• 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!

Obama Health-Care Reform Act Ruled Unconstitutional(edited)

Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
Perhaps you should figure out the actual arguments in favor of the mandate before you hoot and holler in opposition. If you don't even understand the arguments in favor of the mandate, then you can't show us dummies where we're wrong.

I'll help you out: The individual mandate was included because preexisting conditions were being banned, in order to prevent people from waiting until they get sick to sign up for health insurance, thus driving health care costs out of control until no one signed up and the health insurance companies were bankrupted. It has absolutely nothing to do with government funding, and that was never even part of the discussion; the funding for the law is generated through tax increases and Medicare cuts. The amount of revenue that would be generated from these fines is a pittance. You could take those fines and set the money on fire, and it wouldn't make much difference. :roll:

We're just talking past each other though. You clearly don't understand the contents of the law.
Click to expand...
And THERE we have it!
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

X Factor said:
Don't you get it? We don't want it implemented at all.
Click to expand...

Umm well the person to whom I was responding (i.e. not you) apparently wants a regulation about preexisting conditions. I'm merely pointing out why that doesn't work without an individual mandate unless you're willing to have public health insurance. If you're OK with sick people being bankrupted and left to die, you have the right to your opinion. But apparently there are some people on this board, including conservatives, who disagree with you. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
And how do you propose to implement that without an individual mandate? If sick people and healthy people both have access to the same coverage at the same price, the healthy people are more likely to wait until they get sick before they sign up for health insurance. In effect, this means that the health insurance pools at any given point in time will be dominated by the oldest and sickest people, thus driving up the premiums for everyone and encouraging even more young/healthy people to free ride. The end result will be premiums so expensive that no one can afford them, and the collapse of private health insurance.

The only way to prevent that from happening is to have some external force preventing healthy people from going without insurance...hence the individual mandate. I know of no way that makes economical sense to 1) end preexisting conditions, 2) have a private health insurance industry, and 3) not have an individual mandate. You can pick any two of the them, but you can't have all three.

That's why I think the Republicans are swimming in dangerous waters with their court challenges if they favor a free-market approach to health care. If ultimately the Supreme Court strikes down the individual mandate but not the rest of the bill (in other words, if the Supreme Court picks options 1 and 3 above) then we will cease to have option 2. The result would be a government takeover of the entire health insurance industry.
Click to expand...

Why would we need the mandate?
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
Umm well the person to whom I was responding (i.e. not you) apparently wants a regulation about preexisting conditions. I'm merely pointing out why that doesn't work without an individual mandate unless you're willing to have public health insurance. If you're OK with sick people being bankrupted and left to die, you have the right to your opinion. But apparently there are some people on this board, including conservatives, who disagree with you. :2wave:
Click to expand...
I have to laugh. CC didn't believe me when I said that lefties actually argued that there were people left dying in the streets under the current health care system. I'll have to show him this. Thanks.:2wave:
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

ptif219 said:
Why would we need the mandate?
Click to expand...

If you want A) an end to preexisting conditions, and B) the continued existence of a private insurance industry, then you'll need some mechanism to keep healthy people in the insurance pool. Otherwise, they'll be inclined to wait until they get sick to sign up, thus driving up the costs, thus encouraging more healthy people to drop coverage, thus driving up costs more, ad infinitum, until no one can afford insurance and no one is covered by insurance.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

X Factor said:
I have to laugh. CC didn't believe me when I said that lefties actually argued that there were people left dying in the streets under the current health care system. I'll have to show him this. Thanks.:2wave:
Click to expand...

Who said anything about the streets? They die in hospital beds mostly. Do you deny that people without health insurance often do not get the medical treatment they need? Really?
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
If you want A) an end to preexisting conditions, and B) the continued existence of a private insurance industry, then you'll need some mechanism to keep healthy people in the insurance pool. Otherwise, they'll be inclined to wait until they get sick to sign up, thus driving up the costs, thus encouraging more healthy people to drop coverage, thus driving up costs more, ad infinitum, until no one can afford insurance and no one is covered by insurance.
Click to expand...

well since the mandate is gonna be toast that seems like a great reason why Obama care needs to be flushed down the toilet
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
If you want A) an end to preexisting conditions, and B) the continued existence of a private insurance industry, then you'll need some mechanism to keep healthy people in the insurance pool. Otherwise, they'll be inclined to wait until they get sick to sign up, thus driving up the costs, thus encouraging more healthy people to drop coverage, thus driving up costs more, ad infinitum, until no one can afford insurance and no one is covered by insurance.
Click to expand...

Why do we need the Federal Govt to do that? What is wrong with the states implementing the program? Implement it in D.C. and let the citizens there fund your insurance.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Conservative said:
Why do we need the Federal Govt to do that? What is wrong with the states implementing the program? Implement it in D.C. and let the citizens there fund your insurance.
Click to expand...

