The Supreme Court hears an Obamacare fairytale

[Jhhnn]

I'm going to get my bet in.

Minimum of 6-3 against the plaintiffs, preserving the ACA.

Both Kennedy and Roberts will vote with the majority to uphold.

I certainly hope so. Hurf burf in the minority opinion is expected, considering the players.

The Boehner suit is similar in intent if not in the direction of the attack- to break the ACA.

 

[DCal430]

Let us not forget the reason for their language problems in the bill is because republicans wouldn't permit changes to this bill to fix language problems.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

They're kinda stuck taking the case because of contradictory rulings in the lower courts.

The administration was granted an en banc hearing in the lower court that would have likely resolved the conflict and ended this drama there. Four SCOTUS Justices granted cert to the case pre-empting that hearing, and did it the Friday after Republicans won back the Senate.

 

[Jhhnn]

The administration was granted an en banc hearing in the lower court that would have likely resolved the conflict and ended this drama there. Four SCOTUS Justices granted cert to the case pre-empting that hearing, and did it the Friday after Republicans won back the Senate.

Activist Judges on the right wing? Couldn't be!

The drama would never have ended until the SCOTUS refused to hear a lower court ruling against the plaintiffs or ruled themselves. Lower court rulings left to stand don't carry the same weight as a SCOTUS ruling, being 100% binding only in that circuit, so Repub operatives would be free to engage in more venue shopping to start all over again. Different circuit, different plaintiffs, same argument. Given the right wing stacking of the federal judiciary, that's not difficult to find. They play that game wrt abortion all the time.

 

[Sonikku]

 

[5to1baby1in5]

The republicans have a plan incase the Supreme Court rules against the administration.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/we-have-a-plan-for-fixing-health-care/ar-BBi8bzH?ocid=iehp

Brought to you by Orrin Hatch, Lamar Alexander and John Barrasso:

First and most important: We would provide financial assistance to help Americans keep the coverage they picked for a transitional period.

Translation: We will provide Federal subsidies in states which have not set up their own exchanges even though the Supreme Court just ruled that illegal.
How does that work?

Second, we will give states the freedom and flexibility to create better, more competitive health insurance markets offering more options and different choices.

Or give them the option to not offer insurance at all...

We have had many discussions with our Senate and House Republican colleagues on this issue, and there is a great deal of consensus on how to proceed. Many of our colleagues have good ideas, and we look forward to working together.

Yea right, you can't even agree on a way to fund the DHS without having it rammed down your throat.

Such a ruling would also give Congress an opportunity — to stop Obamacare’s damage and create a pathway to reforms that move our health-care system in the direction of freedom, choice and lower costs.

No way anything they do will provide better health care at a lower cost.

The hypocritical bullshit never ends.
Nothing stated here is a 'plan.'

 

[Jhhnn]

The hypocritical bullshit never ends.
Nothing stated here is a 'plan.'

Of course they have no plan. If they ever intended to have one, it'd already be laid out in black & white. They're probably praying for the suit to fail so that they get all the pander points while taking on no responsibility. It's their favorite game, but a lot harder to play well when holding both houses of Congress.

 

[Matt1970]

Someone want to show Jhhnn this?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2419736&highlight=republicans

And remember, when bad things come out about Obamacare, just resort back to saying Obamacare was originally a republican plan republicans have no alternative plan.

 

[Adams200]

The Democrats knew what they were doing when they drafted the bill…just ask Gruber. That's a fact.

 

[Jhhnn]

Someone want to show Jhhnn this?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2419736&highlight=republicans

And remember, when bad things come out about Obamacare, just resort back to saying Obamacare was originally a republican plan republicans have no alternative plan.

Here's the actual proposal, which isn't a blueprint but a sketchy 8 page blue sky outline-

http://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/...e Patient CARE Act - LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL.pdf

Being completely voluntary, it doesn't address the costs of caring for freeloaders when they're in need, nor does it prevent high costs for older people that would force them out of having coverage, either. It's just more Freedumb.

One of the very important features of the ACA is that it offers affordable lifetime coverage for everybody in a pay it forward sort of way. Pay a little more when you're younger so that you'll be able to afford it when you get older. Pay more when fortune smiles upon you, pay less when she doesn't.

None of which relates to the picayune bullshit of the current suit, anyway. If Congress did not intend for the federal exchange to have the same subsidy abilities as state exchanges they never would have created it. They'd simply have forced all states to have exchanges.

Every argument presented attempts to lead away from that in dishonest ways.