Poll Position: If Obamacare mandate falls, what goes with it?
During three days of oral arguments about Obamacare at the Supreme Court this week, legal analysts were at pains to predict which way each justice was leaning based on his or her line of questioning. For all but the most experienced court watchers, this seems like an exercise in futility: Justices may be just as likely to question an attorney’s point in the hopes of eliciting a stronger case for it as they are to seek to poke holes in it. I’ll just stick to the prediction I, like many others, made when the first legal challenges were filed: This case will come down to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court’s most frequent swing vote, in what most likely will be a 5-4 decision.
If the mandate is struck down, how much of the rest of Obamacare should go with it?
- All of it (232 Votes)
- Nothing else (109 Votes)
- Only those parts the administration argued for (e.g., community rating and pre-existing conditions) (28 Votes)
Total Voters: 369
Loading ...Much of the analysis during Wednesday’s arguments focused on the justices’ debate about “severability”: how much of the law ought to survive if the individual mandate is struck down. The 11th Circuit here in Atlanta decided to strike down only the mandate and keep all else intact. Attorneys for the states challenging the law argued none of the law can stand if the mandate falls, because it was the central component of the law: The other provisions don’t work without he mandate, and Congress wouldn’t have passed the law without it. The government’s attorneys argued that only a couple of other provisions — chiefly, the ones covering pre-existing conditions and “community rating,” which holds that insurers can’t charge different premiums based on certain behaviors — should fall in that case because they would severely distort the insurance market absent the mandate, while the rest should stand. (Neither side took the 11th Circuit’s position, so the Supreme Court had to assign another attorney to argue that position.)
Some analysts seemed to think the line of questioning itself, predicated on the dismissal of the mandate, indicated the mandate was in trouble. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case: The only way to argue about severability is to assume the mandate is struck down. If it’s not, the point is moot, but the justices had to hear arguments about what to do in the event they do strike it down.
An interesting argument centered on the idea of judicial restraint: Does it indicate more restraint to leave as much of the law intact as possible, as the liberal justices argued? Or would the court display more restraint to strike it down in total — thereby avoiding potentially changing Congress’ intent — and let Congress start over with a blank canvas, as the conservative justices argued?
That’s a philosophical point, and there are practical considerations here as well. Would Obamacare minus only the mandate be workable? Even if community rating and pre-existing conditions provisions also fall, would other elements of the law such as the exchanges and the Medicaid expansion still make sense? Is Congress more likely to act if it has to try to fix a broken law, or if it gets to start over?
So, here’s this week’s Poll Position: If the mandate is struck down, how much of the rest of Obamacare should the justices throw out with it? Note that I am not asking you to predict what the court will do, but rather what you think should be done.
See the choices and vote in the nearby poll and explain your thoughts in the comments thread.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
171 comments Add your comment
Intown
March 30th, 2012
9:18 am
What a horrendous waste of political capital this will all be if struck down.
Junior Samples
March 30th, 2012
9:19 am
Since this is the same court that gave corporations personhood status, who knows what they’ll decide.
Since the lottery is so popular right now, what if we tied that into healthcare? Mega Medical Millions Mandate!
Wade Hampton
March 30th, 2012
9:30 am
Real Americans could care less what gown-wearing government lawyers “rule” or say.
.
Unfortunently, real Americans are outnumbered by subservient timid kick-shy dogs who flinch at every Washingtonian threat.
.
But………………………………..thats okay.
.
The Patriots of the 18th century comprised the same percentage of the general population as the Ron Paul supporters of today.
.
The spirit of Individual Liberty will ALWAYS prevail.
It is just that girly-men make it harder and more time-consuming to do so.
1961_Xer
March 30th, 2012
9:30 am
Obamacare without the mandate is clearly unworkable. Some parts that don’t require federal funding to enact could survive. However, I don’t thing the SCOTUS is going to parse 2700 pages to determine what survives and what doesn’t. So they are going to either strike it all down, or kick it back to Nancy Pelosi to read it (after all, you have to read it to find out whats in it) and determine what doesn’t require funding that they can still do.
Bobby Taylor
March 30th, 2012
9:39 am
The justices cannot throw out any other part of the law. They can only rule on the constitutionality of the mandate.
The problem is that the mandate was the compromise Obama accepted in hopes of getting the republicans and the heath insurance industry on board. Obama didn’t listen when liberals claimed the republicans were using the mandate as a poison pill.
The pre-existing conditions are eliminated and insurance companies must now spend 90% of all insurance dollars on the customers instead of the 60% they are spending now. The mandate was put forward to bring an additional 30 million new customers into the system at a lower profit margin for the insurance companies. In the end, they would make billions of dollars in profits, but with most of the extra money actually covering patients.
If the mandate falls, then the insurance companies will push back against the new regulations that will force them to cover all new customers. Or the insurance companies will jack up the rates. Or they will stop offering medical insurance since it will not be cost effective.
Then again, if that happens, medicare might be the only option available to cover the American people.
Regardless, if the mandate falls, the whole law falls by proxy.
Road Scholar
March 30th, 2012
9:41 am
We don’t need any health insurance. We do not need any regulations. We just need guns and an army that won’t get what they deserve in benefits to right their wounds. Trust the corporations. trust the 1% .They will let us know what we need to live on while we all pull on our bootstraps…that is if you already have them! All we need is a pandemic.
Joel Edge
March 30th, 2012
9:41 am
“or kick it back to Nancy Pelosi to read it ”
I like that.
But I don’t count my chickens before they’re hatched. There could be some arm twisting in the background. I don’t put anything past a Democrat. What would really tickle me is a SCOTUS solid front. 9-0 against. Kind of a ‘you want to make a few more remarks about us in a state of the union address’ kind of thing. I know, not happening.
bu2
March 30th, 2012
9:42 am
I thought it was amusing to hear the liberal justices talk about judicial restraint and respecting the intent of Congress, particularly Ginsburg and the Obama justices. Breyer usually is consistent, so even though I usually disagree, I respect his positions.
JF McNamara
March 30th, 2012
9:43 am
We need something to be done, and starting over with a blank slate is the worst case scenario. Kick back the parts that fail and make Congress (including Republicans) make it work.
Ironically, a complete rejection might be worse for Republicans. They will have forced the Democrats into fighting for a single payer system.
Road Scholar
March 30th, 2012
9:47 am
Jim Galloway: ” A couple of years ago they changed the name of the Georgia Ethics Commission to the Government Transparency Commission. Tonight the Senate passed a last-minute amendment that allows the “transparency” commission to seal the records in some cases against politicians and delay reporting some violations. Nothing like the 40th day – and night – of a session at the Georgia Capitol
Find the largesse in HB 875, a fishing license bill.”
Kyle, is this the transparency the conserves have been talking about? Is this bill…bait and switch? But we don’t need any government intervention in fishing licenses , do we? The fish don’t vote! Or need healthcare!
beancube
March 30th, 2012
9:57 am
It will trigger tougher questions about the potential threats of the high courts hijacking the Constitutions of the country just like what is happening in Libya. Should the court be allowed to interpret the Constitutions without any broader debate?
retired early
March 30th, 2012
9:57 am
The only way to go is an expansion of medicare to cover those unable to afford insurance and raise medicare “taxes” on payroll to pay for it.
This approach would allow a “gradual” inclusion of more and more people to a point where Insurance companies are a “non factor”. This would be “legal”, doable, cheaper and (with a GOP controlled House), impossible to become law.
carlosgvv
March 30th, 2012
10:02 am
I’m guessing it will 5 to 4 along party lines. Supreme Court justices can be pols too.
Don't Tread
March 30th, 2012
10:06 am
The whole thing needs to go. This thing was written and passed by one party with complete disregard for everyone else (and the Constitution, for that matter).
Someone please tell me where the Constitution permits the President to have his own army, answerable only to him. (aka “National Defense Force”) That had absolutely nothing to do with healthcare at all.
This is the kind of stuff that happens with one-party rule, as we had in 2009 – 2011.
Tea Party Meber
March 30th, 2012
10:06 am
Im tired of the govrement waisting my tax dollors on the poors. If U dont have health insurncae its UR fault. Dont expect me to pay 4 it. U dont pay 4 mine.
Jefferson
March 30th, 2012
10:10 am
Why speculate ?
Commonscents
March 30th, 2012
10:12 am
You are correct Bobby Taylor!!!
Tea Party Meber
March 30th, 2012
10:14 am
Its no mystry we R closser 2 socilism than ever and further a way form God than ever.
retired early
March 30th, 2012
10:14 am
Tea Party
“Don’t expect me to pay for yours…”
Think again…..do you not know that you are paying for the uninsured. It comes out of higher premiums on “everyone’s insurance”.
Get you head out of the sand and try to find a “real solution to the problem” that does not simply put more money in the pockets of the insurance companies.
Will
March 30th, 2012
10:18 am
As a republican newspaper writer, you should be feeling pretty confident about this vote. The four republican justices are a lock to vote yes, just as the four democrat justices are a lock to vote no. Justice Kennedy votes with the four republican justices more often than not.
Also, there is little doubt that the four republican justices will make certain this vote occurs as soon as possible so that republicans can benefit during this election cycle.
I only wish there could be a law that would force dead beat, “no guberment can force me to buy insurance” losers who don’t pay for health insurance to also waive their right to “free” health coverage that causes my health insurance premiums to rise in order to pay for this “free” coverage.
