SCOTUS upholds individual mandate

skydivr

Jumps from perfectly good Airplanes
Donating Member
Well, it's done. John Roberts, in a widely unexpected decision, was the swing vote in declaring the individual mandate constitutional. I am not going to call him a traitor, because he did exactly what you SHOULD expect a member of this court to do: Make a unfettered, clear, logical and non-partisan review of the LAW. He is not saying it's RIGHT, he's just saying it's within the Constitution to do it. Interesting that he frames it as a tax, when Obama has stated on more than one occassion that it's not a tax.

I am not happy with the decision. It will now take a new President and Congress to remove the legislation (and I don't think they have the will to do it).

The most expensive and worst parts of the law have yet to come into effect; we will see how this plays out a few years from now. This does not help in keeping him from a second term.

Now, here's what my company is likely to do: We pay HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS in health insurance premiums. SO, do we pay the $100K worth to continue to provide this insurance, or half that amount to pay the $2000/per employee premium, and tell the employees to go find their own? Take a wild guess what most small business do?

And guess what a lot of citizens will do? Are they going to go to jail if they don't buy it? Nope, they are still going to walk into the emergency room and demand it for free - and the ones that can pay will be squeezed in even larger amounts to pay for those that refuse to.

Another example of the enroachment of big government.
 
Interestingly, Roberts upheld the law, not for the reasons that the government argued, but actually for the reasons the government did not and the President even said wasn't; that it was within the Federal Goverments authority as a taxing authority, which puts it back on/within congress's power to repeal it. Roberts DID say that it was NOT Constitional within the Commerce clause which is good news for conservatives, and a REALLY BIG DEAL is it preserves the individual's rights.

In additional, it also says that STATES CAN REFUSE it without losing other Federal Revenue. That is also good news. STATES CAN CHOOSE TO OPT OUT.

Parts of Robert's opinion:

The essence of Roberts’s ruling was:
• “The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part,†Roberts wrote.
• “The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it.â€
• But “it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but (who) choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.â€

The law, Roberts wrote, “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, it may be within Congress’s constitutional power to tax.â€
He said “The question is not whether that is the most natural interpretation of the mandate, but only whether it is a ‘fairly possible’ one.â€


He said the Supreme Court precedent is that “every reasonable construction†of a law passed by Congress “must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality.â€
NBC's Pete Williams reported that Roberts reasoned that “there’s no real compulsion here†since those who do not pay the penalty for not having insurance can’t be sent to jail. “This is one of the scenarios that administration officials had considered that if the court did this they would consider it a big victory,†Williams said.
But in a major victory for the states who challenged the law, the court said that the Obama administration cannot coerce states to go along with the Medicaid insurance program for low-income people.
The financial pressure which the federal government puts on the states in the expansion of Medicaid “is a gun to the head,†Roberts wrote.
“A State that opts out of the Affordable Care Act’s expansion in health care coverage thus stands to lose not merely ‘a relatively small percentage’ of its existing Medicaid funding, but all of it,†Roberts said.
Congress cannot “penalize States that choose not to participate in that new program by taking away their existing Medicaid funding,†Roberts said.
The Medicaid provision is projected to add nearly 30 million more people to the insurance program for low-income Americans -- but the court’s decision left states free to opt out of the expansion if they choose.
 
Well, it's done. John Roberts, in a widely unexpected decision, was the swing vote in declaring the individual mandate constitutional. I am not going to call him a traitor, because he did exactly what you SHOULD expect a member of this court to do: Make a unfettered, clear, logical and non-partisan review of the LAW. He is not saying it's RIGHT, he's just saying it's within the Constitution to do it. Interesting that he frames it as a tax, when Obama has stated on more than one occassion that it's not a tax.

I am not happy with the decision. It will now take a new President and Congress to remove the legislation (and I don't think they have the will to do it).

The most expensive and worst parts of the law have yet to come into effect; we will see how this plays out a few years from now. This does not help in keeping him from a second term.

Now, here's what my company is likely to do: We pay HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS in health insurance premiums. SO, do we pay the $100K worth to continue to provide this insurance, or half that amount to pay the $2000/per employee premium, and tell the employees to go find their own? Take a wild guess what most small business do?

And guess what a lot of citizens will do? Are they going to go to jail if they don't buy it? Nope, they are still going to walk into the emergency room and demand it for free - and the ones that can pay will be squeezed in even larger amounts to pay for those that refuse to.

Another example of the enroachment of big government.

