Another blow to Obamacare, this time its - U.S. appeals court in Atlanta

[werepossum]

PPAC is not like Social Security. Social Security is a direct tax levied by the Fed to fund a public program. PPAC mandate causes individuals to purchase insurance from a private entity.

PPAC mandate => give money to a private company
SS mandate => give money to the public gov't

PPAC is not like auto insurance. Auto insurance is mandated by the States. Auto insurance is only mandatory if you choose to own a car/drive. PPAC is mandated by the Fed. PPAC is mandatory if you are alive and in the US.

PPAC mandate => Uses Commerce Clause to regulate lack of commerce. Affects all living Americans.
Auto insurance mandate => Uses States' ability to regulate commerce by regulating an activity that Americans choose to participate in.

Seriously now, comparing PPAC to Social Security and/or auto insurance is an apples to rhubarb/strawberry comparison.

I think that is where health care should be as well. That way we have fifty-plus (counting D.C. and Guam, Puerto Rico, etc.) laboratories to find the best way to provide 100% of the population with quality health care at an affordable price, and each state could tailor its solution to its particular problem. North Dakota for instance has nowhere near the percentage of illegal aliens (who will draw out but be unaffected by the mandate) as does Arizona, or nowhere near the population density of Rhode Island. Why should we think the best solution for all three is the same system? That only works if one assumes that government is always the best solution to any problem.

 

[Abwx]

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled that Congress exceeded its constitutional powers when it required individuals to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty.

This court is of more than bad faith and politically oriented.

Any jurist know that if a governement make obligation to pay taxes
for police and military expenses , then we can safely assume that
the citizen is forced to buy the governement s services in matter
of security, wich amount to buy an insurance product...by force of course...

 

[zinfamous]

The repubs demanded this unconstitutional mandate. Romney was their beacon of shining light in how to make this thing passable.

interesting.

 

[zinfamous]

once they figure out they can simply mandate what everyone buys, they can mandate that everyone jewish must buy a star of david and wear it, or face "tax penalties" of an arbitrary amount (20,000) or be jailed. hmmmmmmmm

oh, I see what you did there...



Here, you need one of these so people can understand your nonsense:

 

[woolfe9999]

PPAC is not like Social Security. Social Security is a direct tax levied by the Fed to fund a public program. PPAC mandate causes individuals to purchase insurance from a private entity.

PPAC mandate => give money to a private company
SS mandate => give money to the public gov't

This is a distinction without a true difference. Are conservatives seriously arguing that the government can force you to buy insurance provided by the government, but not force you to buy insurance provided by private corporations? Why?

It isn't properly viewed as a tax to fund a public program either. Unlike taxes that are paid to fund public programs, if you don't make these payments (because you don't work) you do not get the benefits of the program. In that respect, it's exactly like private insurance that you are mandated to buy.

 

[sportage]

This the result when you "compromise" and trash the idea of national healthcare or better known as medicare for all. National was and still is the correct way to go. Back to the drawing board....
Simply design a national medicare for all program and take premiums out of the paycheck, like social security does. Then everyone could be covered. It works in every other modern civilized country.

 

[sactoking]

This is a distinction without a true difference. Are conservatives seriously arguing that the government can force you to buy insurance provided by the government, but not force you to buy insurance provided by private corporations? Why?

Because this is the Federal government, and any powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution are left to the States.

The Constitution allows the Federal government to levy taxes. When SS taxes are levied there is an understanding that they will be used to fund SS but it is not required. SS taxes could be used to fund studies on the mating habits of dyslexic masturbaters and SS could be funded by the income tax and it would all still be perfectly legal. Congress can levy a tax and Congress can provide health "insurance" and the fact that the "insurance" is funded by the tax is only a paper machination by the government.

The Constitution does not specifically grant to Congress the ability to force people to buy anything, much less insurance. The closest thing Congress can do is attempt to regulate insurance as "interstate commerce". Unfortunately, McCarran-Ferguson and Gramm-Leach-Bliley pretty clearly state that the regulation of insurance is strictly a state matter.

It isn't properly viewed as a tax to fund a public program either. Unlike taxes that are paid to fund public programs, if you don't make these payments (because you don't work) you do not get the benefits of the program. In that respect, it's exactly like private insurance that you are mandated to buy.