I am fairly certain that republicans will win the day on this one and will suceed in protecting the deadbeat losers from having to do the right thing by paying for health insurance for their families.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
10:21 am
Kyle’ question is ambiguous in whether the word “should” (“how much of the rest of Obamacare should the justices throw out with it”) is meant in the legal sense, or in the sense of what is good for the country. For the viewpoint of the latter, letting the whole law fall would mean a continuation of having millions uninsured, those insured paying for the emergency services of the uninsured, insurance companies having a free reign of being between the patient and the doctor, etc. The chances of a sensible reform in a foreseeable future would be minimal. Prohibiting the mandate but letting much of the rest of Obamacare in place would force a solution, which might eventually be better than Obamacare.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
10:23 am
When you have a “clunker” with most parts failing, you trade it in and get a new model.
I think this also applies to ObamaCare which is a “clunker”. A new model is needed.
Bob
March 30th, 2012
10:26 am
retired early, what changes under obamacre ? Many of the uninsured now will get coverage for free due to subsidys. The producers will still be paying for the non producers so why give gov more control ? Instead of accepting people walking away from medical bills lets force them to pay their bills so the rest of us don’t get screwed like we do with Social Security.
Bob
March 30th, 2012
10:29 am
Will, you seem to be venting against repubs but wonder why deadbeats get free care and cause your premiums to rise. Your democrats have given the deadbeats the ability to screw you, live with it !
retired early
March 30th, 2012
10:30 am
I have to laugh when you “Tea Partyers” complain about America becoming more “Socialist”.
Most Europeans have a far better standard of living than Americans. They don’t pay for college and they get free health care.
They do not have huge debts coming out of college and do not have to bankrupt from a medical emergency. Oh…thanks to “W”, Americans can’t include medical debt in a bankruptcy, nor can we include college loans.
These “poor socialist Europeans” have no desire to migrate to our “land of opportunity” any more.
They have it much better there, as recent surveys have shown.
Ironically, Europeans and much less “religious” by far than Americans.
Imagine that…
George
March 30th, 2012
10:31 am
It’s all my fault – George Dubya Bush!
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
10:33 am
Won’t miss Obamacare when it’s gone. Inept Fed couldn’t organize a panty raid.
George
March 30th, 2012
10:34 am
Last election the motto was “Hope and Change”
This year it will be wish in one and poop in the other and see which one fills up 1st! Go get em O’Bamer
ragnar danneskjold
March 30th, 2012
10:35 am
I thought early on the mandate would be booted, but that the court would try to throw an olive branch to the administration, keeping as much as possible. Then I learned that RomneyCare – supposed the basis for the administration’s 2700 page plan – was a mere 75 pages. That would mean excising RomneyCare from ObamaCare would leave 2600 of left wing social engineering. Suspect the court will find it too hard to parse the document.
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
10:35 am
Retired – If you love those socialists move on over to France – selah!
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
10:35 am
How about each state having its own health insurance. They know more about the requirements needed in each location better than any overall system. Then the taxpayers would pay for what they want in their state, not what a Federal bureauracy would decide for them.
For instance, I cannot believe that health needs for Idaho and Montana are the same as New York and Michigan. Let the state’s health needs be supplied by the state itself.
Mark
March 30th, 2012
10:37 am
The court’s appointee attorney argued before the Court that the mandate was merely a funding tool. So the bill, should the mandate be determined to be unconstitutional, will be sent back to Congress to find alternative funding, kill the bill, or amend it.
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
10:37 am
We less big gov-t socialism – not more. Cut the size of gov-t and you cut the national debt.
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
10:39 am
Send Retired to France and reduce the national debt.
retired early
March 30th, 2012
10:46 am
Dusty
Do you really believe the GOP controlled Georgia government would do “anything” to replace “Obamacare”.
BTW, the states that DO provide something meaningful will become the fastest growing to the detriment of those that don’t. It would reshape this country into the haves and the have nots.
Oblama
Typical response from one who has nothing meaningful to say regarding the topic being discussed.
ragnar danneskjold
March 30th, 2012
10:48 am
Dear Retired @ 10:46, good morning, I agree with friend Dusty. Perhaps healthcare is not the burning issue in Georgia that it is in New York and California. Certainly there is no rational argument for a one-size fits-all solution?
Tea Party Meber
March 30th, 2012
10:51 am
Now my posts are being sensored?
Tea Party Meber
March 30th, 2012
10:52 am
What ever happned 2 free speach?
gm
March 30th, 2012
10:55 am
Hey it make sense that the Justice would vote against this because they have federal insurance and its working for them, never mind the 40 million people mostly women and children dont have health care.
We had a President in office name W. Bush for 8 years did not tackle health care, he spent billions in Iraq but cared less about the American people health, did not offer any bills, or solutions, yet the right are now outraged over a President that have concerns about our kids health.
Our Catholic priest are outraged over abortions issues but silient on taking care of women and kids and health care, satans rep party of hypocrites continue to make him pride.
Linda Ellis
March 30th, 2012
10:56 am
I know what it is to have employer-sponsored health insurance plans, and I also know what it is to end up losing them after a lay-off.
I was uninsured after my COBRA ended and then after that for six months I was uninsured before I could enroll on to the Ohio High Risk Pool, THE ONLY AFFORDABLE legitimate health insurance program available to me after I was rejected in the private market for having pre-existing conditions; none of which were life threatening.
I know what it is to be turned away at the Cleveland Clinic to have my blood drawn because I was uninsured and had not seen a financial counselor first. After I saw the financial counselor for almost an hour, I had to pay ‘up front’ $262 before I could walk back down the hallway and go back in that lab and the tech agreed to draw my blood from a doctor order.
So, if you are uninsured, you are NOT treated the same way as when you can present your little insurance card in your hand.
All uninsured people do not qualify for Medicaid, nor even for much of a sliding scale discount on a provider bill.
Those who are trying to shut down the currently running federal high risk pools (which came about due to the ACA – “Obamacare”) and which offer more affordable monthly premiums compared to state run high risk pools, need to realize that those enrollees most likely will need to return to being uninsured through absolutely no choice of their own.
Log onto Ehealthinsurance.com for your state and go through the process of applying for health insurance. You’ll have to reveal your medical issues, medications you take, surgeries you’ve had, etc. going back in some categories up to 10 years of time.
Whatever you report for health conditions — literally from head to toe — will be taken from that application and used against you to obtain coverage. You will see those pre-existing conditions; which could be conditions like having sinusitis, consulting for a surgery you had not yet had, typed into as reasons for denying you coverage in your rejection for coverage letter.
Once you are rejected for coverage by one insurer, most likely you will be rejected by others. I was rejected by four of them.
My main point is that folks you can’t have it both ways!
Taking away perhaps the only possibility for someone to obtain and keep health insurance and then turn around and feel it is appropriate to scold them for becoming uninsured shows just how uninformed about the facts those who have been against “Obamacare” really are.
quick work break
March 30th, 2012
10:56 am
I think repeal of the rest of the law will produce a spectacular number of anecdotal examples of how people who were going to be helped are now facing bankruptcy or else denied care. Awesome.
gm
March 30th, 2012
11:00 am
Tea Party Meber
Whats amazing about you tea party hypocrites, you line up for your unemployment checks, medicaid, Va, SSI, when a disaster happens you have your had out for Fema and Obama to sign it.
Richard
March 30th, 2012
11:03 am
Republicans (note that I said “republicans”, not “conservatives”) passed abortion restrictions in Georgia because it will save 1500 lives a year.
In the words of a particular NFL athlete “child please.”
Let’s be clear that these are the same people suing Obamacare because it’s wrong for the government to come between the doctor and patient. All of you die hard republican supporters need to grow up and realize that your party wants power and control over your life just as much as Democrats. At some point, we as voters need to send a powerful message to these power hungry liars/scumbags.
Oh and Tea Party members…I didn’t catch the protest outside the capitol building over this intrusion into rights. Did I just get the address wrong?
Ray S.
March 30th, 2012
11:05 am
For me it’s very simple: Each member of congress only gets one vote for or against the law … they don’t get to pick and choose provisions to vote yes or no on … therefore each member of the supreme court should only get one vote, as to whether the law in it’s entirety is constitutional or unconstitutional. If constitutional, the entire law stands, if unconstitutional, the entire law doesn’t stand.
For EX: … members of congress often times will add a provision to a law, so there will be enough votes to pass … of course minus that added provision, there wouldn’t have been enough votes. If the bill passes under those circumstances, then the supreme court strikes down that provision, but leaves the rest in tact, then you have a bill that would have never passed congress in the first place.
The only logical answer, the entire law stays or goes, depending on the supreme court vote.
The matter of constitutionality is also obvious, there’s no clause in the constitution that gives the fed govt the right to force people to buy anything, no matter how beneficial it is to the person, or the entire country.
gm
March 30th, 2012
11:05 am
Oblama
There they go the hypocrites on the right, they want to pick and choice what gov program, that best fit them.
Amazing when Bush was spending and adding trillions to national debt, funding billions in Iraq you hypocrites never said a word, now when this President wants to spend money on Americans you are outraged, its really hard to tell who is the terrorist or the Americans.
retired early
March 30th, 2012
11:05 am
Ragar
“One size fits all…” Not acceptable ?
I remember why the Food Stamp Program came into being. It was because the Welfare program controlled by the states varied widely in benefit amounts even when taking into consideration the “cost of living in each state. States in the south, especially Texas, provided benefits too small to provide a viable existence. The Food Stamps were used to level the total assistance package.