This individual mandate is not new and I doubt if Romney wins he would try to change it because if you look at the plan he laid out back in 2006 (just reading over it), it's sort of similar to the current health care reform act. Seems like he didn't oppose it until he started running for president and somebody told him to just say the opposite of what the other guy says. :rofl:

Read More:
The Significance of
Massachusetts Health Reform




If you look further back, the mandate requiring every American to purchase health insurance, appeared in a 1989 published proposal by Stuart M. Butler of the conservative Heritage Foundation called "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans," which included a provision to "mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance." The Heritage Foundation "substantially revised" its proposal four years later, according to a 1994 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. But the idea of an individual health insurance mandate later appeared in two bills introduced by Republican lawmakers in 1993, according to the non-partisan research group ProCon.org. Among the supporters of the bills were senators Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who today oppose the mandate under current law.

Read more: Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News

What are the most expensive and worst parts of the law?
 
The most expensive parts are that the people 'who can't afford it' will be given exemptions, leaving only those who "can" to pay for it all...
 
While I can appreciate why each party would try to make huge political horsecock out of this SCOTUS decision, the fact is, individual mandate is here to stay, even if (R)Money wins in Nov.

And the reason is obvious: as SLO MO has correctly observed, Obamacare is in many ways almost indistinguishable from Romneycare that Mittens put into place back in 2006. Again, until (R)Money was informed by his Repub masters that it was time for him to flip-flop on the issue, he was all about the individual mandate.

Nothing is going to get repealed.... as much as the conservatards hate it, this is a huge positive win for the libtards. :whistle:

For moderate Independantards like myself.... it's not that huge a deal. It is obvious to that both sides have some valid points in their arguments.
 
My problem is with this half in half out stance thr us government has it makes the whole health care industry jacked up. They need to be either all in or all out to have a understandable and functional system.

I prefer out.
 
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 “Obamacareâ€￾ 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."
 
Flicka said:
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.

Daniel,
That is a fantastic quote! Thank you for posting it.
 
Government mandates all kinds of things. this is nothing new. If you want to drive a car you have to buy insurance.. If you want health care you have to buy insurance. I think that for those that don't have or buy insurance are going to have a rude awakening when they go to the emergency room and get refused service. federal law mandates that hospitals have to take care of you in an emergency situation up to the point where they stabilize you. then you are on your own. So I think you will see people buying insurance when they get put in this situation.
 
Things you will miss of Obama Care goes away
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act this week and could potentially strike down part or the whole of ‘Obamacare.’ Below are 10 things you will miss about the law if the justices invalidate it:

1) Access to health insurance for 30 million Americans and lower premiums. More than 30 million uninsured Americans will find coverage under the law. Middle-class families who buy health care coverage through the exchanges will be eligible for refundable and advanceable premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to ensure that the coverage they have is affordable.

2) The ability of businesses and individuals to purchase comprehensive coverage from a regulated marketplace. The law creates new marketplaces for individuals and small businesses to compare and purchase comprehensive coverage. Insurers will have to meet quality measures to ensure that Americans can access comprehensive coverage when they need it.

3) Insurers’ inability to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. Beginning in 2014, insurers can no longer deny insurance to families or individuals with pre-existing conditions. Insurers are also prohibited from placing lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage and rescinding insurers except in cases of fraud. Insurers are already prohibited from discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions.

4) Tax credits for small businesses that offer insurance. Small employers that purchase health insurance for employees are already receiving tax credits to encourage them to continue providing coverage.

5) Assistance for businesses that provide health benefits to early retirees.The law created a temporary reinsurance program for employers providing health insurance coverage to retirees over age 55 who are not eligible for Medicare, reimbursing employers or insurers for 80% of retiree claims. The program has offered at least $4.73 billion in reinsurance payments to more than 2,800 employers and other sponsors of retiree plans, with an average cumulative reimbursement per plan sponsor of approximately $189,700.

6) Affordable health care for lower-income Americans. Obamacare extends Medicaid to individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty line, guaranteeing that the nation’ most vulnerable population has access to affordable, comprehensive coverage.

7) Investments in women’s health. Obamacare prohibits insurers from charging women substantially more than men and requires insurers to offer preventive services — including contraception — at no additional cost.

8) Young adults’ ability to stay on their parents’ health care plans. More than 3.1 million young people have already benefited from dependent coverage, which allows children up to age 26 to remain insured on their parents’ plans.

9) Discounts for seniors on brand-name drugs. Pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to provide a 50% discount on prescriptions filled in the Medicare Part D coverage gap. Seniors have already saved $3.5 billion on prescription drug costs thanks to the Affordable Care Act provision.