From an economic standpoint, you'd still have the free rider problem if you did it at the state level, just like you would if you didn't require healthy people to buy insurance. Suppose that one state decides to cover all its residents...so you wait until you get sick, then you move to that state to take advantage of the coverage. This drives up the cost of insurance, which discourages healthy people from moving to that state, which further drives up the cost of insurance, etc. It's just a slightly less exaggerated version of the same problem associated with trying to end preexisting conditions without an individual mandate.

From a logistical standpoint, the biggest reason to do it at the federal level is simply because it's less of a pain in the ass to have one standard than to have 50 standards. You may discount this as unimportant, but a sizable fraction of all health care spending goes to pushing paper and bureaucratic compliance with various government agencies and insurance companies. Consolidating it all in one place can reduce these costs.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Badmutha said:
Except the first SS recipients didnt have to wait 6 decades to start collecting.....hence the ponzi scheme.
.
.
.
.
Click to expand...

Not the point. The point is social security seems to be legal because it has existed for over 70 years. It is mandatory that earners pay into it. That seems to me to be legal precedent for mandatory payment into national health insurance.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
If you want A) an end to preexisting conditions, and B) the continued existence of a private insurance industry, then you'll need some mechanism to keep healthy people in the insurance pool. Otherwise, they'll be inclined to wait until they get sick to sign up, thus driving up the costs, thus encouraging more healthy people to drop coverage, thus driving up costs more, ad infinitum, until no one can afford insurance and no one is covered by insurance.
Click to expand...

No one can afford it now with the threat of Obamacare. My private health insurance went up 30% to almost $800 a month
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar;1059256845]From an economic standpoint, you'd still have the free rider problem if you did it at the state level, just like you would if you didn't require healthy people to buy insurance. Suppose that one state decides to cover all its residents...so you wait until you get sick, then you move to that state to take advantage of the coverage. This drives up the cost of insurance, which discourages healthy people from moving to that state, which further drives up the cost of insurance, etc. It's just a slightly less exaggerated version of the same problem associated with trying to end preexisting conditions without an individual mandate
Click to expand...
.

But that then is a state and local issue where it belongs. States have the right with citizen approval to implement a healthcare program but the Federal Govt. doesn't. The American people by a large majority are not in favor of this bill and rightly so.

Do you even know how many people there are in this country that really cannot afford healthcare coverage? It isn't what you think. Are you covered by a healthcare policy?

From a logistical standpoint, the biggest reason to do it at the federal level is simply because it's less of a pain in the ass to have one standard than to have 50 standards. You may discount this as unimportant, but a sizable fraction of all health care spending goes to pushing paper and bureaucratic compliance with various government agencies and insurance companies. Consolidating it all in one place can reduce these costs.
Click to expand...

There is nothing that the govt. does that reduces costs so why is this different. We have a 14.1 trillion dollar debt because of that effecient govt. and now you want to expand it? There isn't a healthcare system in the world that has lowered healthcare costs. Liberal arrogance however says they can do it here. Liberals have never been right on any issue.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

tryreading said:
But regarding tort reform, $54 billion over ten years is nothing considering the total health care numbers, and will make no difference.
Click to expand...

tell it to the reagan wannabe

I’m willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits.
Click to expand...

Remarks of President Barack Obama in State of the Union Address -- As Prepared for Delivery | The White House
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

ptif219 said:
No one can afford it now with the threat of Obamacare. My private health insurance went up 30% to almost $800 a month
Click to expand...

Except I'm talking about EVERYONE...and I'm talking about ACTUALLY not being able to afford it (as in premiums that are thousands and thousands of dollars per year). Not complaining that you can't afford it, then paying the bill. You can't just ban preexisting conditions and expect everything else to stay the same. Economics does not work like that.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
And how do you propose to implement that without an individual mandate? If sick people and healthy people both have access to the same coverage at the same price, the healthy people are more likely to wait until they get sick before they sign up for health insurance. In effect, this means that the health insurance pools at any given point in time will be dominated by the oldest and sickest people, thus driving up the premiums for everyone and encouraging even more young/healthy people to free ride. The end result will be premiums so expensive that no one can afford them, and the collapse of private health insurance.

The only way to prevent that from happening is to have some external force preventing healthy people from going without insurance...hence the individual mandate. I know of no way that makes economical sense to 1) end preexisting conditions, 2) have a private health insurance industry, and 3) not have an individual mandate. You can pick any two of the them, but you can't have all three.

That's why I think the Republicans are swimming in dangerous waters with their court challenges if they favor a free-market approach to health care. If ultimately the Supreme Court strikes down the individual mandate but not the rest of the bill (in other words, if the Supreme Court picks options 1 and 3 above) then we will cease to have option 2. The result would be a government takeover of the entire health insurance industry.
Click to expand...

You have a well thought out and possibly plausible argument here, BUT, you are forgetting that we live in the United States and that we have a constitution, that is the basis of our laws. And this constitution limits the powers of the gov't. And they have overstepped their authority here. Thus the whole issue.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Chappy said:
This was not a surprise. It'll be appealed.
Click to expand...

Its not a suprise because everyone knew it was unconstitutional. The appeal will lose too.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

tryreading said:
Not the point. The point is social security seems to be legal because it has existed for over 70 years. It is mandatory that earners pay into it. That seems to me to be legal precedent for mandatory payment into national health insurance.
Click to expand...