That would certainly be the case with health care.
What’s the difference between a New Yorker and a Georgian when it comes to paying medical bills.
I see this as a National, not a State problem.
Ken
March 30th, 2012
11:07 am
If this is upheld what is next ? Gov’t ownes part of GM , will they require us to pay a GM products ? The process and the law was flawed from the start . This is what happens when the law has to be passed befofore you can read it , thanks to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats.
In the broader sense the whole party system is flawed , all the way to the Supreme court. The Supreme court will probably vote along party lines just like the rest of the politicians . Sad state of affairs . Perhaps if we outlaw political parties maybe we could get something meaningful accomplished. We need some free thinkers , what is wrong with doing the right thing regardless of party .
By the way , those who favor the law , hope you have to deal with the IRS over the penalty . Try reading that portion .
Kyle Wingfield
March 30th, 2012
11:07 am
retired early: As someone who’s lived there and here, I’d strongly dispute your 10:30.
First, “Europeans” is a widely misused term in this context. The differences in laws and standards of living from Spain to France to Britain to Germany to Belgium (where I lived) are pretty large.
Second, to the degree that we can discuss them together, they don’t so much have a “better” standard of living as a different one. They get “free” health care — for which families firmly in the middle class often pay income tax rates well above 40 percent and even 50 percent. They get “free” college — for which they pay with higher unemployment rates for young people (immovable labor unions contribute heavily to this problem, too, which is why I’m always amused when French college students protest in “solidarity” with the union members who fight to keep their lifelong grip on their jobs, making it that much harder for the college students to enter the work force when they graduate). They may get more vacation days — although this is changing over here in many cases — but have less disposable income. And consumers there have far fewer choices than we do here.
So, it’s not as rosy a picture over there as you wish to paint.
Kyle Wingfield
March 30th, 2012
11:12 am
Tea Party Meber: When all you do is call other people “loosers” (sic), yes, I take those comments down.
Oh, and to everyone else: I wouldn’t consider “Tea Party Meber” to be an actual sympathizer of the tea party. At least, that’s not the tune “Tea Party Meber” sings when posting under other names…
Jefferson
March 30th, 2012
11:12 am
Kyle, you are lucky, don’t forget it.
Kyle Wingfield
March 30th, 2012
11:15 am
Jefferson: Do you really believe “lucky” and “unlucky” are the only ways people go through life?
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
11:16 am
Dear Retired Early;,
Yes, I do think Georgia could manage healthcare just as well as paid beaurocrats in Washington DC. Do not underestimate those of us in Georgia. We may play “fiddedeedee” with playtoy laws (like many just passed) but when it comes to big important thngs we know when to get serious. Why do you think we have one of the best burn and emergency hospitals in the country, i.e. Grady?
Get serious. Did you retire to Florida because of no state taxes and then found out that everything there was taxed by the state? There’s no free ride. Do you think federally operated ObamaCare is going to be cheaper for all states? Do you think money grows on trees? Do you think Obamacare is going to make all things even and there will be no “haves & havenots”?
Once again, I declare on the side of independence. We cannot call ourselves free while demanding to be fed, housed, employed, and healed by big government. Take your pick. Free or “fondled” by government? That becomes more and more the question.
States will learn to economize for practical healthcare. Lift the Federal Santa Claus off their backs and they will learn how to manage while being run by their citizens.
Veteran of a Thousand Psychic Wars
March 30th, 2012
11:18 am
Enter your comments here
Refugee from Dikkksie (Thank God We Escaped)
March 30th, 2012
11:18 am
The big news is that Dikkksie is of no importance in the presidential election now, but no one seems to realize this. The South has gone for the “Lost Cause” (Gingrich/Santorum) so the serious contenders (Romney/Obama)can completely ignore Dikkksie in this campaign. Romney has Dikkksie in the bag, unless he turns black. It would be funny if both now endorsed same-sex marriage. What Dikkksie gonna do, stay home and not vote?
Veteran of a Thousand Psychic Wars
March 30th, 2012
11:19 am
Too many people, too few hula hoops.
I’m just sayin
Tea Party Meber
March 30th, 2012
11:20 am
The guy was bad mouthin God and America. I will stand up and dfende my god and Country.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
11:20 am
There are countries with well-functioning “Medicare for all ” systems, and there are countries with well-functioning forms of Obamacare. Hardly any developed country has such a mess of health care insurance as the US. But to those, like Oblama, who respond to a anybody, who points out to anything better elsewhere by suggesting that that person should move there or be sent there: This is not only YOUR country, buddy. Get used to the fact that people who want to improve things here have just as many rights as you do.
Ayn Rant
March 30th, 2012
11:23 am
The rest of it doesn’t work if the insurance pool doesn’t include most Americans, including the healthy and the poor.
Let’s go back to the unregulated, dysfunctional, free-for-all health care racket where the insurance companies and the lawyers fleece the patients and the medical providers. Eventually, people will have been deprived and ripped off enough to demand an affordable, effective health care system like the British have had since 1947.
Dirty Dawg
March 30th, 2012
11:26 am
To me what it will mean is that TSCOTUS has, unequivocally, been politicized – of course most of us knew it in 2000 with Bush v Gore, and again with Citizens United (sic) – and the only thing left to us, short of a Pelican Brief solution, is a Constitutional Amendment that would provide ways to remove Justices from the bench, establish term limits, or indeed anything that would allow us to remedy this ‘failing’ institution.
Chip
March 30th, 2012
11:30 am
Toss the whole stinking control-freak mess, since it was never about anyone’s health anyway. Then barf-gas the protestors in the streets and let them think about their greedy selfishness while they dry-heave for hours.
Hey liberals: the big bad world doesn’t owe you anything, and it isn’t “your” healthcare if everyone else pays for it.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
11:35 am
The idea that the health insurance needs are different in different states is a fantasy. It is as “valid” as Romney’s claim that the individual mandate is great for Massachusetts and people like it there, but would be a disaster for the US. If health needs for Idaho and Montana are different than for New York and Michigan, then surely they are different for Atlanta than for South Georgia. Should we have different health insurance system for each of them?
Linda
March 30th, 2012
11:37 am
Richard@11:03, The Declaration of Independence promises us only 3 unalienable rights: life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. What is it that you do not understand about a child’s right to life?
Several other states have similar “fetal pain bills.” GA’s bill designates 5 months.
Obama is SO pro-abortion that he voted several times in the Ill. Senate against bills to seek medical attention for children who are born alive after a botched abortion.
When do you think it becomes cruel to abort a baby? 6 months? 7 months? 8 months? 8 months & 30 days?
retired early
March 30th, 2012
11:39 am
Kyle
I am guilty of gross over generalization with regard to “most Europeans”. I was trying to point out some of the major difference between American and European’s ideals regarding Healthcare and Education.
These differences show a contrast between people who believe health care and education is a “Right” versus The many Americans who think it is not.
What caught my attention recently, was a recent survey noting that “many” recent college graduates from “many” European countries have decided to remain in Euorpe, instead of migrating to the US, as they have in the past.
The same report noted the problems with unions, which shuts out younger workers in favor of older ones, but isn’t that true in America as well.
Bottom line…..Both countries have their good and bad points, but Americans need to quit thinking socialism is “all bad.”
We can learn from them…and they can learn from us as well.
Thulsa Doom
March 30th, 2012
11:40 am
I look at Obamacare as a sellout to the insurance industry. A couple of months ago I attended a 2 day seminar held by some consultants on future health care under ACA and how to adjust for it. The trend we are seeing and which would continue under ACA is that many small employers would simply have to give up paying for group insurance for their employees- it would be too expensive. So a whole new niche for individual sales with added filler policies with much higer margins for insurance companies and agents is developing due to the loss of employer coverage.
This is going to be very profitable for the insurance industry because with ever rising costs the trend is towards higher and higher major hospitalization deductibles and higher margin filler policies such as Accident policies, indemnity policies, critical illness policies, etc. The higher and higher deductibles mean that people will be paying more and more out of pocket.
The best read I’ve seen so far is the Kaiser family foundation study on ACA. I would encourage anybody who hasn’t read it to read it.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
11:41 am
It needs to all be thrown out and the writing on a new bill given to a committee. Hearings and testimony from all stake holders, patients, providers, insurers, government, doctors, etc should heard. Have the committee draw up a bill and try to get enough votes to pass it out of committee. Kinda like it is supposed to be done. A long laborious task that will produce something of value.
What Obamacare was a hurriedly thrown together mish/mash of Democrat solutions, winnowed by Democrats, for Democrats, and passed with no thoughts of compromise with the 50% of the country that was left out of the debate. It was passed for the sole purpose of giving Oblamer credit for getting a national healthcare bill through the congress, after so many years of democrat failure to achieve this objective.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
11:44 am
Americans need to quit thinking socialism is “all bad.”
Not only bad, it is UNAMERICAN! If you want socialism, move to a socialist country, America was not set up that way!
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
11:50 am
Well, Kyle has explained so well at 11:07 the European healthcare systems which some here think are ideal. Not only are they much smaller countries with less population, they have higher taxes. And I haven’t heard of anybody needing expert medical care headed for those countries. Cheaper surgery like Thailand but not necessarily the best. But the princes and pontiffs head to the USA for the best medical care. Let’s not ruin it. It will not stay the best with socialized medicine.
I’m off my soapbox and out into the sunshine. Tres wunderbar!
HDB
March 30th, 2012
11:50 am
“When you have a “clunker” with most parts failing, you trade it in and get a new model.”
When you can’t afford a new model, you fix the clunker you’ve got…because it’s cheaper than the financing you pay!! Same here….unless you want to go to single-payer (which it should be in the first place!)………
Thulsa Doom
March 30th, 2012
11:55 am
“Hardly any developed country has such a mess of health care insurance as the US”
Not quite. Canada now has a program where they piggyback off the U.S. health care system. Ever looked at how few MRI machines Canada has per 100,000 people compared to the U.S.? Its embarrassing for proponents of socialized health care.
But I digress. Canadian partnerships actually now encourages their citizens to go to and use U.S. facilites and get reimbursed by the Canadian govt. Why? Because the Canadian system typically can’t afford the fixed cost of building new hospitals, outpatient clinics, purchasing imaging machines, etc.
http://www.freep.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS06/908200420/Canadians-visit-U-S-get-health-care
Don't Tread
March 30th, 2012
11:56 am
Single payer: A system where the government collects the premiums and then decides what health care you get.
The concept of freedom doesn’t mesh well with the government deciding your fate.
retired early
March 30th, 2012
11:57 am
Rafe
Do you want to get rid of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, pell grants, the DOT, military, police and education as well….these are all “socialist” programs. We all pay into a big pool, called taxes, and fund all these things which we as a country need. “one for all”…pure socialism.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
11:58 am
MarkV
I see you want good healthcare for all, a true objective. But believe me, the people of north Georgia are more aware of south Georgia than those in Washington. If we must have beaurarcracies I take the smaller ones instead of the giants.
Now I’m really gone….
Mark
March 30th, 2012
11:58 am
Will ,March 30th, 2012@10:18 am,
You are awfully cruel. If you are stricken with illness, you can lose your job, your insurance, all you have worked for, due to no fault of your own. Are we turning into a country that only cares for the pain of a fetus?
Linda
March 30th, 2012
12:00 pm
During the Supreme Court hearings, Justice Scalia,
[I]f we struck down nothing in this legislation but the … ‘Cornhusker Kickback,’ OK? We find that to violate the constitutional proscription of venality, OK?” Scalia said, eliciting chuckles from the audience.
“When we strike [the 'Cornhusker Kickback'] down, it’s clear that Congress would not have passed [the bill] without that. It was the means of getting the last necessary vote in the Senate.
“And you are telling us that the whole statute would fall because the ‘Cornhusker Kickback’ is bad? That can’t be right,” he said.
Venality is a vice associated with being bribeable or of selling one’s services or power, especially when one should act justly instead. In its most recognizable form, dishonesty, venality causes people to lie and steal for their personal advantage, and is related to bribery and nepotism, among other vices.
Obamacare was partisan. Only 3 Republicans voted for it. Specter switched to the Democrats & was voted out. Snowe won’t run again. One-fourth of the Democratic senators who voted for it were bribed, including those from Neb., LA, Mich., Conn., Ver., PA, NY, Fla., OR, Mont., ND, SD, Utah, Wy. & Iowa. It is unbelievable that 45 senators could authorize the govt. take-over of 1/6 of our economy who were too stupid to get their own cookies.
This bill should be struck down for its combined support by venality & stupidity.
tiredofIT
March 30th, 2012
12:01 pm
Simple, take Medicare and set the age requirement to zero, done!
DawgDad
March 30th, 2012
12:24 pm
“If this is upheld what is next ? Gov’t ownes part of GM , will they require us to pay a GM products ? ”
Of course. They ALREADY DO require us to “pay a GM products” – we (present and future taxpayers) funded the GM bailout and provided other subsidies. More directly, even if they don’t immediately (or ever) require people to buy a GM product there is no question the purpose of Obamacare was to establish the precedent for the Federal Government to MANDATE private citizens engage in commerce. This is neo-fascist.
I will acknowledge there are bleeding heart liberals out there who honestly believe Obamacare is about health care. I would encourage them to closely study the Supreme Court case and gain some valuable insight into the truth.
St Simons - we're on Island time
March 30th, 2012
12:45 pm
If Obamacare mandate falls, what goes with it?
a) all hope of the cons squirming out of the responsibility of single payer
b) all hope of the cons controlling anything but the AM radio
K.Conway
March 30th, 2012
12:47 pm
Time for Obama to go and his radical agenda!!!
Pet
March 30th, 2012
12:57 pm
It is so poorly cobbled together….
Strike it down and start over.
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
12:59 pm
If Oblamacare then Oblama will go with it and I won’t miss either.
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
1:01 pm
Oblamacare + inept Fed government = disaster
Jefferson
March 30th, 2012
1:03 pm
Kyle, not all but You are already starting to forget.
brian
March 30th, 2012
1:18 pm
So now with the new WallStreet Poll we have actual statistics of how many people in the GOP and Tea Party are liars, or idiots, or lying idiots…(it’s at least 56% and I have the facts to back that up)
What I really want to know is of the 67% of them that want to overturn Obamacare is this. What if the child of that Tea Party person marching with the sign and protesting the bill was the person who had a pre-existing aggressive cancer. What if it was THEIR child who would loose their insurance, THEIR child who would not be able to get treatment without that insurance, THEIR child who was going to DIE as a result of their protest.
Do you still think it would be 67%? READ MORE….
http://thetop10.squarespace.com/the-politics-of-it-all/2012/3/28/the-gop-tea-party-lie-about-obamacareagain.html
Steve
March 30th, 2012
1:20 pm
We, as Americans, have been duped by the plutocrats and corporatists. We vote against our own best interests based on trumped up wedge issues. It’s so sad to watch America slow slide into a permanent decline.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
1:22 pm
retired early
Military: Constitution enumerates several responsibilities of the US Government, one is to provide for the common defense. I am not going to justify each and every expenditure of the Fed gov, just to say that if it is not called for in the Constitution, i.e., an enumerated power, then it should be left to the states to provide, if it is absolutely necessary.
There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the US Govt the responsibility to equalize outcomes and take care of the citizens from cradle to grave. Taxes should be for the lawful running of the Fed Gov, not to amass money to distribute to the states, businesses, corporations, or the deadbeats. Charity is a person decision and should be left there.
If you prefer a country with a more social agenda then amend the Constitution or move, simple.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
1:30 pm
By June, we will finally have 9 people who have actually read the bill.
By Scalia’s statement that I posted above, it appears that the justices are aware of the drama that was associated with the bill. The Nebraska Cornhusker kickback was an attempt to bribe Sen. Nelson, the lone Democrat against the portion of the bill that originally included taxpayer-funded abortions. There were 3 independent news sources that confirmed that the Obama adm. threatened to close the Offutt Air Force Base, home of the Strategic Air Commend, in Nebraska to bribe Nelson.
http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-reno/ensign-requests-investigation-into-white-house-threats-to-pass-obamacare
It appears that at least one of the Justices has been keeping up with Kyle’s blog & watching FOX.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
1:34 pm
Brian
(it’s at least 56% and I have the facts to back that up)
What is the test for idiots, I’d like to have a copy. You know this is a made up statement, not meant to do anything but inflame the GOP. What did Dems score on your idiot test, 98%?
brian, you are reading from a blog, no credibility whatsoever.
What did these people with the aggressive cancer do less than 2 years ago, before Obamacare?
Why are you trying in insinuate that after Obamacare is gone, that there will be no legislation to address these problems. It certainly would not take much effort or brains to come up with something constitutional and better than Obamacare.
dan
March 30th, 2012
1:38 pm
It’s very simple, there is not a severability clause (or is it that there is a non-severability clause) either way, either the whole law stands or falls. There is no picking it apart. That is the way the laws are written in congress.
Progressive Humanist
March 30th, 2012
1:42 pm
The “conservative” judges on the Roberts’ court have already shown themselves to be the most activist judges in our nation’s history. They will essentially make the law any way they want, which is not part of their constitutional duty. It’s been clear for more than a decade that precedent, traditionally the foundation of law, means nothing to this court and they literally make it up as they go along, based purely on political ideology. What’s most amusing (and disgraceful) is to hear these justices, supposedly the most objective, respected people in the nation, parrot talking points from Tea Party members and Fox News on the bench, talking points that have no relevance to constitutional law. Let’s stop pretending that the Supreme Court has any integrity. When a former Reagan solicitor general calls their behavior ‘disgraceful’, it’s just another clear sign they’ve lost all credibility.
HDB
March 30th, 2012
1:42 pm
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
1:34 pm
“What is the test for idiots, I’d like to have a copy.”
Ask Rick Santorum……he just passed it!
I was always taught, the first thoughts are your REAL thoughts…..
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/30/rick-santorum-stops-himself-from-calling-president-obama-a-nr-video/
Intown
March 30th, 2012
1:46 pm
The lesson from this healthcare law and the impending strike down from a partisan Supreme Court, is that the Republicans may ahve been down in 2008-09, but man, if they didn’t play out a long term political strategy extremely effectively. They made Obama piss away a historic high tide in Dem political power by drawing out the healthcare fight as long as possible, negotiating in a poison pill, and then using that poison pill to likely strike down the law. I hate their take on public policy but man, you gotta respect their tactical strategy.
Intown
March 30th, 2012
1:48 pm
This never woulda happened if Hillary had won the primary.