10) Temporary coverage for the sickest Americans. The law established temporary national high-risk pools that are providing health coverage to individuals with pre-existing medical conditions who cannot find insurance on the individual market. In 2014, they will be able to enroll in insurance through the exchanges. 67,482 individuals have already benefited from the program.
 
Things you will miss of Obama Care goes away
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act this week and could potentially strike down part or the whole of ‘Obamacare.’ Below are 10 things you will miss about the law if the justices invalidate it:

1) Access to health insurance for 30 million Americans and lower premiums. More than 30 million uninsured Americans will find coverage under the law. Middle-class families who buy health care coverage through the exchanges will be eligible for refundable and advanceable premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to ensure that the coverage they have is affordable.

2) The ability of businesses and individuals to purchase comprehensive coverage from a regulated marketplace. The law creates new marketplaces for individuals and small businesses to compare and purchase comprehensive coverage. Insurers will have to meet quality measures to ensure that Americans can access comprehensive coverage when they need it.

3) Insurers’ inability to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. Beginning in 2014, insurers can no longer deny insurance to families or individuals with pre-existing conditions. Insurers are also prohibited from placing lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage and rescinding insurers except in cases of fraud. Insurers are already prohibited from discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions.

4) Tax credits for small businesses that offer insurance. Small employers that purchase health insurance for employees are already receiving tax credits to encourage them to continue providing coverage.

5) Assistance for businesses that provide health benefits to early retirees.The law created a temporary reinsurance program for employers providing health insurance coverage to retirees over age 55 who are not eligible for Medicare, reimbursing employers or insurers for 80% of retiree claims. The program has offered at least $4.73 billion in reinsurance payments to more than 2,800 employers and other sponsors of retiree plans, with an average cumulative reimbursement per plan sponsor of approximately $189,700.

6) Affordable health care for lower-income Americans. Obamacare extends Medicaid to individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty line, guaranteeing that the nation’ most vulnerable population has access to affordable, comprehensive coverage.

7) Investments in women’s health. Obamacare prohibits insurers from charging women substantially more than men and requires insurers to offer preventive services — including contraception — at no additional cost.

8) Young adults’ ability to stay on their parents’ health care plans. More than 3.1 million young people have already benefited from dependent coverage, which allows children up to age 26 to remain insured on their parents’ plans.

9) Discounts for seniors on brand-name drugs. Pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to provide a 50% discount on prescriptions filled in the Medicare Part D coverage gap. Seniors have already saved $3.5 billion on prescription drug costs thanks to the Affordable Care Act provision.

10) Temporary coverage for the sickest Americans. The law established temporary national high-risk pools that are providing health coverage to individuals with pre-existing medical conditions who cannot find insurance on the individual market. In 2014, they will be able to enroll in insurance through the exchanges. 67,482 individuals have already benefited from the program.

There is nothing in this socialist POS that I would miss. This is just the governments way of killing private insurance companies. Look at what this bill is going to do to them in the coming years and how they are making it more affordable for employers to have their workers use the government healthcare instead of the private insurance. This is total BS!!!!!!!
 
There is nothing in this socialist POS that I would miss. This is just the governments way of killing private insurance companies. Look at what this bill is going to do to them in the coming years and how they are making it more affordable for employers to have their workers use the government healthcare instead of the private insurance. This is total BS!!!!!!!


in the security industry which can be dangerous as officers have been killed or injured in the line of duty....the employer has to pay gov mandated "health and welfare" which is supposed to cover benefits. its roughly 3 and some change an hour up to 80hr a pay period and it barely covers an individual thru the offered plan much less an individual and child or family. so in a way private companies priced themsleves out of the game as many just cannot afford it. just speaking from experience I honestly do not know enough about the reform to speak for or against it
 
I don't like the outcome either. But Insurance companies have put Health Insurance out of the reach of most Americans. And as far as a Tax goes. Well, since 1/2 of the US do not pay Federal Income tax anyway, I can't see how this is going to go anywhere except adding more TRILLIONS to our National Debt. We don't have a Health Care problem in the US, we have a HEALTH COST PROBLEM. And just throwing more $$$$$$$ at it, isn't going to help it any ! So, here comes the PRIVATE HOSPITALS AND DOCTORS for only those with $$$$$$$ !
By the way, the Insurance Companies reported (FOX and CNN) yesterday that cost will rise for coverage over the next few months.
 
When i get the notification from our Health insurer, i'll be sure to post it up.
 
Back
Top