The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Affordable Care Cat upheld

QuothQuoth the RavenMiami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
edited June 2012 in Social Entropy++
affordable-care-cat.jpg

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

Quoth on
«13456764

Posts

  • LilliLilli Registered User regular
    edited June 2012
    I was going to make this thread, but it would have just been me being a smug asshole about this being upheld, so thanks!

    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.

    Lilli on
  • AbracadanielAbracadaniel Registered User regular
    Guy in cube next to me has Limbaugh or Beck or whoever on the radio and he's losing his shit.

    Also an unsurprising condemnation of 'they' and 'them' and a huge pat on the back for 'we' and 'us'

    Demonize the other 4 ever.

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    it's important that people be smug assholes about this for a few days

    reposig.jpg
  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    Via SCOTUSblog:
    Essentially, a majority of the Court has accepted the Administration's backup argument that, as Roberts put it, "the mandate can be regarded as establishing a condition -- not owning health insurance -- that triggers a tax -- the required payment to IRS." Actually, this was the Administration's second backup argument: first argument was Commerce Clause, second was Necessary and Proper Clause, and third was as a tax. The third argument won.

  • pickmanpickman The Molten Lands of the Southern Mouse ShrineRegistered User regular
    I'm just content with the fact it's not going to cost me a week and a half of pay to go to the doctor anymore.

    hurk.jpg
  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    The rejection of the Commerce Clause and Nec. and Proper Clause should be understood as a major blow to Congress's authority to pass social welfare laws. Using the tax code -- especially in the current political environment -- to promote social welfare is going to be a very chancy proposition.

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    america: catching up with the first world

    reposig.jpg
  • LilliLilli Registered User regular
    edited June 2012
    Quoth wrote: »
    Via SCOTUSblog:
    Essentially, a majority of the Court has accepted the Administration's backup argument that, as Roberts put it, "the mandate can be regarded as establishing a condition -- not owning health insurance -- that triggers a tax -- the required payment to IRS." Actually, this was the Administration's second backup argument: first argument was Commerce Clause, second was Necessary and Proper Clause, and third was as a tax. The third argument won.

    The follow up to that is somewhat important too, if you care about politics and not just being a smug asshole about the ACA.
    The rejection of the Commerce Clause and Nec. and Proper Clause should be understood as a major blow to Congress's authority to pass social welfare laws. Using the tax code -- especially in the current political environment -- to promote social welfare is going to be a very chancy proposition.

    Still, for now I'm excited.

    Edit: And you already posted it.

    Lilli on
  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
  • LilliLilli Registered User regular
    Is this where I post 'hilarious' Free Republic responses?

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    Lilli wrote: »
    Is this where I post 'hilarious' Free Republic responses?

    yeah lol *fart*

    reposig.jpg
  • BaidolBaidol I will hold him off Escape while you canRegistered User regular
    This is also the thread where we discuss how hilariously bad CNN is at this news reporting business.

    Steam Overwatch: Baidol#1957
  • Sweeney TomSweeney Tom try The Substance it changed my lifeRegistered User regular
    I was shocked about it being upheld.

    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.

  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    To be fair, most outlets jumped the gun on this, but CNN certainly failed fastest and hardest

    I heard it first from Diane Rehm and had to go to SCOTUSblog to get the straight deal

  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    Speculation was that Roberts would vote to uphold so he could write the decision himself and tailor it appropriately

  • LilliLilli Registered User regular
    Baidol wrote: »
    This is also the thread where we discuss how hilariously bad CNN is at this news reporting business.

    Some of their very best reporting.

  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    Also please note that Republicans can now devote all their attention to calling for a repeal, which is still possible if not likely

  • CptKemzikCptKemzik Registered User regular
    edited June 2012
    CNN's ratings are apparently at their lowest since 1991, and the 25-40ish demographic has an average primetime viewership of 130,000, with total prime time viewership less than 500,000. They're a piece of crap news group (really most US news is), and I hope they continue dying a slow death.

    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.

    CptKemzik on
  • This content has been removed.

  • TankHammerTankHammer Atlanta Ghostbuster Atlanta, GARegistered User regular
    Does this mean I can afford healthcare now?

