• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2[W:1, 183, 386, 590]

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
112,903
Reaction score
60,359
Location
Sarasota Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Moderator's Warning:
Please continue your discussion from the original thread here. Note: any personal attacks, trolling, baiting, off topic posts, etc will result in being removed from the thread at the very least.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Were the death panels ruled constitutional? :lol:
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The law upheld in it's entirety, yet at the end of the day it seems as if conservatives gain more political clout and enthusiasm than the victors in all their glory.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The law upheld in it's entirety, yet at the end of the day it seems as if conservatives gain more political clout and enthusiasm than the victors in all their glory.

No, it wasn't upheld in it's entirety. Federal medicaid coercion on the states was deemed unconstitutional.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

No, it wasn't upheld in it's entirety. Federal medicaid coercion on the states was deemed unconstitutional.
You are absolutely correct, my mistake.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated. It may be that Chief Justice put his fears about the institution of the Supreme Court over his duty to interpret the Constitution. If this is true, Chief Justice Roberts breached his duty to the Constitution.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

because this law will help the greater-good of our society, I support it.

and I even though I have issues with the legal arguments of the SCOTUS, I still support their decision, especially from a moral perspective.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated....

intimidation...from whom?

got any evidence for this conspiracy?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Honestly, I think a lot of conservative politicians are relieved by the decision. They talk big about how much they hate health care, but they didn't want to have to campaign to people who can't get medical care because of what they did. Republicans have all kinds of crazy rhetoric they're into, but it's better left as rhetoric, not reality.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated. It may be that Chief Justice put his fears about the institution of the Supreme Court over his duty to interpret the Constitution. If this is true, Chief Justice Roberts breached his duty to the Constitution.

No, you don't understand. He was worried that the court would be delegitimized in the public eye if it was too blatantly partisan. It isn't like somebody was threatening to delegitimize it, it just is what would have happened if it disregarded the constitution to achieve right wing policy results that they couldn't achieve in the actual Congress. Roberts is indeed keenly aware of that risk. He has given many lectures on it lately.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

HC is always being rationed in one manner or another. It's economics.

Which is why a Free Market HC system like the United States had before Obamacare is vastly superior to the Socialized system the ACA is trying to force us into

The elderly in the UK hospitals are dying from starvation and thirst because there is no money left, yet people like you amazingly believe that the quality and availability of HC in the US is going to improve because of Obamacare. :lol:
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Honestly, I think a lot of conservative politicians are relieved by the decision. They talk big about how much they hate health care, but they didn't want to have to campaign to people who can't get medical care because of what they did. Republicans have all kinds of crazy rhetoric they're into, but it's better left as rhetoric, not reality.

Can you please provide specific and detailed sources to back up your claim that "Republicans Hate Health Care"?

Thank you
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Which is why a Free Market HC system like the United States had before Obamacare is vastly superior to the Socialized system the ACA is trying to force us into

The elderly in the UK hospitals are dying from starvation and thirst because there is no money left, yet people like you amazingly believe that the quality and availability of HC in the US is going to improve because of Obamacare. :lol:

Socialized system? Uh... What?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Can you please provide specific and detailed sources to back up your claim that "Republicans Hate Health Care"?

Thank you

I mean that they hate the health care reform. Obviously.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Which is why a Free Market HC system like the United States had before Obamacare is vastly superior to the Socialized system the ACA is trying to force us into

The elderly in the UK hospitals are dying from starvation and thirst because there is no money left, yet people like you amazingly believe that the quality and availability of HC in the US is going to improve because of Obamacare. :lol:

I do not think that word "socialized" means what you think it does.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

It now appears that the dissent of the conservative Justices was at one time the majority opinion, and that Roberts changed his vote based on intimidation. He was intimidated by threats to delegitimize the Supreme Court if Obamacare wasn't validated....

Obama made NO such threats. I just watched your video. It appears that once again, Fox News is lying.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2[W:1]

Albert Di Salvo said:
If you actually know which provisions of the legislation were passed through the Budget Reconciliation please refer me to them by reference to the specific sections in the legislation. That would save me a great deal of time. Thanks.


Per Wikipedia, the specific provisions of the reconciliation bill for the PPACA (actually the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) which dealt with health care were the items listed below. For the most part, the reconciliation act didn't establish any major new provisions (those are in PPACA); it just tweaked the dollar amounts and the timetables a bit. All other items not listed below were part of the PPACA and passed Congress without the need for reconciliation.

