If the Court Overturns Obamacare then What?

[candycorn]

If the law is overturned, then healthcare will once again take center stage in congress. However, the chance of actually passing any meaningful legislation is not good. Republicans will resurrect their scale down healthcare proposals such as tort reform and health insurance across state lines. Democrats, unhappy with Obamacare will back a single payer plan once again. Insurance, drug companies, hospitals, medical associations, and trade groups will once again start their lobbying for other legislation favorable to their business. The same outrage we had in 2008 from the public about increasing healthcare costs, inability to get affordable insurance, and denial of claims will again put more pressure on congress who aren't going to want to do anything.

This I will disagree with. If overturned, I would be shocked if the words "health care" are said in concert having to do with any new meaningful legislation on Capitol hill until 2016 at the earliest.

 

[deaddogseye]

the issue of severability is one of the issues before the court and will be addressed in argument tomorrow i believe. That is the issue of whether if the court for example finds the individual mandate unconstitutional what happens to the rest of the law? Does it all go or just the mandate. The law does not have a savings clause that says if part of the law violates the constitution, the rest endures. It doesnt say the opposite either. It was kept silent on that point so the court will have to decide this -- assuming they dont uphold the law.

if they find the congressional intent was to save the rest then you have real chaos - the mandate is the funding mechanism for the other provisions of the law. it will be interesting and it will be up to congress to deal with the mess - that they created

 

[Staidhup]

In the event the court should overturn the law it would force congress to address the inequities and deficiencies of the current law. To throw up one's hands and say what was passed is the best that can be done is mediocre at best. It is apparent the a quasi open free market and subsidized program, based on need, is a valid option which needs further exploration, furthermore political posturing needs to be put aside once and for all to address the problem. From a financial stand point the government is overwhelmed with unfunded liabilities as it is so Medicare, and Medicaid need to be brought into the discussion. Can a solution be reached that protects the rights of our citizens and at the same time address the issue of health care, lets hope so.

 

[Decepticon]

Maybe we can just throw it all out and go with single payer?

It's not like taxation for health care would could even be constitutionally questioned, given many states enforcement of auto insurance mandates.

 

[koshergrl]

Wow, sounds like the fascists are getting a little nervous.

Praying it gets overturned. A lot of people are.

And prayer works.

 

[deaddogseye]

Maybe we can just throw it all out and go with single payer?

It's not like taxation for health care would could even be constitutionally questioned, given many states enforcement of auto insurance mandates.

They couldnt get single payer through when they dominated the house and had 60 votes in the senate. Thats why they did it the way they did. There is NO WAY single payer will happen. No Way!!!

And as for auto insurance mandates -- you can choose not to drive or own a car. That is a big difference

 

[deaddogseye]

If the law is overturned, then healthcare will once again take center stage in congress. However, the chance of actually passing any meaningful legislation is not good. Republicans will resurrect their scale down healthcare proposals such as tort reform and health insurance across state lines. Democrats, unhappy with Obamacare will back a single payer plan once again. Insurance, drug companies, hospitals, medical associations, and trade groups will once again start their lobbying for other legislation favorable to their business. The same outrage we had in 2008 from the public about increasing healthcare costs, inability to get affordable insurance, and denial of claims will again put more pressure on congress who aren't going to want to do anything.

This I will disagree with. If overturned, I would be shocked if the words "health care" are said in concert having to do with any new meaningful legislation on Capitol hill until 2016 at the earliest.

I agree with you on this (assuming the entire law is struck down, not just the mandate). There could be some minor bill to show the public that something was done but nothing at all comprehensive. If only the mandate is thrown out then it gets trickier because it creates a real economic problem for the industry.

 

[Edgetho]

Maybe we can just throw it all out and go with single payer?

It's not like taxation for health care would could even be constitutionally questioned, given many states enforcement of auto insurance mandates.