'seems to be legal because it has existed for x years' is a very poor argument. There's much better ways to argue the health care bill than this.

The only reason SS is still here is because its very popular, not because its constitutional.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
If you want A) an end to preexisting conditions, and B) the continued existence of a private insurance industry, then you'll need some mechanism to keep healthy people in the insurance pool. Otherwise, they'll be inclined to wait until they get sick to sign up, thus driving up the costs, thus encouraging more healthy people to drop coverage, thus driving up costs more, ad infinitum, until no one can afford insurance and no one is covered by insurance.
Click to expand...

Then all you have to do is move to a country where that is legal.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
From an economic standpoint, you'd still have the free rider problem if you did it at the state level, just like you would if you didn't require healthy people to buy insurance. Suppose that one state decides to cover all its residents...so you wait until you get sick, then you move to that state to take advantage of the coverage. This drives up the cost of insurance, which discourages healthy people from moving to that state, which further drives up the cost of insurance, etc. It's just a slightly less exaggerated version of the same problem associated with trying to end preexisting conditions without an individual mandate.

From a logistical standpoint, the biggest reason to do it at the federal level is simply because it's less of a pain in the ass to have one standard than to have 50 standards. You may discount this as unimportant, but a sizable fraction of all health care spending goes to pushing paper and bureaucratic compliance with various government agencies and insurance companies. Consolidating it all in one place can reduce these costs.
Click to expand...

Still missing the point, the federal gov't does not have the authority to do this. As they say, it really is that simple.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

ptif219 said:
Pre existing are not a reason to deny insurance. I know I have a rider on my policy because of pre-existing
Click to expand...

The way Pre-ex works is that if you are deemed to have a pre-existing condition, you are not going to be reimbursed for medical expenses related to that condition for the frst 2 years of the policy. 2 years is fairly common pre-ex exclusion, it can be slightly more or less. You can obtain treatment for other conditions, just not he condition that was pre-existing signing up for the coverage. After the two year period is up, you can obtain reimbursement for treatment related to the pre-ex condition.

The way HIPAA deals with it, is they give creditable coverage for moving between plans. For example, if you have a pre-ex condition and have an unboken chain of insurance, you can move between policies without restarting the pre-ex exclusion period.

It's certainly not as bad or scary as the porponents of this bill scared people into believing.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
Who said anything about the streets? They die in hospital beds mostly. Do you deny that people without health insurance often do not get the medical treatment they need? Really?
Click to expand...
Yes, I do deny it. People who can't afford it get health care all the time.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Kandahar said:
Except I'm talking about EVERYONE...and I'm talking about ACTUALLY not being able to afford it (as in premiums that are thousands and thousands of dollars per year). Not complaining that you can't afford it, then paying the bill. You can't just ban preexisting conditions and expect everything else to stay the same. Economics does not work like that.
Click to expand...
No? It's what Obama promised.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Conservative said:
But that then is a state and local issue where it belongs. States have the right with citizen approval to implement a healthcare program but the Federal Govt. doesn't.
Click to expand...

Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA don't seem to have incurred any legal problems as to their legitimacy.

Conservative said:
The American people by a large majority are not in favor of this bill and rightly so.
Click to expand...

The majority of the American people either approve of the law or wish it had gone farther.

Conservative said:
Do you even know how many people there are in this country that really cannot afford healthcare coverage? It isn't what you think. Are you covered by a healthcare policy?
Click to expand...

A bare-bones policy that I'm quite certain would try to screw me over if the need ever arose, yes.

As to your question: I don't have the exact statistics. Some are unable to afford it due to low incomes, some are unable to afford it due to pursuing higher education, and some are unable to afford it due to being too old or having a preexisting condition. And some are unable to afford it because our tax structure distorts the incentive for insurers to offer individual plans, as opposed to corporate plans (a problem which was not solved by the reform law, but should be).

Conservative said:
There is nothing that the govt. does that reduces costs so why is this different. We have a 14.1 trillion dollar debt because of that effecient govt. and now you want to expand it? There isn't a healthcare system in the world that has lowered healthcare costs. Liberal arrogance however says they can do it here. Liberals have never been right on any issue.
Click to expand...

We have by far the highest health care costs in the world, with no better results than many other countries.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

The Prof said:
tell it to the reagan wannabe



Remarks of President Barack Obama in State of the Union Address -- As Prepared for Delivery | The White House
Click to expand...

The fact is tort reform is a tiny fraction of medical costs. I don't see why you think posting the above changes that.

A person who actually thinks tort reform will significantly change medical costs is ignorant.

A politician who talks tort reform regarding medical costs is being a politician. Bottom line: tort reform is not important.

I think what happens is folks see other people getting a settlement because their relative was killed by a doctor, and they think 'Hey, those people shouldn't be getting that settlement!' But, in a nation of law, you sue, and the way to punish is you take money from the guilty party. I don't have any problem with that. If you are wronged, you sue. That's the proper procedure here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom