Let the arguments begin.........

[wgrr]

Originally Posted by finnbow

If it were not for the anachronism of employer-provided healthcare, the mandate would not be necessary. But somehow, we cling to the notion that employer-provided healthcare is the right way to deliver health care services (along with free emergency room care at all of our expense for the indigent). If we want to cling to this silly notion, the mandate is essential.

Question - Why aren't Republicans railing against the unconstitutionality of requiring emergency rooms to provide free care to the indigent?

If the SCOTUS strikes down the Federal individual mandate in the ACA then they will have effectively struck down Reagan's Federal mandate that requires emergency rooms to accept patients with no ability to pay for their services. Another Federal mandate that would have to go is the selective service mandate that requires all people to register for the draft at the age of eighteen. SCOTUS rulings can have wide reaching unintended consequences.

[wgrr]

The woman who brought this case before the court was vehemently opposed to buying health care insurance and especially against being forced by the government to buy the insurance.

Then her husband had some very serious health issues, and guess what, they can't pay the bills to the doctors and hospitals in three different states.

They are declaring bankruptcy to get some relief although medical bills, credit card bills, and others can no longer be discharged in bankruptcy. You have to make arrangements to pay off your debt.

If Obamacare had been fully implemented she would not be going through what she is now because her husband would have been taken care of, and the bills would have been paid.

There are going to be a lot of pissed off seniors out there if the ACA goes down. The "doughnut hole" in Medicare part D comes back and their drug costs skyrocket again. There are many good things in the ACA. Most of them are Republican ideas. To put it bluntly; Republican's don't want Obama getting credit for finally getting it through.

Now we have a politically motivated SCOTUS that is going to tell the people of this country what is good for us. I guess the people we actually voted for are incapable of representing us.

You know, A few years ago I was laid off for a couple of months until I found another job. I took out a catastrophic health care policy because COBRA was going to cost eight times what I was paying at work for insurance. I had to go to the doctor and the visit cost me $135 to clean the wax out of my ears. I asked the doc later about it at a party, yes we are friends, and he told me if I was paying by insurance it would have been the copay plus an additional $35 billed to the insurance company. Yep, if you pay cash, you get screwed. His words not mine.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I agree that the bill is a monstrosity, but within the system we currently have, the mandate may be one of the few good things about it. It was, after all, strongly supported by the GOP (until it wasn't).

An interesting irony is that the government forces emergency rooms to give pro bono care to the indigent, which you and I have to pay for. Yet we're seemingly up in arms about being told that we need health insurance, while at the same time we're being forced to pay for those who refuse to get it.

I could support the notion of "repeal and replace" if the GOP put forth a cogent, effective and efficient alternative. However, under the rubric of employer-furnished health care, I can't see how it can be done without a mandate. It seems to me that those against the mandate are for health care free-loaders, a radical departure for the "party of personal responsibility."

Right. There simply is no way to cover all citizens, without having to take from one and give to another. It's impossible. No matter how you work it we will always be paying for others. The best we can hope for is to get as many people as possible paying in, and finding the most efficient way to do it. And, I for one don't see how you can without a mandate of some sort.

It amazes me that Republicans would rather continue paying for individuals who simply refuse to pay, rather than making them pony up. It makes no sense.

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by wgrr

If the SCOTUS strikes down the Federal individual mandate in the ACA then they will have effectively struck down Reagan's Federal mandate that requires emergency rooms to accept patients with no ability to pay for their services. Another Federal mandate that would have to go is the selective service mandate that requires all people to register for the draft at the age of eighteen. SCOTUS rulings can have wide reaching unintended consequences.

Correct. There was an interesting discussion on this very topic on PBS last night.

Dave

[Oerets]

To me it looks like it will be struck down and hopefully sent back to congress to fix somehow. The GOP had better be prepared for the loud outcry and a push for single payer when this happens.
This could up end other Government programs like SS and Medicare and be sent up for review next.


With the election later this year it will also drive home the difference between the GOP and the Dems outlook on society. Plus what the nation can be in for if the GOP gains control of the Presidency later this year.


After the rulings from the "Justices" since Bush V Gore then Citizens United and lets not forget expanding Eminent Domain. All straight along party lines I only see dark days ahead for all of us.



Barney

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

If SC has been so successful in limiting government power how on earth did we get to such a large federal government?

Pete

Originally Posted by d-ray657

We became such a large country.

Regards,

D-Ray

BAM!Manifest destiny?

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Oerets

To me it looks like it will be struck down and sent back to congress to fix somehow. The GOP had better be prepared for the loud outcry and a push for single payer when this happens.
This could up end other Government programs like SS and Medicare and be sent up for review next.


With the election later this year it will also drive home the difference between the GOP and the Dems outlook on society. Plus what the nation can be in for if the GOP gains control of the Presidency later this year.




Barney

Ity aint over yet, Barney. Listening to some of the goings on today, it sounded like Kennedy and possibly Roberts(?) could go either way. Scalia is hopeless.

We shall see.

Dave

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Ity aint over yet, Barney. Listening to some of the goings on today, it sounded like Kennedy and possibly Roberts(?) could go either way. Scalia is hopeless.

We shall see.

Dave

I don't know from what I have heard it sounded like the Solicitor General was outclassed or not up to the job today. Lets hope he is on tomorrow and can keep them from throwing out the complete bill if the mandate gets tossed.



Barney

[wgrr]

You can never predict the outcome of a SCOTUS case by listening to the oral arguments. After they are over the clerks will debate it for months and write something up. Then they will hand it off to the justices who will review it. Do you actually believe those nine pompas asses work for a living.

[piece-itpete]

Why do the Feds take a great percentage of GNP over time, if it's because of population growth?

The armed forces are a clear area of Federal responsibility.

Pete