Streetracer
March 30th, 2012
1:49 pm
Linda @ 1:30
The “Cornhusker kickback”, I believe, had to do with Medicaid funding as much as anything else. Being Bellevue, NE born and raised, there has been no Stragitic Air Command for several years. Air Force was reorganized to eliminate SAC and TAC.
However as far as PPACA goes it is real bad legislation. I saw a quote from one of the Supremes to the effect that reading the law was a violation of the 8th Amendment.
Many seem to be woefully ignorant of why our Constitution was constructed as it is (bad education?). The Federal Government has very specific enumerated powers for a reason; to prevent tyranical goverance. Basically, each person and/or state has the right to do whatever it wants, except for those enumerated Federal powers. Since each of us has this very wide freedom to behave however we want, people have decided that there elected state and local representatives could regulate certain of those behaviors (RIGHTS) for the common good.
Mary Elizabeth
March 30th, 2012
1:50 pm
I believe health care is a human right, just as I believe social security is a human right in one’s old age, and a good education is a human right that should be available to all classes of Americans.
Conservatives should have been careful for what they have wished – because they are about to get it.
What will happen – without ObamaCare – when a person loses his job because of physical or mental illness? He, then, will lose his healthcare. And his family will probably go bankrupt, and worse, if his illness is severe enough and if it lasts long enough, and costs him enough – without medical coverage.
This is what happens when health insurance is connected to employment.
The next, and better step, of course, would be to pass a single-payer medical insurance plan for the nation, but that is not going to happen anytime soon, because there was tremendous resistance, even, to passing ObamaCare. Single-payer would need to happen in small, incremental steps – like first having ObamaCare sustained.
No protection for pre-existing conditions, no protection against being dropped just when you need medical coverage, no protection against inordinately high insurance premiums, no coverage for your children until they are 26 on your plan.
Yes, our nation is about to get what many have wished for. Looks like partisan thinking (and interests) will prevail among members of the Supreme Court, once again.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
2:05 pm
brian@1:18, You mis-cited your site. It specifically states that 67% of AMERICANS who were polled are against Obamacare. Do you really believe that 67% of Americans are members of the GOP & the Tea Party? If that was true, Obama might as well start packing.
The health care bill is legal mumbo jumbo. It’s the regulations that are being written that we need to worry about, already over 12,000 pages, & the announcements being made that confirm our worst nightmares.
You are confusing health care & health care insurance. No one is dying due to the lack of either one.
The bill passed over 2 years ago & becomes more unpopular as time goes by. What matters now more than polls is its constitutionality.
Streetracer
March 30th, 2012
2:14 pm
Mary Elizabeth @ 1:50
I fully agree with your first paragraph, however not much else. I believe that it is incumbent on me to help those less fortunate or who have bad luck or whatever. But one who does not share those same views should not be compelled by Government Fiat to provide assistance. That, IMHO, is neither Constitutional or good public policy.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
2:15 pm
Progressive Humanist @1:42 pm
Why I agree with the substance of your post, but you should not paint all the justices on the Supreme Court with the same brush.
I would add that listening to an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court compare the health care to broccoli does not give one much confidence in the near-term future of this country.
Emma
March 30th, 2012
2:16 pm
@Bobby Taylor! Thanks for a CLEAR understanding of what could be ahead!
Oblama
March 30th, 2012
2:19 pm
gm – Sorry but I never said I supported Bush and I never voted for him. You label everyone that disagrees with YOUR opinion a right wing lunatic. I didn’t vote for Oblama either because he supports BIG government solutions for every problem. Some call that socialism. Most of you in the “progressive” (leftist) movement dream of a world where there are no different races, no sexes, and no different views from your own. Your world would be clones, all identical in color, all sexless, all of one common opinion (leftist) with the inability to think as an individual – because the government is going to look after you, tell you what is right for you and you will be allowed the same number of seconds to live and then be snuffed out. The FED government needs cleansing of those entrenched in Congress. It is inept and corrupted by long time politicians whose greatest desire and purpose is to get reelected. I say term limits for BOTH parties since you refuse to vote out the incompetent and the corrupt. Oblama is a term I coined to describe those in BOTH parties who blame the other party and never accept responsibility for the inept mess that BOTH sides created. That includes the current President and the one before him. I expect that you would never recognize and apologize for the contribution YOUR side has contributed to this Fed debt.
OBIWAN
March 30th, 2012
2:26 pm
One thing that cost NOTHING could be done now, let insurance companies go across state lines. Why is that so hard? Oh that’s right they made the law saying you could NOT go across state lines, wonder why.
DawgDad
March 30th, 2012
2:26 pm
“Most Europeans have a far better standard of living than Americans. They don’t pay for college and they get free health care.”
Show me ONE person in America who gets “free” health care. This is essentially the Kagan argument, and it’s very offensive. SOMEBODY pays.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
2:30 pm
It was US District Judge Roger Vinson who in Dec., 2010, compared the health care mandate to the fed. govt. requiring citizens to eat broccoli.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/u-s-judge-in-pensacola-weighs-florida-19-1127535.html
Justice Scalia’s comparison to broccoli probably means that he read Vinson’s ruling.
md
March 30th, 2012
2:39 pm
Considering the mandate is the funding mechanism and the dems no longer have the numbers to cram through an alternative funding source, I think it becomes dead in the water………..
md
March 30th, 2012
2:46 pm
“Most Europeans have a far better standard of living than Americans. They don’t pay for college and they get free health care.”
Sure, if one considers 800 sf to be “better”……..I’ll take the larger homes with actual yards for starters…..then ask a few expats why they work here………
commoncents
March 30th, 2012
2:55 pm
Mary Elizabeth @1:50- “I believe health care is a human right, just as I believe social security is a human right in one’s old age, and a good education is a human right that should be available to all classes of Americans.”
I’m going to have to disagree to all three of those points:
1) I believe health care should be accessible to all, but not given away freely. It should not be deniable to the newly born, but beyond that, we each have the responsibility to provide for ourselves and our families. If you maintain insurance your whole life, you can’t be denied for having a pre-existing condition. If you choose to not have it at some point, then that is a risk you must be willing to accept that opens you back up to pre-existing conditions.
2) Social security provided by the government is wrong. Everyone should be able to provide for themselves some sort of future retirement income, whether it be deducting money from your own paycheck each time and setting it aside or investing it. If you want the government to provide this, that is ok. But don’t expect to get more out than what your investment is actually worth and don’t expect to be subsidized by others for the rest of your life.
3) I also believe education is a right, but you said education SHOULD be available to all, and guess what: It already is! Beyond high school, it becomes a personal choice and that cost needs to be paid for by the individual, not shouldered by the tax payers.
md
March 30th, 2012
2:58 pm
“They don’t pay for college”
Seems some here need to understand that paying a lifetime of taxes before going to college is no different than paying once they get to college.
And guess what, there are education plans here that do the same thing…….but it takes a bit of self control to get it done. Those that would prefer others do it for them need not try……..
Mark
March 30th, 2012
3:00 pm
The so called cornhusker deal Judge Scalia referred to was repealed and removed from the ACA deal by “The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010″, and as such should not be used as the excuse to repeal the ACA. Whether it was ignorance or his desire to be partisan, it will be considered a low moment for our highest court. Please read the bill, Judge Scalia, and do the legal research for any subsequent changes made, so that your decision is based on the law, as it stands today, formally before you.
catlady
March 30th, 2012
3:14 pm
I want to keep the whole thing. Not that I need it; I have fair insurance through my work. But I am tired of paying for those who don’t have it. And believe me, there are a lot who don’t, many because they don’t want it taken out of their paycheck.
My neighbor, a TPer, rails against it. He has no insurance. He is sedentary, weighs in at 350 or more, and is 55. When he has to go to the hospital (and he will, more and more) he gets his free because he is “poor”. He SHOULD have health insurance, instead of expecting the rest of us to pay an increased rate to fund his care.
He is all for “personal responsibility”, but his mother, who lived to be 92, never worked outside the home. She “drew” on her husband’s SS for 20 years after he died, and on the taxpayers for the 10 years she lived in the nursing home. Her son did not have to sell the home to repay us for her care.
A responsible person takes care of themselves, and does not expect the rest of us to take up their slack.
the red herring
March 30th, 2012
3:24 pm
kyle–i think it is obvious tea party meber is not a tea party member but rather a person trying to turn people against tea party members. most tea party people i know are for less taxes, less government, more liberty. Simple as that and they sure aren’t walking around with their hands out looking for free stuff. I think the health care mandate is unconstitutional—i believe the health care bill was built around the mandate and should be struck down and the major portions of it reworked along with improvements such as tort reform. I believe people with preexisting conditions should be able to get affordable insurance. i do not think able bodied people should be able to have unemployment and free insurance for more than 18 months without them doing public work. I think only elderly, the “truly” physically and mentally disabled should get healthcare and unemployment benefits. I do not think illegal immigrants have a right to any of the above and feel they should be deported until they can apply and receive legal immigration. Any person that watched the way the health care bill was passed thru congress with republican/independent ideas being totally excluded should know that’s not how our government should work. To pass all that legislation behind closed doors (and even nearly resorting to “deeming” the bill to be passed) is simply unamerican. I don’t care if you are democrat, republican, libertarian, or martian—behind closed door legislation should not be allowed in the USA.
obooboocare
March 30th, 2012
3:33 pm
Strike it down their throats!
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
3:39 pm
“Justice Scalia’s comparison to broccoli probably means that he read Vinson’s ruling.”