Except all those people that do, like spouses, dependents, the disabled, etc.

 

[senseamp]

Interesting that they severed individual mandate from the rest of the law. Serious hilarity could ensue if individual mandate is scrapped but pre-existing condition exclusions are still banned.

 

[Lithium381]

oh, I see what you did there...



Here, you need one of these so people can understand your nonsense:

I lol'd Of course my example is far fetched, but seriously, think of the possibilities when congress learns that it can control very huge and impactful down to the small details of our lives through legislation. we'll become sheeple for REAL@!

 

[Abwx]

think of the possibilities when congress learns that it can control very huge and impactful down to the small details of our lives through legislation. we'll become sheeple for REAL@!

I m afraid it s already too late...

 

[sactoking]

Interesting that they severed individual mandate from the rest of the law. Serious hilarity could ensue if individual mandate is scrapped but pre-existing condition exclusions are still banned.

Yeah, banning excluding pre-existing conditions without the mandate is just begging for tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in adverse selection "fraud".

 

[werepossum]

I m afraid it s already too late...

I fear you are right. Whether it's whom you may marry or whom you may hire for a manicure, our answer is increasingly "Government knows best".

 

[PrinceofWands]

 

[PrinceofWands]

The whole law, no can't be struck down, but this part will most certainly be struck down. You can't make people buy something, you just can't do it. OB tried to liken this to car insurance, but that is highly flawed. I only need to buy car insurance if I want to drive a car.

Well 'OFFICIALLY' you HAVE to strike down the entire law because they didn't include severability. I'm still trying to figure out why, unless they knew the mandate was bogus and didn't want to allow and easy excision. I'm also not sure how the courts are severing without it having been in the law. Was there a court decision somewhere that gave them the power to sever?

 

[PrinceofWands]

There are many areas in the U.S. where public transportation isn't available and you are, by extension, put in a situation where you HAVE to own a car to survive because it's the only way to get to work. And in that scenario, you are simply not able to avoid paying auto insurance because it's mandated by law. Obama healthcare is the exact same concept with the (ultimately insignificant) distinction that with auto insurance you do have one freedom that allows you to avoid it, and that is to move, uproot your family and way of life to avoid buying a car in the first place. I think it's likely Kennedy will properly weigh that the "freedom" many Americans have to avoid auto insurance is really not one at all, and that pretty much guarantees SCOTUS victory for Obama's healthcare plan.

Problems with this idea: you still aren't forced to drive. You can move, you can ride a horse, you can carpool, you can etc ad infinitum. Also, in most states you can bond out of insurance requirements. Not easy, but possible.

I actually agree that a vehicle is more or less a necessity, and that think that travel should be a protected right, and thereby all auto insurance mandates negated. I'm just pointing out why they're able to survive court challenges.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I don't get how buying health insurance can possibly be unconstitutional. I know you guys are already well on your way to beating this dead horse but basic things like health care and education are part of living in our society. Being forced to send your kids to school is not unconstitutional and neither should having health insurance. I would love to not pay for social security, which I think is a stupid program, but I'm forced to do that too. Since when do we get to pick and choose what we want to pay for? If your community, state, or country votes to pay for something then you have to as well. I can't say that I don't want to pay for our roads to be repaired simply because I don't drive on them. If you're such a goofball that you don't want to use healthcare then you don't belong in our society.

I wouldn't argue the states taxing to provide universal health care. I don't think you can win against that. I personally wouldn't argue the fed doing it, even though I think it should be the states instead. It'd still be better than nothing.

The problem (to me anyway) is including a tertiary private component (insurance). You can tax the public and call it infrastructure/basic right. You can't tell people they must privately hand over their wealth to others. Get rid of insurance, and let the government provide it directly and it become constitutional as far as I can see.

 

[Lanyap]

Want To Know Whom To Thank (or Curse) for Health Care Reform? Here He Is.

Jonathan Gruber, Professor of Economics, MIT
The economics professor who is shaping health care reform at the national and state level.
By Christina Gossmann
Updated Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2011, at 7:03 AM ET

If health care reform is a major issue in the 2012 presidential campaign, which seems likely, and if President Obama's opponent is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who currently leads in polls of Republican voters, then a central figure of debate will be a silver-tongued economist at MIT. Jonathan Gruber advised both the governor and the president on health care, and even though Romney now derides Obama's law as "disastrous," Gruber's ideas animate both efforts.