They couldnt get single payer through when they dominated the house and had 60 votes in the senate. Thats why they did it the way they did. There is NO WAY single payer will happen. No Way!!!

And as for auto insurance mandates -- you can choose not to drive or own a car. That is a big difference

States have many rights that the Federal Government does not. And vice versa.

One of those is the ability to force people to buy a product whether they like it or not. States can do it, the Federal Government can NOT.

If you don't understand that, you either need to or you need to find another topic that interests you

 

[The Rabbi]

We will go back to a system that 97% of the people were perfectly satisfied with. Insurance rates will drop. Socialism will be set back 8 years at least.

What better outcome could anyone hope for?

 

[The Rabbi]

Maybe we can just throw it all out and go with single payer?

It's not like taxation for health care would could even be constitutionally questioned, given many states enforcement of auto insurance mandates.

Maybe you know something Barney Frank doesn't know?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3BS4C9el98&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL804CD8035F517B3E]Single Payer Action Confronts Barney Frank - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Flopper]

If the law is overturned, then healthcare will once again take center stage in congress. However, the chance of actually passing any meaningful legislation is not good. Republicans will resurrect their scale down healthcare proposals such as tort reform and health insurance across state lines. Democrats, unhappy with Obamacare will back a single payer plan once again. Insurance, drug companies, hospitals, medical associations, and trade groups will once again start their lobbying for other legislation favorable to their business. The same outrage we had in 2008 from the public about increasing healthcare costs, inability to get affordable insurance, and denial of claims will again put more pressure on congress who aren't going to want to do anything.

This I will disagree with. If overturned, I would be shocked if the words "health care" are said in concert having to do with any new meaningful legislation on Capitol hill until 2016 at the earliest.

I agree with you on this (assuming the entire law is struck down, not just the mandate). There could be some minor bill to show the public that something was done but nothing at all comprehensive. If only the mandate is thrown out then it gets trickier because it creates a real economic problem for the industry.

True. If the mandate were gone, the insurance industry would demand relief and Congress might throw the whole thing out both the good and the bad. IMHO, it would serve the country better at this point to fully implement the law, see what the real costs are instead of relying on projecting, see what works and what doesn't work then amend the law.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

If the law is overturned, then healthcare will once again take center stage in congress. However, the chance of actually passing any meaningful legislation is not good. Republicans will resurrect their scale down healthcare proposals such as tort reform and health insurance across state lines.

What would tort reform and allowing cross state purchasing cost the taxpayers? I'll give you hint, then answer is nothing. Those two things could be done immediately (not several years down the road), are almost guaranteed to save consumers money, and if they don't work there's no harm done. Why are you against trying all options, especially when these are pain free cost saving methods?

Will they cure everything wrong with the system? Of course not. But let's try what we can before we go rushing head first towards a federal mandate.

Democrats, unhappy with Obamacare will back a single payer plan once again.

I actually support a single payer type plan, but only if it's done at a state level. It they try at a federal level I will be 100% against it.

Insurance, drug companies, hospitals, medical associations, and trade groups will once again start their lobbying for other legislation favorable to their business. The same outrage we had in 2008 from the public about increasing healthcare costs, inability to get affordable insurance, and denial of claims will again put more pressure on congress who aren't going to want to do anything.

Again? When did they ever stop? How is a mandate forcing US citizens to give their money to insurance companies NOT passing laws favorable to insurance companies?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program."

John Mackey: The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare - WSJ.com

This would be ideal

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The only way to bring down the cost of health care is to put more of the cost burden on the consumer, not less.

I'm not sure about that.

I am.

My son's family health insurance plan has a thousand dollar deductible and rather high copays. Like many families they're struggling and skipping medical treatment for some minor problems that have the potential of becoming very big problems because they don't have the money.