That would make Justice Scalia’s argument even more deplorable, not being a spur-of-the moment comment but something he had time to think about.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
3:41 pm
I would add that listening to an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court compare the health care to broccoli does not give one much confidence in the near-term future of this country.
Can’t help myself MarkV, I know what you mean, but have to give you a MarkV comment.
He did not compare Obamacare to broccoli, he compared the government forcing you to buy healthcare to the government requiring you to buy broccoli, big difference. Semantics and definition are your game MarkV, did you blow this one? Lets try to be more precise and clear next time.
obooboocare
March 30th, 2012
3:52 pm
To read these asinine comments directed at Justice Scalia by these leftwing want-to-be-communist clowns is hilarious. Lenin wouldn’t bother to call these idiots, “useful”!
Linda
March 30th, 2012
3:54 pm
Judge Scalia knows the Cornhusker Kickback was removed from the health care bill & that Sen. Nelson was the last Democratic holdout. Removing a bullet from an armed robbery victim does not remove the guilt from the attempted robber or erase the crime. The corruption & venality surrounding the scandalous bill will forever be carved in the minds of every moral American, including the justices.
DawgDad
March 30th, 2012
4:02 pm
“I want to keep the whole thing. Not that I need it; I have fair insurance through my work. But I am tired of paying for those who don’t have it. ”
I understand your underlying position as you laid it out, but do realize how ridiculous your opening statement is? You’re seriously in favor of keeping a plan that will require you to pay MORE because your’re tired of paying for those who don’t have it?
If you think I’m wrong about paying MORE under Obamacare, I’m not. The insurance through my employer has already gone up as a direct result of Obamacare. All the stuff about controlling health care costs was mainly true – they want to control the costs and who gets paid what, but they clearly aren’t interested in controlling the TOTAL cost because Obamacare is driving costs UP.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
4:05 pm
Scalia might have voted for the bill until he heard that a liberal on Kyle’s blog had called him, a justice of the Supreme Court, ignorant & his argument deplorable.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
4:08 pm
Rafe Hollister @3:41 pm: “He did not compare Obamacare to broccoli, he compared the government forcing you to buy healthcare to the government requiring you to buy broccoli, big difference. He did not compare Obamacare to broccoli, he compared the government forcing you to buy healthcare to the government requiring you to buy broccoli, big difference.”
I expected a certain minimum of intelligence on the part of the readers. Too bad you have failed.
1961_Xer
March 30th, 2012
4:21 pm
Really, the reason the mandate will fall is because the defense could not adequately explain in deterministic terms why healthcare is different and why (and more importantly) Congress will not be able to use the Commerce clause to force even more individual behaviour if it were to stand.
They wanted to say “everyone will need healthcare”, but that is not sufficient.
They needed to show how everyone will need healthcare, AND that they would be unable to pay for that healthcare when they need it, thus putting a burden on the system. Clearly, it is not the case that most people will be unable to pay for received healthcare at some point in their lives. Plenty of young people, myself included (when I was in my 20’s), go without insurance for years before getting a job that affords them health insurance, yet I never created a burden on the system via an inability to pay for healthcare. The government argument fails! Once I obtained health insurance, I never let it lapse even thought me nor my family has ever had a serious health problem/emergency. But the government’s argument is that I SHOULD have had to have health coverage throughout my 20’s because someday I WOULD be a burden on the system…. and that is patently false! I have paid about $200,000 in insurance premiums over the years, and received about $30,000 of care. The government would have required me to pay in an additional $100k…. because SOMEONE ELSE fails to pay under similar circumstances.
We are not our brother’s keeper. If I was, my “brother” would not weigh 300lbs. My “brother” would not smoke, or drink excessively. My “brother” would exercise three times per week, and eat his vegetables. But since I am not my brother’s keeper, I should not be my brother’s insurer, either. Until the government can compel the 30+% of people in this country who are morbidly obese to get their lives together, I should not be made to pay for their healthcare via mandate or subsidy.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
4:22 pm
catlady@3:14, You said you were tired of paying for those who don’t have health care insurance. How will the health care bill change that? How will the health care bill force your neighbor to have health care insurance?
If he does not buy insurance, he will pay the govt. $2000 per year & you will still be “paying for those who don’t have insurance.”
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
4:23 pm
Awww we are still on the snare of Obamacare! Somehow one branched off to broccoli and all its powerful inportance.
All I got to say is “Broccoli by any other name would smell as ’sweet’”! Only collards can outdo its sweetness. But I hear you, MarkV. Why would anyone in their right mind want to bring up broccolli, much less collards, when it isn’t even dinner time and no cornbread?
The clue to this mystery is “right mind”. The right mind becomes frazzled after a day of chitchat on undefinable subjects influenced only by the Supreme Court at this minute and dragged through all shades of ignorance and intelligence and battered by the dimwits of dullness and buffoonery. Just another day at the races! (That is NOT a racist statement!)
But I remain a dedicated blogger, who would love to stay on subject but the predicate keeps interfering. (So there, Prof. Mary Elizabeth, see what good education can do for you. Subject & predicate not forgotten.)
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
4:28 pm
1961_Xer @4:21 pm
You argument is false.
“Plenty of young people, myself included (when I was in my 20’s), go without insurance for years before getting a job that affords them health insurance, yet I never created a burden on the system via an inability to pay for healthcare. “
Such an anecdotal argument is no argument at all. Are you trying to say that nobody in his/her 20s gets seriously sick or injured?
Paleolibertarian
March 30th, 2012
4:28 pm
I say that medicaid, medicare, S.S., federal student loans.
And if the Socialists, I mean, Democrats want single-payer, tell them to move to Canada. I’ll help some of them pack. And I hope they take some of the worthless RINOs and NeoCons with them.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
4:29 pm
1961_Xer@4:21, Where would you be today if you had deposited 80% of that $200,000 in a HSA instead of forking it out to an insurance company?
Martin Williams
March 30th, 2012
4:33 pm
I hope the whole thing fails and we the idiots that have health insurance from our employers will continue to pay for health care for the uninsurd through higher premuins. I also hope gas price will be $4 and above permanently. Gas in the U.S. is still extremely cheap and we use more energy than any other nation on mother earth.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
4:41 pm
A comparison of health care systems of different countries is always problematic. For one thing, it is fundamentally false to judge the health insurance system of a country by the quality of health care and vice versa. Imagine the very best health insurance system, whatever it may be. It would still not guarantee a high quality health care if, for instance, the country were too poor to afford it. Therefore, it is quite ridiculous to use as argument something like the number of MRI machines per 100,000 people. It is equally ridiculous to praise the health care of a country, such as the USA, on the basis of people coming from abroad to have sophisticated treatments done here. There is no doubt about the excellence of the US medical technology. That does not say anything about the quality of health care enjoyed by the totality of US citizens.
The quality of the health insurance system should be measured by the universality of the access to affordable health care. As I mentioned earlier, there are countries with high quality health insurance using the single payer approach, and others using a highly regulated private insurance approach, as well as various combinations. The individual mandate is essential, although it can be relaxed by not being applied to highest earners. The main point is, the citizens of each country decide what is best for them. If the Supreme Court strikes down the individual mandate of Obamacare, all that it will accomplish is to set back the health care for the Americans as a nation by a few years.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
4:41 pm
Now, MarkV, you have broken your own rules. One does not disagree with a common assumption (old people are sicker than young people) without giving accurate FACTS to prove your denouncement. (Miss Manners also objects to the world “false” when there is a possiblity what was said is not false..Disagree is more commendable. )
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
4:56 pm
Hmmm..MarkV.. Some of your points are valid Others show slant.
Poor healtcare is poor whether it is a rich or a poor country. If you give a poor person poor healthcare, it is still just that. The usual way to improve it is to spend more money on all phases of that healthcare.
There is no way that anyone should say they cannot get healthcare in the USA. We all know the emergency rooms cannot turn away patients. Most states and counties have clinics. There may be people who are afraid to try for healthcare (illegals, drugs, faith healers, and those who think they can treat themselves). I have worked in many healthcare systems across the USA and I have found easy access for most patients.
For someone to believe that people are dying in the streets of the USA is usually some misguided person without the facts. But do not say that poor healthcare for all is better than keeping standards high.
The people of Cuba all have healthcare and it is considered fairly good. I still don’t want to be a citizen there.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
4:57 pm
Dusty @ 4:41 pm: “Now, MarkV, you have broken your own rules. One does not disagree with a common assumption (old people are sicker than young people) without giving accurate FACTS to prove your denouncement.”
Dusty,
Explain. I have not written anything about young people not been less sick than old people. I have argued that even young people can get sick or injured. The case presented, that somebody went through 20s without insurance and without requiring medical care that he could not afford was not a rational argument. Do you want to claim that other people do not exist? People who suffer such serious health problems in their 20s and need a very expensive treatment, and if they have neither insurance nor relatives who can pay for that, that other people do not end up paying for them?
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
5:00 pm
MarkV
I expected a certain minimum of intelligence on the part of the readers. Too bad you have failed.
No, you fell into your own trap, you have been outed at being imprecise, here is an example of you attacking someone else for being imprecise.
“Plenty of young people, myself included (when I was in my 20’s), go without insurance for years before getting a job that affords them health insurance, yet I never created a burden on the system via an inability to pay for healthcare. “
Such an anecdotal argument is no argument at all. Are you trying to say that nobody in his/her 20s gets seriously sick or injured?