Gruber says both proposals stand on a "three-legged stool": preventing insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, requiring universal coverage to eliminate "free riding," and subsidizing insurance plans to make them affordable to all. This "incremental universalism," fixing the existing system instead of starting from scratch, appeals to Republicans for its private-sector involvement and to Democrats for its universal coverage. That's what made both "Romneycare" and "Obamacare" possible.

Gruber first became interested in health care reform as a graduate student in economics at Harvard, when the issue gained prominence under President Clinton. Gruber decided to remain in academia, but Washington's potential ability to implement the changes he was proposing in research paper after research paper continued to interest him. So he brought the two together: He created the Gruber Micro-Simulation Model, which—well, let's use Gruber's words: It "takes two sets of inputs, fixed information on individuals and varying information on policy parameters, to predict the effect of health market interventions on the movement of people and dollars within the U.S. healthcare system." For the first time, policy makers were able to see whether they could actually afford their health-reform bills and what impact they would have on the behavior of both employers and individuals.

Powered by The model had an enormous impact on Massachusetts and on the United States, earning Gruber the American Society of Health Economists Inaugural Medal for the best health economist in the nation aged 40 and under in 2006, frequent appearances on MSNBC and a contract to write a comic book explaining how health care reform works. (Here are a few pages from this work in progress, along with a Q&A.)

But, Gruber emphasizes, the federal reform is more ambitious and less affordable than the state law was. We've successfully addressed the coverage side of health care, he says. Now, it's time to take a look at the price tag: Do people choose the most cost-effective health care plan? What factors drive their choices? How can we help them choose the best plan? What's the best way to compensate medical providers: paying them for each service or paying them a fixed amount? And what will happen to our health if we pay them less? Ultimately, we need to find a way to slow down the exponential growth of health care costs.

And so, while continuing to help the federal government implement the law, Gruber is back at his MIT desk to once again synthesize vast amounts of complex academic research in a way that is understandable to the rest of us.

http://www.slate.com/id/2300505/

 

[BarneyFife]

Only in America would people be so stupid to not want health insurance especially in these times where a large chunk of the population is only able to get part time work with no benefits. Good luck paying a $1000 premium for a family on $10 an hour full time.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Only in America would people be so stupid to not want health insurance especially in these times where a large chunk of the population is only able to get part time work with no benefits. Good luck paying a $1000 premium for a family on $10 an hour full time.

Way to swallow the corporatist scraps. How about some of us strive for a working system instead of the same old tired crap?

 

[ProfJohn]

Don't you want good health? If you don't have Health Insurance or the ability to foot the bill then people like myself who are covered will get the shaft.

Then the government can pass a healthcare tax and make all Americans pay it and use it to cover the cost of the uninsured.

 

[Lanyap]

Only in America would people be so stupid to not want health insurance especially in these times where a large chunk of the population is only able to get part time work with no benefits. Good luck paying a $1000 premium for a family on $10 an hour full time.

So how much will the premium for a family cost after it's fully implemented?

 

[ProfJohn]

Hogwash! Social Security is mandated insurance that everyone that works is forced to purchase. It has been around for 75 years and not been deemed unconstitutional.

Social Security is run by the government.

This would require you to purchase insurance from a private company, huge difference.

 

[ProfJohn]

This the result when you "compromise" and trash the idea of national healthcare or better known as medicare for all. National was and still is the correct way to go. Back to the drawing board....
Simply design a national medicare for all program and take premiums out of the paycheck, like social security does. Then everyone could be covered. It works in every other modern civilized country.

How much would medicare for all cost and who would pay for it?

 

[umbrella39]

Excellent. Now we have conflicting appeals court rulings, a sure sign this will have to go to the SCOTUS. Hopefully soon so they can smack it down permanently.

GLWT

 

[EagleKeeper]

Funny how conservatives latch onto this rather than the (overwhelmingly popular) pre-existing conditions and lifetime cap provisions.

Have they proposed getting rid of the health insurance requirement and keeping these other parts, or are they all equally evil?

The government should not be able to tell a company how to run its business model.