Until the majority cost burden is hitting consumers across the board the price will NEVER go down without sacrificing the quality of care. There are no market forces in the health care industry to drive down prices because just about every one of us is paying through a third party. You don't care if your monthly meds are costing $200 a month if you're only paying a $5 co pay. Insurance companies or the government are footing the bill in most cases and so service providers keep charging more and more. If you had to pay for most of your general services then you could shop around for the least expensive doctor and treatments.

Insurance should be reserved for exactly that, insurance. It should be there to cover catastrophic medical issues, not every sniffle, sneeze, and scraped knee. Health care was never this expensive a couple generations ago when you still had doctors making house calls and people writing checks to pay for the delivery of their child. Government meddling in the market via Medicare and Medicaid and 85% of working Americans having health care plans, rather than true insurance, is what has artificially driven up the costs.

Placing more of the healthcare cost on the family encourages people to bypass low cost healthcare procedures and preventive services and chance serious healthcare problems with much higher costs.

Based on what evidence?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...ays-preventive-care-will-raise-not-cut-costs/

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Maybe we can just throw it all out and go with single payer?

It's not like taxation for health care would could even be constitutionally questioned, given many states enforcement of auto insurance mandates.

Are you a masochist? I ask this because you must really enjoy making yourself look stupid. Do you understand the difference between state law and federal law?? You clearly have no understanding of the Constitution whatsoever. I gather you go to public school.

 

[occupied]

Allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines will have the same effect as allowing credit card companies to do business across state lines did. They will all relocate to the state with the loosest regs and the other states will have no say in the matter.

 

[Annie]

The only way to bring down the cost of health care is to put more of the cost burden on the consumer, not less.

I'm not sure about that.

I am.

My son's family health insurance plan has a thousand dollar deductible and rather high copays. Like many families they're struggling and skipping medical treatment for some minor problems that have the potential of becoming very big problems because they don't have the money.

Until the majority cost burden is hitting consumers across the board the price will NEVER go down without sacrificing the quality of care. There are no market forces in the health care industry to drive down prices because just about every one of us is paying through a third party. You don't care if your monthly meds are costing $200 a month if you're only paying a $5 co pay. Insurance companies or the government are footing the bill in most cases and so service providers keep charging more and more. If you had to pay for most of your general services then you could shop around for the least expensive doctor and treatments.

Insurance should be reserved for exactly that, insurance. It should be there to cover catastrophic medical issues, not every sniffle, sneeze, and scraped knee. Health care was never this expensive a couple generations ago when you still had doctors making house calls and people writing checks to pay for the delivery of their child. Government meddling in the market via Medicare and Medicaid and 85% of working Americans having health care plans, rather than true insurance, is what has artificially driven up the costs.

Placing more of the healthcare cost on the family encourages people to bypass low cost healthcare procedures and preventive services and chance serious healthcare problems with much higher costs.

Based on what evidence?

Congressional Budget Expert Says Preventive Care Will Raise — Not Cut — Costs - ABC News

I've been saying the same for over a decade, when I had insurance and now that I don't. Insurance should be for 'hospitalization' and 'catastrophic coverages' such as chemo and dialysis. Doctors wouldn't need the extensive staffs they have to deal with insurance, insurance companies could actually write policies that would give coverages based on the groups and not all possibilities.

Eyeglasses, contacts, mental health, etc? People pay themselves or not.

Indeed there would be less money flowing to pharmaceuticals, but they know that people will pay for the drugs that work. In all likelihood, FDA would rewrite their standards, making it more feasible to get both studies and drugs to market.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines will have the same effect as allowing credit card companies to do business across state lines did. They will all relocate to the state with the loosest regs and the other states will have no say in the matter.

What state has the loosest regulations, and what regulations is that state missing that is making you upset?

 

[SniperFire]

Maybe we can just throw it all out and go with single payer?

Ask President Romney about that.

 

[Dragon]

They couldnt get single payer through when they dominated the house and had 60 votes in the senate. Thats why they did it the way they did. There is NO WAY single payer will happen. No Way!!!

Don't make any bets on that. Just a little free advice.