1. Increasing the tax credits to buy insurance
2. Eliminates several of the special deals given to senators, such as Ben Nelson's "Cornhusker Kickback"
3. Lowers the penalty for not buying insurance from $750 to $695
4. Closes the Medicare Part D "donut hole" by 2020 and gives seniors a rebate of $250.
5. Delays the implementation on taxing "Cadillac health-care plans" until 2018
6. Requires doctors who treat Medicare patients be reimbursed at the full rate
7. Sets up a medicare tax on the unearned incomes of families that earn more than $250,000 annually.
8. Offer more generous subsidies to lower income groups. Households below 150% of the federal poverty level would pay 2% to 4% of their income on premiums. Health plans would cover 94% of the cost of benefits.[SUP][19][/SUP] Households with incomes from 150% to 400% of the federal poverty level ($88,200 for a family of four) would pay on a sliding scale from 4% to 9.8% of their income on premiums, rest will be covered by government advanceable, refundable tax credit. Health plans would cover 70% of the cost of the benefits.[SUP][19][/SUP][SUP][20][/SUP]
9. In 2014, if a company with more than 50 workers does not offer coverage, they will be obligated to pay $2,000 for each full time worker in the company, exempting the money due for the first 30 employees. For example, an employer with 53 workers will pay the penalty for 23 workers, or $46,000.[SUP][19][/SUP]
10. Would increase Medicaid payment rates to primary care doctors to match Medicare payment rates, which are higher, in 2013 and 2014.[SUP][19][/SUP]
11. The federal government would pay all of the costs of expanding Medicaid under the reform until 2016, 95% in 2017, 94% in 2018, 93% in 2019, and 90% thereafter. Some states that already insure childless adults under Medicaid would receive more federal money for covering that group through 2018.
12. The Medicare patients will receive 50% discount on brand-name drugs would begin in 2011. By 2020, the government would pay to provide up to 75% discount on brand-name and generic drugs, eventually closing the coverage gap.[SUP][19][/SUP]
13. Would extend the ban on lifetime limits and rescission of coverage to all existing health plans within six months after signing into Law
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The law upheld in it's entirety, yet at the end of the day it seems as if conservatives gain more political clout and enthusiasm than the victors in all their glory.

That was, by far, the slickest part of ObamaCare; to make it get passed, and SC "tested" long before it was even completely written or put into effect. Since the HUGE cost increases in "private" medical care insurance do not take effect until 2014, we the sheeple are NOW quite easily fooled. The republicants must explain this SCAM very clearly and carefully, or they will be seen as mean rich guys denying "the poor" something of real value.

The INDIVIDUAL penalty/tax/fee is the least of our worries, as that will effect, at most 2% of the population INITIALLY. 90% of current medical care insurance is bought by employers and given out as a tax free benefit to their employees. Most of the low wage workers, that now have NO medical care insurance benefit, will get HEAVILY subsidized "exchange" plans, that are the "last phase" of ObamaCare, and MANY others will get added to Medicaid (under the new expanded, qualification rules), further increasing both federal and state taxpayer burdens.

The REALLY scary part of ObamaCare is what will EMPLOYERS decide to do in 2014, when the cost of medical care insurance goes WAY up. I predict that many will decide to pay the LOWER cost of the fine and drop the benefit, giving their employees what will SEEM to be a big pay raise of perhaps 80% of the difference between the fine and the PRE-OBAMACARE insurance benefit cost.

At first this will seem wonderful, and will be so for the employers and the gov't; the employer will save money (20% of the current insurance costs are saved) and the gov't will get a HUGE windfall from FIT an FICA taxes on the employee's "big raises". The employees, after partying to celebrate their amazing new pay raises, however will then get to find out, first hand, just what ObamaCare REALLY costs, as they must now shop in the gov't controlled "private" medical care insurance market ON THEIR OWN. This will be very interesting to see, in 2014 and 2015.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

No, you don't understand. He was worried that the court would be delegitimized in the public eye if it was too blatantly partisan. It isn't like somebody was threatening to delegitimize it, it just is what would have happened if it disregarded the constitution to achieve right wing policy results that they couldn't achieve in the actual Congress. Roberts is indeed keenly aware of that risk. He has given many lectures on it lately.

Hi Tea, you were right about the disposition of the Mandate and I was wrong. But you based your conclusion on the Commerce Clause and not the power of taxation. So we both missed the mark as far as the rationale goes.

The fight over Obamacare will continue, but not before the Supreme Court. The fight goes back to the political realm and will last for years to come. Fraud in the inducement ensures continuing rage. Increasing costs, declining quality, and undeniable rationing will all be attributed to Obamacare because it's in effect, and thus within the line of causation.

American political culture ensures that the controversy will continue...just like abortion.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2[W:1]

[/COLOR]

Per Wikipedia, the specific provisions of the reconciliation bill for the PPACA (actually the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) which dealt with health care were the items listed below. For the most part, the reconciliation act didn't establish any major new provisions (those are in PPACA); it just tweaked the dollar amounts and the timetables a bit. All other items not listed below were part of the PPACA and passed Congress without the need for reconciliation.

Isn't it a fact that the Budget Reconciliation process was used after Scott Brown took away the 60th vote from Obamacare?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2[W:1]

Isn't it a fact that the Budget Reconciliation process was used after Scott Brown took away the 60th vote from Obamacare?

If it is, you should be able to link to a source for that claim without trouble.
 
Back
Top Bottom