not a centrist, his votes are done without regard for the party which nominated him.

As it should be. Although Roberts is conservative, he rules on the merits of the points in the case, not the political fallout. As do all supreme justices.

 

[Jaskalas]

... proving that Republicans are no better than Democrats.

Centralize power and it will be turned against you.

 

[dank69]

I think it is kind of misleading to say the mandate is upheld. In effect that is the case, but really it is deemed unconstitutional for Congress to mandate activity under the commerce clause. This is essentially a 1 percent tax increase on everyone, with a deduction if you buy health insurance. See:

Take a quick look at Footnote 11, which is on page 44 of the slip opinion: Those subject to the individual mandate may lawfully forgo health insurance and pay higher taxes, or buy health insurance and pay lower taxes. The only thing that they may not lawfully do is buy health insurance and not pay the resulting tax.

I compare it to a mortgage deduction. The court says it is not illegal to forgo insurance, so the "mandate" is not upheld

Typo in the quote you copied, should have read:

Take a quick look at Footnote 11, which is on page 44 of the slip opinion: Those subject to the individual mandate may lawfully forgo health insurance and pay higher taxes, or buy health insurance and pay lower taxes. The only thing that they may not lawfully do is not buy health insurance and not pay the resulting tax.

 

[nehalem256]

U.S. Military actually had such a practice up until 1970's. A female soldier had to make a choice of retirement or abortion in order to serve the country. It was Justice Ginsberg took it to the court to fix such an injustice. Ironic, isn't it?

It would seem to me that pregnancy prevents someone from fulfilling their military duties. Requiring people to meet their commitments is not "injustice".

 

[Bird222]

Sadly, this is true. I just wish I thought Obama ever had the intent to honor his promises. With the Bush's and with Clinton, I thought they honestly wanted to honor their promises but were unable to do so. Whether this is because they actually did have that intent or were just that good of liars, I do not know.

As opposed to Obama???

 

[ichy]

I apologize, I was not clear and that's my fault. I see the confusion I've caused. What I meant was that insurance companies should not be able to deny policies to people with pre-existing conditions. IIRC, ACA has that provision and caps the premium increase for those folks to x% over the rates of "normal" people.

I agree with you there, the problem I see is that if they can't deny coverage AND you don't force people to buy insurance before they get sick then insurance will be absurdly expensive because healthy people won't have to buy it until after they get cancer/diabetes/etc.

IMO the worst parts of the ACA are the massive expansion of Medicaid and the fact that it does nothing to fix the insane malpractice situation in this country. If the Republicans were smart they'd agree to stop throwing monkey wrenches into the current law in exchange for serious tort reform and some kind of Medicaid cost containment.

 

[her209]

Judicial activism!!!

 

[sactoking]

I apologize, I was not clear and that's my fault. I see the confusion I've caused. What I meant was that insurance companies should not be able to deny policies to people with pre-existing conditions. IIRC, ACA has that provision and caps the premium increase for those folks to x% over the rates of "normal" people.

Under the ACA there will be no underwriting and guaranteed issue, with no cancelation or rescission (save for failure to pay premium or fraud). This means that anyone who applies for a policy will have to be offered one and no policy may be canceled except in limited circumstances. Policies will be rate banded by age and smoking status only. Within a rate band the most expensive policy cannot exceed 300% more premium than the least expensive policy.

 

[MovingTarget]

"This is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause." Senator Padme Amidala (D-Naboo)

Just lightening the mood.

Good one. :thumbsup:

From other forums I frequent...

If “liberty” means “not being able to afford healthcare and avoiding going to the doctor when you’re sick and need medicine…”

But frankly, I feel more free now.

 

[lopri]

If you don't force people to buy coverage when they're healthy then covering those with pre-existing conditions is also the unaffordable thing to do. I'm curious (not being sarcastic here, I'm no mindless ACA fanboy) how else you suggest making it feasible to require coverage for the uninsured?

I am not a huge cheerleader for Obamacare but I have yet to see any serious suggestions that would work better. As for "OMG the gov't forces us to buy insurance," we are ALREADY being forced to pay for the healthcare of the uninsured. Right now there are plenty of bums and freeloaders who walk into the ER and get treated, or simply don't pay their hospital bills. The basic individual mandate concept was originally pushed by conservatives as a way to stop people from freeloading.

Exactly. For the past 10+ years or so, I have been subsidising everyone else's medical expenses. No more free-riders.

 

[ThePresence]

Judicial activism!!!

No it's not at all.
And I'm a staunch conservative.

 

[zsdersw]

Time for Republicans to begin using the mandate power once they're back in office. Use this as a club to basically outlaw abortions with mandatory pre-procedure services (or maybe a surety bond), mandatory ID (without which voting is prohibited), mandatory retirement and healthcare savings accounts, mandatory firearm purchases, etc. Bleed the Democratic constituency dry with all the mandates.

Pretty much.

It's pretty awesome that the insurance companies basically wrote in their own survival, ensuring that millions of new customers would be forced to buy their product. Hopefully some of this will transfer over to auto insurance and I can go wreck my car then go get insurance.

Yep exactly. Republican's may not be able to outlaw abortion, but it seems pretty clear that can put a tax on it.

So... let me get this straight. glenn1 made the post I quoted at the top, and you two agree with him on the course of action he described?

Sure.. compound one big mistake with a bunch more just because they'll suit your particular set of interests.

 

[Jaskalas]

As it should be. Although Roberts is conservative, he rules on the merits of the points in the case, not the political fallout. As do all supreme justices.

As should ALL courts and justices.

 

[umbrella39]

LOL, when costs continue to skyrocket, I look forward to hearing about how the Republicans are to blame. Likewise, I look forward to your whining when I Republican president eventually pushes through a mandate like this. It will happen, trust me. You give these guys an inch and they take 10 miles.

LOL like the costs were ever going to stop skyrocketing under either a R or D administration. This is a STEP in the right direction. If the SC upholds a 'pushed through' mandate then I guess again, OUR opinions will matter but in the end... not really. The system works. Had it gone the other way and all or some struck down, does the system stop working? Only if you opinion is not shared by the majority of the SC I guess... This is starting to have less to do with the Democrats and Obama every day. As well it should.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Under the ACA there will be no underwriting and guaranteed issue, with no cancelation or rescission (save for failure to pay premium or fraud). This means that anyone who applies for a policy will have to be offered one and no policy may be canceled except in limited circumstances. Policies will be rate banded by age and smoking status only. Within a rate band the most expensive policy cannot exceed 300% more premium than the least expensive policy.

Hmmm, I thought that they could be rate banded for pre-existing conditions too, capped at 300%. I must be mistaken.

 

[sportage]

For those still confused...

this ruling opens the door to amend affordable healthcare act with the stuff liberals were mad that they did not get in the original bill. I.e. public option, expanded medicare.

Was Obama smart enough to see this coming???
YES. I do believe he was.

 

[ThePresence]

As should ALL courts and justices.

Should being the operative word, although we both know that's not how it always goes.