• 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!

Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
The U.S. Supreme Court sided today with the Obama administration over its major healthcare overhaul, upholding federal subsidies across the country.
The decision will have a major impact on the millions of Americans who are receiving financial assistance from the federal government to buy health insurance.

Read more @:
Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies

Story just now breaking. More info to come soon. Millions of Americans get to keep their healthcare. A huge win for the Obama admin.
 
Good news indeed!
 
Republicans are off the hook.
 
Good news. Just as I predicted, it was a 6-3 decision and Chief Justice Roberts voting for it.
 
6-3 is solid
 
Maybe the Cons will finally stop trying to rely on legislation from the bench. Perhaps they will get smart and actually work WITH the PPACA (fix the legislation, where appropriate and expand state exchanges), because they are out of options in working against it.
 
Last edited:
This is really good stuff. Glad that we don't have to re-legislate the entire healthcare law and now we can focus on using the tools it provides to supply better healthcare for cheaper.
 
Why is Scalia the only one who can read English?

This destroys the middle class, who are being raped by these sky high deductibles.

Concierge plan for those that can afford it. No coverage for most everyone else.
 
Since it was voted into law the American people have been against the law. While I disagree with the SOCTUS ruling, I guess the upside is that Democrats can't run from this legislation anymore.
 
Maybe the Cons will finally stop trying to rely on legislation from the bench. Perhaps they will get smart and actually work WITH the PPACA (fix the legislation, where appropriate and expand state exchanges), because they are out of options in working against it.

Actually, I hope Republicans continue to ignore the problems liberal/progressives created in their unilateral PPACA boondoggle. Much better to say, "don't ask us, talk to the Democrats who created it."

The Nation deserves to see how Democrats do things.
 
This just equates to more Democrats losing in the coming elections.

Do their supporters like getting their clocks cleaned ?
 
Maybe the Cons will finally stop trying to rely on legislation from the bench. Perhaps they will get smart and actually work WITH the PPACA (fix the legislation, where appropriate and expand state exchanges), because they are out of options in working against it.

I'm unsure what you think needs fixed in the law. Its doing, and will do, everything it intended.
 
Good news !

ObamaCare remains a huge Albatross for Democrat candidates !
 
Maybe the Cons will finally stop trying to rely on legislation from the bench. Perhaps they will get smart and actually work WITH the PPACA (fix the legislation, where appropriate and expand state exchanges), because they are out of options in working against it.

That's pretty funny, actually. The truth is the "Cons" have to stop relying on the courts NOT legislating from the bench. Justice Roberts has proven that he'd much rather be President than Chief Justice. He'd much rather create legislation than simply determine its constitutionality. His two rulings in relation to the ACA are a complete abandonment of his oath of office and "Cons" in the future would be well served not to rely on the Chief Justice's integrity because it doesn't exist.
 
This is really good stuff. Glad that we don't have to re-legislate the entire healthcare law and now we can focus on using the tools it provides to supply better healthcare for cheaper.

Yeah I agree.. those 30,000 pages ( that makes 0bamacare so wonderful ) full of crap that nobody understands should not be touched.
 
I will take my year long gold subscription when ever you get the chance.

Thanks!

:) Fair is fair, and it's for a good cause. $25 in your name as soon as I can figure out how to make that work in the system.
 
:) Fair is fair, and it's for a good cause. $25 in your name as soon as I can figure out how to make that work in the system.

Hmm, I thought there was a thing for it on the donations page but it's for donating anonymously.
 
Hmm, I thought there was a thing for it on the donations page but it's for donating anonymously.

Yeah, and I don't have paypal, and the other option won't come through.

I'll have to ask.
 
Too many threads on this, but this is more or less my post for the other one...

The dissenting opinion is right, this decision is a gross misinterpretation of the actual ACA language. Some seven times in ACA is specifies subsidies and tax credits though "Exchange established by the State." The majority in this 6-3 decision just decided that the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and by extension, the Department of Health and Human Services equates to a State. The argument can now be made that by precedence on what is equal to a State. If a law references a State, the Federal government can now argue any relevant department is now capable of being involved in that definition.
 
Tyranny wins the day once again, through our inept Supreme Court. Another loss for the people and our Constitution, which tries to protect us from government tyranny.
 
Back
Top Bottom