________________________________________-
No, he is not saying there are no exceptions, he would say “he expected a certain minimum intelligence on the part of the readers” His argument was clear to me.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
5:02 pm
Anything the fed. govt. does costs twice as much, takes twice as long, has twice as much red tape, is twice as disappointing & requires twice as many bureaucrats as the private sector. It will cost four times more than promised & will have four times more unintended consequences.
Health care should be left up to the medical professionals, not politicians.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
March 30th, 2012
5:02 pm
No matter what, it’s DOA. Toast. History.
The mandate funds all of this illegality and I seriously doubt if a Republican controlled House is going to find a way to pay for late term abortions, boob jobs, liposuction and all the other “diseases” that liberals consider vital to their health and welfare.
And won’t obozo be the a$$, wasting a year of critical legislative process over this folly?
No New Taxes, EVER!
March 30th, 2012
5:04 pm
The main reason for out of control health care costs is the system of third party payers. Someone else’s deep pockets invite big price hikes, so let us eliminate deep pockets, and see how fast prices fall. No more health insurance means falling prices for all. Give it a try sometime. Each patient must pay for their own health care out of pocket.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
5:07 pm
Dusty @4:56 pm
Dusty,
You have to do better.
“Poor healtcare is poor whether it is a rich or a poor country.” Did I write something different? What I wrote is that if the country is poor, it may simply cannot afford good health care, whether it has a good health insurance system or not.
“There is no way that anyone should say they cannot get healthcare in the USA.” Are you wearing your rose glasses all the time? Emergency room cannot turn away patients. But there are still, plenty of people who do not get good health care because they cannot afford it. Do not be so blind. Actually, there are people dying in the streets of the USA. I would not argue with that, because those are exceptions, but still it happens.
“But do not say that poor healthcare for all is better than keeping standards high. “ Where did I say that?
As for your comments about Cuba, what has that got to do with anything?
Old timer
March 30th, 2012
5:18 pm
Retired early….After spending much time in Europe,primarily Italy, I disagree with your post. They live on much less income, small..to very small home, and many do not have cars. Young people cannoto find jobs. Many homes still do not have large refrigerators, dryers, dishwashers…etc. And taxes for all the “free” stuff are very high.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
5:18 pm
Rafe Hollister @ 5:00 pm
If you have such a good understanding of the argument, why don’t you state it?
Linda
March 30th, 2012
5:22 pm
My husband & I have lived under the administrations of 12 presidents. We have NEVER seen a president try to divide our country so far apart & so blatantly as Obama in so many ways. He’s been harping for years now about the evil rich, the fat cats, Wall St. CEOs, bonuses, millionaires & billionaires, corporate jets, the 1%, etc., not paying their “fair share,” blah, blah, blah.
It ain’t working, folks.
Everyone wants to be evil, rich, fat, own a jet, etc. who are buying lottery tickets today, including the Occupy Everything crowd.
Good luck, Americans!
Old timer
March 30th, 2012
5:29 pm
I would like to see cost studies of plans.. I believe we can create better less expensive plans where people purchase what they need. Selling plans across state boundaries might make things less expensive as would limiting lawsuits. I would imagine there are many ways to help control costs.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
5:32 pm
MarkV
You need to visit the children’s hospitals of Atlanta. They are filled with sick chilcren and not all of them have their expenses paid by family or insurance. But they are treated with the same and the best care available. Now how did that happen? Most hospitals budget for indigent care and the sick get treated.
You seem to think that because no family funds are available to pay for a sick indigent child or person, they will not receive care. They will! I”m sorry but sometimes neglect comes from not knowing what is available.
Yes, there are a few people with incurable vicious diseases who say they cannot get help. But, with all the help that is available in this country, we now MUST have better healthcare when we already have the best in the world. I say it is not only dumbing down the system and probably more expensive in the long run.
The only changes we need in our healthcare system is to study it carefully by the experts on how to make it less expensive. The drug companies will help as they already are by giving free medication in many cases to indigent patients. The help of professional assistants is used more frequently. Costs can be cut in doctors’ expenses without the need for extreme liability insurance .Out patient surgery is more common now The list goes on and on but must be done careful and not by people with no medical training (as ObamaCare seems to have been done.)
bob
March 30th, 2012
5:33 pm
WE NEED HEALTH REFORM, PERIOD! We should put all the teaparty members on a cruise ship and sink it! haha!
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
5:44 pm
Dusty @5:32 pm
I wish I knew what you were arguing for and against. Let’s start with the following:
“You need to visit the children’s hospitals of Atlanta. They are filled with sick chilcren and not all of them have their expenses paid by family or insurance. But they are treated with the same and the best care available. Now how did that happen? Most hospitals budget for indigent care and the sick get treated.”
Read it again.” Most hospitals budget for indigent care and the sick get treated.” Hospitals budget for it. And who pays those expenses? The owners of those hospitals from their pockets? No, the insured patients who get charged high expenses. You have just made an argument for individual mandates.
“But, with all the help that is available in this country, we now MUST have better healthcare when we already have the best in the world. I say it is not only dumbing down the system and probably more expensive in the long run.”
Please read it. What does that first sentence mean? What does the second sentence mean?
I will stop here, because it is getting too long. I certainly agree that we have to study carefully how to make healthcare less expensive.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
5:45 pm
No New Taxes@5:04, What about a compromise? What if we had health care insurance policies exactly like our auto & hazard insurance policies? Most Americans understand that the higher the deductible, the lower the premiums. Americans pay for their own windshield wiper blades, tires & brake jobs. Americans pay for their own paint, carpet & appliance replacement. Americans should pay for the cost of routine doctor visits, medicines & tests.
Compare the costs of High Deductible Health Care Plans & Health Savings Plans to the standard health insurance policies we have today.
I know for a fact that doctor visits are cheap when the patient pays cash.
Insurance is supposed to be for accidents, fires, losses, sickness, etc.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
5:46 pm
Now Mark V
You do know Cuba is a communist country with the kind of healthcare you seem to favor. That is why it was mentioned. You muist remember your connotations are almost as good as simple facts from which to draw conclusions.
The only people dying in the streets of the USA are jaywalkers, drunks, shooting victims, bike riders, and people who don’t fasten their seat belts. ObamaCare is not going to help a single one of them.
md
March 30th, 2012
5:46 pm
“I want to keep the whole thing. Not that I need it; I have fair insurance through my work. But I am tired of paying for those who don’t have it.”
You are aware that ACA provides subsidies for those that can’t afford it, right? It actually provides subsidies for those making a paltry 88k a year…….it’s the ones making 89k a year that should be stomping their feet.
The bill needs to be killed and allow the States to implement as they see fit……..50 laboratories working on the problem has got to be better than one sides’ vision of utopia…….
Ted
March 30th, 2012
5:52 pm
First of all Kyle, it’s called The Affordable Care Act. I wonder why people can’t ever call it by its real name. I also noticed that you failed to mention that Republicans are gleeful about striking down a law that would help millions of Americans based on a provision that they supported in the first place–the individual mandate. Individual mandates have been around for a while, they are part of the Massachusetts health care bill “RomneyCare” and the discussion about them goes back to at least 1989, when the conservative Heritage Foundation gave lectures about it and expressed their support.
In 1993, Republicans introduced health care bills that contained an individual mandate. Advocates included Senators Hatch (UT), Grassley (IA), Bennett (UT), and Bond (MO). The inclusion of the individual mandate was part of a compromise–instead of the public option the individual mandate was included. All of a sudden Republicans who supported the idea turned against it, because the President was for it.
The people who are clapping in audiences about healthcare not being available or accessible, or cheering about all Americans not being covered for their healthcare (the “let them die” remark at a Republican debate) are ignorant–and that’s being kind. All of the posters here who are so against the Affordable Care Act should give up your health insurance and pay out of pocket. You know why you won’t? Because no one can afford to pay for health care by themselves, much less completely out of pocket unless they are a multi-millionaire.
I would never pay for an AJC subscription..the sloppy reporting, mistruths, or just leaving information out to suit your own purposes is just too much for me. You and some of the others at this newspaper should take a look at some of the quality papers across the country and take your cue from them. It’s one thing to have a different viewpoint but it’s another thing to distort reality by not telling the entire story.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
6:00 pm
OK MarkV
First sentence: Hospitals are managing their business ALREADY.. They have markups like any institution to make ends meet. That is what management means
Second sentence: We already have a fine healthcare system in place considered the best in the world. ObamaCare is based on the premise that everybody can’t get care (99% wrong). But expertise will decline the more people, ignorant of healthcare systems. try to .change it into a cut-rate affair that will do a little something for ALL people. No country with socialized medicine has first rate healthcare. I don’t want to make our good system into mediocre and costly.
Dinner time!!
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
6:00 pm
If you have such a good understanding of the argument, why don’t you state it?
Here it is,… you can dish out the spurious criticisms of other posts, but you can’t take it, when your posts are spuriously criticized. That was the point of the argument, nuff said.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
6:07 pm
First of all Kyle, it’s called The Affordable Care Act. I wonder why people can’t ever call it by its real name.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Actually it is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Why don’t people call it that, maybe because it doesn’t protect patients and in not affordable.
Dusty
March 30th, 2012
6:08 pm
Ted
Forget it. I wouldn’t care if they called it BushCare, ClintonCare, CarterCare, HooverCare or anything else. It is an inoperable illegal expensive “plan” that won’t work. That’s why most people don’t like it. They know better.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
6:12 pm
Ted@5:52, It’s not called the Affordable Health Care Act because it’s not affordable. It’s costs were one of the many lies associated with it.
