Would anyone like to discuss the interesting nuances of this situation?
The Supreme Court upheld the law in a 5/4 decision with the majority opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts. However, he broke from the other 4 Justices in the majority by specifically noting that the mandate violates the Commerce Clause... UNLESS you call it a tax, which it is, so it's okay.
States also may not be forced to comply with new regulations or lose existing Medicaid funding, but they won't receive new funding if they don't comply.
I think this is a win/lose for Democrats because now the Republicans can pounce on the mandate being a tax, and they can campaign on the platform of full repeal. Which probably won't happen even if they win, but still!
We can talk about the other rulings coming down, but I am not well versed in them, so maybe some other awesome dude can step in.
Link to the opinion:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf
Posts
Edit: Seriously though, this is very exciting to me, and I can't fucking wait to see the shitstorm that comes out the tea party crowd today.
Also an unsurprising condemnation of 'they' and 'them' and a huge pat on the back for 'we' and 'us'
Demonize the other 4 ever.
The follow up to that is somewhat important too, if you care about politics and not just being a smug asshole about the ACA.
Still, for now I'm excited.
Edit: And you already posted it.
yeah lol *fart*
But then I actually read stuff about the vote
and that John Roberts was one of the people who voted for it being upheld
and honestly, I'm more shocked about that than the actual decision.
Steam
I heard it first from Diane Rehm and had to go to SCOTUSblog to get the straight deal
Some of their very best reporting.
Also I was expecting a 5-4 ruling, but did not expect Roberts to be the swing vote. I guess this shows a) he cares about his legacy as chief justice b) is not a total piece of shit c) the court isn't always partisan hackery (lookin at you scalia, thomas, alito) and d) kennedy doesn't get to be the vaunted independent/swing voter anymore.
i am genuinely wondering whether that will come up
Their front page said it was completely struck down.
Steam
oh damn did I miss that they said completely? welp...
They reported the mandate was struck down.
4 of 9 justices believed the mandate was constitutional using the Commerce Clause. So, it dies.
However, 5 of 9 justices believed the mandate was constitutional as a tax. So, it lives.
Pretty sure CNN read/heard the first part and failed to read/listen the second part.
Healthcare for all
I'm in the UK so I'm just going to assume that this is what you're trying to implement in the US now.
And for another sweeping generalization from a foreigner (IE me):
Anyone who opposes this bill is crazy.
interesting
Right, they can't lose existing funds but they won't get new ones
Some states may actually go for this... If anyone does, it would be Florida I'm sure
It was a half-assed pseudo conservative effort, that was modeled on Romney's healthcare reform he passed in massachusetts while governor (which of course he is hilariously trying to distance himself from throughout the election), which helps expand healthcare coverage but is nowhere near a public single-payer effort that we should really be trying to pass. That didn't happen though because "SOCIALISM!!!!!"
Basically this is better than nothing, but we as a country will still be massively subsidizing the vulture-esque middlemen that are the health insurance industry.
Today is the day our country died.
We need a revolution.
yeah, as stoked as i am about this, PPACA was a pretty neutered version of what i really wanted which was a legit socialized healthcare system like other western countries
baby steps i guess
yeah this is some really cathartic schadenfreude
I'm reading the Yahoo comments.
90% of them are either calling for Obama to be impeached for this outrage, laughing about how he'll get voted out in November, or actual shame of being an American today.
I now know why I don't read Yahoo comments more often.
Steam
They'll have a lot of new customers, some subsidized by government funds I believe, or do low-income folks get Medicaid instead?
Taxes are anti-American, what do you think you revolted for in the first place???
NO TAXATION!!
:rotate:
I was wondering about this
How did it come up? Like, it seems like if someone were out to make any kind of profit or take advantage of services available to veterans it would be covered under fraud.
But just going to a party and being like 'Yeah I got a purple heart' just makes you a lying dirtbag, but it shouldn't be illegal.
congratulations you are now the republican nominee
"The case involved Xavier Alvarez who was an elected member of the Three Valleys Municipal Water District Board in Pomona, California. In 2007 Alvarez said at a public water district board meeting that he was a retired Marine, had been “wounded many times,” and had been “awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor” in 1987."