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    so the penalty for states failing to apply this ruling is no new medicare money, right

    i am genuinely wondering whether that will come up

    reposig.jpg
  • AbracadanielAbracadaniel Registered User regular
    Wait, what did CNN report?

  • Sweeney TomSweeney Tom try The Substance it changed my lifeRegistered User regular
    Smart Hero wrote: »
    Wait, what did CNN report?

    Their front page said it was completely struck down.

  • CptKemzikCptKemzik Registered User regular
    edited June 2012
    They said "MANDATE STRUCK DOWN BY THE COURT," one second later SCOTUSblog reported "uhm mandate is upheld" now they're furiously trying to explain the confusion created entirely by themselves

    oh damn did I miss that they said completely? welp...

    CptKemzik on
  • BaidolBaidol I will hold him off Escape while you canRegistered User regular
    Smart Hero wrote: »
    Wait, what did CNN report?

    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.

    Steam Overwatch: Baidol#1957
  • KarlKarl Registered User regular
    Hurrah

    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.

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    oh hey the stolen valor act is struck down for infringing on freedom of speech

    interesting

    reposig.jpg
  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    Fandyien wrote: »
    so the penalty for states failing to apply this ruling is no new medicare money, right

    i am genuinely wondering whether that will come up

    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 :(

  • CptKemzikCptKemzik Registered User regular
    edited June 2012
    Karl wrote: »
    Hurrah

    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.

    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.

    CptKemzik on
  • Goose!Goose! That's me, honey Show me the way home, honeyRegistered User regular
    Is it wrong that I enioy reading the freep live thread of the decision announcement?

    Today is the day our country died.

    We need a revolution.

  • Raijin QuickfootRaijin Quickfoot I'm your Huckleberry YOU'RE NO DAISYRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    This is a good thing but it doesn't do much for me. Being relatively low income I qualify for MINNESOTA CARE right now so I already have very affordable health insurance.

  • TankHammerTankHammer Atlanta Ghostbuster Atlanta, GARegistered User regular
    I want to ask the crazy teabagger I spoke to the other day how this is removing freedoms from anybody.

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    CptKemzik wrote: »
    Karl wrote: »
    Hurrah

    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.

    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.

    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
    Goose! wrote: »
    Is it wrong that I enioy reading the freep live thread of the decision announcement?

    Today is the day our country died.

    We need a revolution.

    yeah this is some really cathartic schadenfreude

    reposig.jpg
  • Sweeney TomSweeney Tom try The Substance it changed my lifeRegistered User regular
    edited June 2012
    Goose! wrote: »
    Is it wrong that I enioy reading the freep live thread of the decision announcement?

    Today is the day our country died.

    We need a revolution.

    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.

    Sweeney Tom on
  • QuothQuoth the Raven Miami, FL FOR REALRegistered User regular
    CptK has it right, this is better than nothing but it's more of a victory for insurance companies than anyone else I think

    They'll have a lot of new customers, some subsidized by government funds I believe, or do low-income folks get Medicaid instead?

  • FyndirFyndir Registered User regular
    edited June 2012
    TankHammer wrote: »
    I want to ask the crazy teabagger I spoke to the other day how this is removing freedoms from anybody.

    Taxes are anti-American, what do you think you revolted for in the first place???

    NO TAXATION!!

    :rotate:

    Fyndir on
  • AbracadanielAbracadaniel Registered User regular
    Fandyien wrote: »
    oh hey the stolen valor act is struck down for infringing on freedom of speech

    interesting

    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.

  • Goose!Goose! That's me, honey Show me the way home, honeyRegistered User regular
    Also, the new talking point that's sprung from this is "Obama passed and signed the largest tax increase"

  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    Fyndir wrote: »
    TankHammer wrote: »
    I want to ask the crazy teabagger I spoke to the other day how this is removing freedoms from anybody.

    Taxes are anti-American, what do you think you revolted for in the first place???

    NO TAXATION!!

    :rotate:

    congratulations you are now the republican nominee

    reposig.jpg
  • Raijin QuickfootRaijin Quickfoot I'm your Huckleberry YOU'RE NO DAISYRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    Smart Hero wrote: »
    Fandyien wrote: »
    oh hey the stolen valor act is struck down for infringing on freedom of speech

    interesting

    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.

    "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."

Sign In or Register to comment.