The Heritage Foundation & Republicans might have considered the individual mandate 25 years ago, but that is history & about to be declared unconstitutional.
Yes, routine health care costs SHOULD be paid for out-of-pocket. All the people in the US who are self-employed pay for their health insurance out-of pocket. All employers pay for their employees’ health insurance out-of-pocket.
It is YOU who is distorting reality by not understanding it.
md
March 30th, 2012
6:16 pm
And all those for this monstrosity know not what they do……..requiring a 3rd party bureaucracy to live between us and our doctors is just stupid, stupid, stupid……..
A market solution would be best, followed by a single pay system……..this behemoth surely isn’t the answer.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
6:17 pm
Rafe Hollister @6:00 pm
As I expected, you are full of hot air and no substance. You wrote: “No, he is not saying there are no exceptions, he would say “he expected a certain minimum intelligence on the part of the readers” His argument was clear to me.” His argument was clear to you. The argument he, 1961_Xer made, and which you claimed was clear to you. But now you are weaseling and unable to answer. Pathetic.
Just saying..
March 30th, 2012
6:22 pm
If the mandate goes, would prefer to see a single payer proposal vs whatever the GOP puts up.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
6:24 pm
Dusty @ 5:46 pm
“You do know Cuba is a communist country with the kind of healthcare you seem to favor. That is why it was mentioned. You muist remember your connotations are almost as good as simple facts from which to draw conclusions.”
Dusty,
Are you even distantly aware of the fact that there are many, many non-communist countries in the world that provide universal health care? I doubt that you even know what healthcare Cuba provides, and you most certainly do not know what I favor, other than that it should be universally affordable.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
March 30th, 2012
6:26 pm
This is pretty sick but what else do you expect from PMSNBC-
In the NBC segment, Zimmerman says: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”
The full version, though, unfolds like this:
Zimmerman: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.”
911 operator: “Okay. And this guy, is he white black or Hispanic?”
Zimmerman: “He looks black.”
Ted
March 30th, 2012
6:34 pm
Rafe, Linda, and Dusty, you’re fine examples of the ignorant people that I was talking about.
“The Heritage Foundation & Republicans might have considered the individual mandate 25 years ago.”
No, actually they considered it up until the President was elected and it was on the table with health reform. Stop trying to rewrite history.
MarkV
March 30th, 2012
6:36 pm
Dusty @6:00 pm
“First sentence: Hospitals are managing their business ALREADY.. They have markups like any institution to make ends meet. That is what management means”
That is not the first sentence I asked about, and it definitely is not an answer to what I wrote about the hospitals.
“Second sentence: We already have a fine healthcare system in place considered the best in the world.”
Actually, this is about the first sentence I asked about, which was “But, with all the help that is available in this country, we now MUST have better healthcare when we already have the best in the world.” Which still does not make sense. But if you want to replace it with the above, I must remind you that our healthcare system is considered the best in the world only by some Americans. A case of a fox praising his tail.
I won’t even try to decipher your last paragraph. I can only accuse you by you being in a hurry to prepare dinner.
Hillbilly D
March 30th, 2012
6:38 pm
This case will come down to Justice Anthony Kennedy,
The most powerful person in U. S. government. With this and several other things, the law is whatever he wants it to be.
tiredofIT
March 30th, 2012
6:41 pm
Heath insurance companies are just middle men making ridiculous profits and not really very good at what they do. I am sure there are many cheaper ways to perform their function.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
6:45 pm
Rafe, It’s apparent to the conservatives on this blob exactly who is full of hot air, no substance, a weasel & pathetic, & it ain’t you.
Some people have absolutely no problem celebrating fool’s day.
@@
March 30th, 2012
6:54 pm
If Obamacare mandate falls, what goes with it?
Everything but the single-license approach.
State regulation of insurance companies has been criticized for many years because of the burden imposed on insurers by having to comply with the laws of many jurisdictions. These higher costs are passed on to consumers. The problems with the current regulatory structure are prompting calls for increased federal regulation of insurance. However, all proposals to federalize insurance regulation create opportunities for abuse at the hands of the federal government and fail to utilize the benefits of a federal system. This article shows how many of the problems of the current system can be addressed without resorting to a large scale intrusion of federal regulators into
insurance markets. The proposed solution calls for minimal federal intervention to provide for jurisdictional competition between states that would be allowed to charter insurers that could operate nationally with only the single license granted by the charter. This single-license approach addresses the most salient concerns of proponents of federal
optional chartering. It also has the potential for triggering competition and innovation in insurance products and rates while preserving a meaningful role for state regulation.
Oh wait…that wasn’t in there. Had it been, the state’s would have held creative license.
If the justices choose to sever the mandate only, give the 2700 page monstrosity to Kagan to figure out. She knows what’s in there.
schnirt
Hillbilly:
Check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3qbB4Kq3Y0
Looks like Mama got everyone ‘cept the oldest to slick their hair down.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
7:17 pm
Ted@6:34, Gentleman don’t disrespect ladies. You do know the difference between ladies & women, don’t you? You do know the difference between gentlemen & males, don’t you? Only foul-mouthed liberals find the need to try to intimidate women when they can’t argue the truth of points being discussed. What liberals have never understood is that conservative women are the strongest women in America & are actually emboldened by attempts at intimidation by the liberal left. Only orphans have understandable excuses for such language.
In spite of the fact that I was raised as a Democrat in a Dem. household in a Dem. town & am still registered as a Dem., my husband married me anyway. History is still being rewritten.
The progressive movement has 2 classifications of people: those in the loop & those in the soup. How dare you call Dusty & I ignorant when it’s minions like you who are in the soup pot.
One needs to merely access the Heritage Foundation website to observe their negative opinions of Obamacare.
Rafe Hollister
March 30th, 2012
7:32 pm
Linda, thanks for watching my back there. I need to follow LBB’s advice and just step over it.
Ted, your arguments about the GOP being for it before they were against it, is lame. The Dems have been for many things before being against them. I can think of several by just Oblamer alone. He voted for the tax breaks for the oil companies while in the Senate and now he thanks that this is almost criminal.
Oblamer campaigned against Hillary and made fun of her desire for a mandate. He said the problem, with Healthcare was cost and not participation. He said he was going to lower cost and then more people would want to participate. Guess he changed his mind. Actually plenty of times. I could go on and on.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
7:36 pm
The reason the fed. tax code allows taxpayers to deduct mortgage interest is to motivate taxpayers to invest in home ownership. Is Obamacare the first bill in the history of our country that uses coercion, rather than motivation, to force taxpayers to act? Is that one of the reasons Obamacare is so unpopular?
@@
March 30th, 2012
7:42 pm
Ted:
First of all Kyle, it’s called The Affordable Care Act. I wonder why people can’t ever call it by its real name.
Actually, it’s The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But what’s in a dropped word or four?
It neither protects the patient or is affordable.
Obamacare(s) not that it does neither. The dems call it his signature healthcare plan. His name will forever be tied to another failed attempt at universal healthcare. Everytime it’s been promoted, the citizens have rejected it. The first effort was launched in 1912.
md
March 30th, 2012
8:15 pm
Since we are still on the ACA, thought I’d re-post these quotes for those that may have forgotten:
“You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward,”
and
“And what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended,”
Both comments in reference to the “system/process”……..yet, exactly how the dems crammed through the bill.
md
March 30th, 2012
8:16 pm
Oops……forgot to mention that the quotes came from our current President……….
Rick
March 30th, 2012
8:25 pm
Linda, you declared yourself a lady, and stated you abhorred name calling. Wow, what happened to you? (@6:45 PM)
You say “Rafe, It’s apparent to the conservatives on this blob exactly who is full of hot air, no substance, a weasel & pathetic, & it ain’t you.
Some people have absolutely no problem celebrating fool’s day.”
You really need to get away from this blog for a bit, find your former self, maybe spend some quality time with family this holy season coming up. Happy Holiday, to you and yours.
Linda
March 30th, 2012
9:04 pm
Rick@8:25, If you actually read the comments on this blog, you would see that the mentions of “hot air,” “no substance,” “a weasel” & “pathetic” were used by one of your liberal cohorts.
What I do with my time is absolutely none of your business. The fact of the matter is that I make my income on the internet & there are times that I cannot leave the computer to “find my former self or spend quality time with my family” while I am “at work” on the computer.
What you really want me to do is to divert my attention away from the Obama agenda, which I refuse to do.
Happy Holiday to you & yours, too.
Why Penalizing People Who Don’t Buy Health Insurance Is a Cherished American … – Slate Magazine | tgfmPress
March 30th, 2012
10:36 pm
[...] doctor knows about ObamaCareFox NewsYes Virginia, Health Insurance Is Different From BroccoliForbesPoll Position: If Obamacare mandate falls, what goes with it?Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Chicago Tribune -Standard Speaker -USA TODAYall 15,325 [...]
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
March 30th, 2012
11:07 pm
If Obamacare mandate falls, what goes with it?
8:51 am March 30, 2012, by Kyle Wingfield
—————————-
What’s left of the failed Obozo regime. The loser spent two years jamming Americans with his unconstitutional sham instead of focusing on jobs and the economy.
Fail.
UGA 1999
April 2nd, 2012
2:13 pm
If it fails is it because it is unconstitutional.