Obamacare Declared Unconstitutional by Federal Judge

[Oddball]

SO the GOP removed the individual mandate and then sues claiming without it...it is unconstitutional.

And if they win we lose the pre-existing condition protection they SWORE to protect.

Wonderful fuckers these Republicans eh?

Life's tough.
Shit happens.
Wear a ******* helmet.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Based on the American system, I always thought it was an extreme over reach. Much like DACA.

So was Marbury v. Madison if one has their head up their ass.

 

[Oddball]

Based on the American system, I always thought it was an extreme over reach. Much like DACA.

So was Marbury v. Madison if one has their head up their ass.

Instructive that you believe the father of the Constitution to have his head up his ass, Francis.

 

[Oddball]

Yes, we know.

 

[Lesh]

SO the GOP removed the individual mandate and then sues claiming without it...it is unconstitutional.

And if they win we lose the pre-existing condition protection they SWORE to protect.

Wonderful fuckers these Republicans eh?

Life's tough.
Shit happens.
Wear a ******* helmet.

Instructive that you don't give two shits what sleezeballs the GOP is

 

[Oddball]

Instructive that you don't give two shits what sleezeballs the GOP is

I know perfectly well what sleazeballs they are...They can't be shamed by the cry of "HYPOCRITE!" any more than the sleazeballs from your team can be....So save your keystrokes and quit clutching your pearls....You are no better.

 

[S.J.]

It's dead meat.

 

[Olde Europe]

"Obolshevikcare"?

Frankly, you guys are hilarious.

The Supreme Court has operated, since just about forever, under the principle that whatever portion of any law or regulation can be salvaged shall be left standing, even if portions are deemed unconstitutional. On these grounds alone, O'Connor's ruling will not stand. And let's not even get into that scurrilous argument that a mandate no longer enforced by a tax is therefore unconstitutional, for that's just weird. All the while, Obamacare will remain the law of the land. Deal with it!

Remember Roberts? Make that Chief Justice Roberts. No way, no how will he throw the Supreme Court into the giant political wood chipper and let that ruling stand.

Then, as much as you are hyperventilating now, you'll hyperventilate again. It'll be as much fun then as it is hilarity right now.

 

[KGB]

I’m not advocating for provide. I’m advocating for opening up the market place. The thing is healthcare is a national issue now. The market can deliver the solution but we have ridiculous laws in place which prevent it.

Fair enough.

Another blind spot is this notion that buying across state lines is a remedy...That does next to nothing to ameliorate the shall-issue mandates put in place by state legislatures...Any real fix needs to declare these mandates unconstitutional, under the rubric of freedom of interstate commerce.

Agree it’s not a cure-all but it’s a step in the right direction. The shall issue mandates are an obstacle but not an insurmountable one either. The states have an interest in their citizens well being but this issue is too big for any one state. There could be a compromise whereby states are free to offer plans with the mandates but can’t refuse another state’s or national plan. Think of it as supplemental. You buy a baseline plan from Geico in Rhode Island but want to purchase additional coverage where you live in Ohio since that supplemental offers a coverage the RI plan doesn’t. But the Ohio plan only takes effect if that particular mandate is affected. Otherwise the Geico plan is the primary payer.

It's too big for any one government. Centralizing power in this way creates worse problems than those it is presumed to solve.

I’m not advocating for centralizing anything. I support Rand Paul’s ideas.

If you say so. I don't want the federal government involved at all. And I'd prefer that the state I live in steer clear as well. Re: Rand Paul - As much as I admired his father, I simply can't trust Rand. He's turned into the "Little Finger" of DC.

That said, his plan is miles better than anything else I've seen, short of doing nothing (always my go to). He's a least trying to break the employer provide health care shackles - but he goes in the wrong direction. The solution isn't more tax incentives. They're what created the problem in the first place. The solution is to end the tax breaks for employer provided healthcare, not extend them to cover private insurance buyers as well.

Isn't it curious how every health care reform Congress proposes up ends up funneling more money to the insurance industry?

See that’s the thing, we are beyond the point of doing nothing. That’s just no longer an option. It’s become too large an issue now. Decoupling insurance from employment is the first step. I realize it was used as an employment incentive, but that model doesn’t work. So I’m good with incentivizing individuals with tax credits. And I’ll accept it for employers as long as the association plans are green lighted. Health insurance should be no different than car insurance when you think about it.

 

[rightwinger]

OK Republicans
You Broke it....you bought it


You have two years to provide coverage to 145 million people with pre-existing conditions

Voters will want to know

How it it The State's responsibility?

It’s not the State’s responsibility but it’s in the State’s interest. Rand Paul has a solid plan to address it.

His fathers plan was to let them die

 

[rightwinger]

"Obolshevikcare"?

Frankly, you guys are hilarious.

The Supreme Court has operated, since just about forever, under the principle that whatever portion of any law or regulation can be salvaged shall be left standing, even if portions are deemed unconstitutional. On these grounds alone, O'Connor's ruling will not stand. And let's not even get into that scurrilous argument that a mandate no longer enforced by a tax is therefore unconstitutional, for that's just weird. All the while, Obamacare will remain the law of the land. Deal with it!

Remember Roberts? Make that Chief Justice Roberts. No way, no how will he throw the Supreme Court into the giant political wood chipper and let that ruling stand.

Then, as much as you are hyperventilating now, you'll hyperventilate again. It'll be as much fun then as it is hilarity right now.

The court is faced with a delemma

If Obamacare is invalidated, there is nothing backing it up. Actual harm will result

 

[rightwinger]

Fair enough.

Another blind spot is this notion that buying across state lines is a remedy...That does next to nothing to ameliorate the shall-issue mandates put in place by state legislatures...Any real fix needs to declare these mandates unconstitutional, under the rubric of freedom of interstate commerce.

Agree it’s not a cure-all but it’s a step in the right direction. The shall issue mandates are an obstacle but not an insurmountable one either. The states have an interest in their citizens well being but this issue is too big for any one state. There could be a compromise whereby states are free to offer plans with the mandates but can’t refuse another state’s or national plan. Think of it as supplemental. You buy a baseline plan from Geico in Rhode Island but want to purchase additional coverage where you live in Ohio since that supplemental offers a coverage the RI plan doesn’t. But the Ohio plan only takes effect if that particular mandate is affected. Otherwise the Geico plan is the primary payer.

It's too big for any one government. Centralizing power in this way creates worse problems than those it is presumed to solve.

I’m not advocating for centralizing anything. I support Rand Paul’s ideas.

If you say so. I don't want the federal government involved at all. And I'd prefer that the state I live in steer clear as well. Re: Rand Paul - As much as I admired his father, I simply can't trust Rand. He's turned into the "Little Finger" of DC.

That said, his plan is miles better than anything else I've seen, short of doing nothing (always my go to). He's a least trying to break the employer provide health care shackles - but he goes in the wrong direction. The solution isn't more tax incentives. They're what created the problem in the first place. The solution is to end the tax breaks for employer provided healthcare, not extend them to cover private insurance buyers as well.

Isn't it curious how every health care reform Congress proposes up ends up funneling more money to the insurance industry?

See that’s the thing, we are beyond the point of doing nothing. That’s just no longer an option. It’s become too large an issue now. Decoupling insurance from employment is the first step. I realize it was used as an employment incentive, but that model doesn’t work. So I’m good with incentivizing individuals with tax credits. And I’ll accept it for employers as long as the association plans are green lighted. Health insurance should be no different than car insurance when you think about it.

The problem with employer provided health plans is they are not transferable. Lose your job or decide to go into business for yourself you are on your own.
Employees are literally chained to a job if they or their family have a serious illness

 

[Pete7469]

It has always blown my mind that bed wetters believe the DNC forced this law through because they "care" about people.

Like I said. Dumbest mother fuckers on earth.

 

[easyt65]

Federal judge in Texas rules entire Obama health-care law is unconstitutional

If upheld, Dems will now push for Single-Payer... for now it's headed to the fifth Circuit Court

 

[debbiedowner]

state high risk pools are a smarter way to cover folks with pre-existing C's

Some states had those pools long ago and never worked. Money dried up fast.

 

[debbiedowner]

OK Republicans
You Broke it....you bought it


You have two years to provide coverage to 145 million people with pre-existing conditions

Voters will want to know

How it it The State's responsibility?

It’s not the State’s responsibility but it’s in the State’s interest. Rand Paul has a solid plan to address it.

"State's interest" is subjective and irrelevant.

Not in this case. The Constitution does state “promote the general welfare”. Healthcare out of anything falls under that. I’m not advocating single payer but the federal gvt can use its power to allow interstate health insurance commerce. There’s a market here to be had which will provide cheaper solutions & better quality. Read Rand Paul’s plan, he nails it. Obamacare Replacement Act - Rand Paul - Rand Paul Kentucky US Senator

I like the idea of association plans.

Look hard because you're allowed to purchase association plans NOW.

 

[rightwinger]

state high risk pools are a smarter way to cover folks with pre-existing C's

Some states had those pools long ago and never worked. Money dried up fast.

Dumping every high risk person in the same pool cant survive. The key is that everyone is entitled to health insurance at the same rate as everyone else.
Want to insure the healthy people, you have to insure the sick

 

[debbiedowner]

Here we go again, sports fans...The Boiking's "signature" chunk of incomprehensibility, costliness, and general disdain declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL -lock, stock, and barrel- by a federal judge in Texas.



Certain to make it back to USSC, where Murica may well FINALLY be done with this crony giveaway to Big Insurance, and general bureaucratic pain in the ass.

Federal judge in Texas strikes down ObamaCare

Its really going to be up to the Democrat Party now that the end of the ACA is now settled law.

With a majority in the House, they need to get together and put forward a Tremendous Health Care program which will perform as Obama promised. Lower costs, more access, better, Tremendous style healthcare and complete freedom to patients as well as health care facilities.

The end? Not yet, it will work it's way all the way back to SCOTUS.

This is from the Marketplace this morning:

The district court decision in Texas v. Azar is still moving through the courts. The Marketplaces are still open for business, and we will continue with open enrollment. There will be no impact to enrollee’s current coverage or their coverage in a 2019 plan.

 

[Olde Europe]

The problem with employer provided health plans is they are not transferable. Lose your job or decide to go into business for yourself you are on your own.
Employees are literally chained to a job if they or their family have a serious illness

That's not a problem of "employer provided health plans" but a problem of a health care system that doesn't cover everyone and lets folks fall through the cracks. Obamacare partly healed that defect by prohibiting discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, hence the right-wingers' howling. Even if your job is terminated, there would be no problem if you just sign up, with government subsidies if need be, for an individual plan.

 

[debbiedowner]

Here we go again, sports fans...The Boiking's "signature" chunk of incomprehensibility, costliness, and general disdain declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL -lock, stock, and barrel- by a federal judge in Texas.



Certain to make it back to USSC, where Murica may well FINALLY be done with this crony giveaway to Big Insurance, and general bureaucratic pain in the ass.

Federal judge in Texas strikes down ObamaCare

So the GOP removed the individual mandate and then sues claiming without it...it is unconstitutional.

And if they win we lose the pre-existing condition protection they SWORE to protect.

Wonderful fuckers these Republicans eh?

They don't understand what they have wished for Trump along with dems will push for some kind of single payer.

You are also protected through 2019 while this works it's way to SCOTUS.