Rev....it passed 6 - 3

The Chief Justice himself broke ranks and went with the liberal justices.

I guess this was as much a trial of the Supreme Court as it was for the individual mandate that forces the individual to buy health insurance or face a fine - a provision that could have been the same as a health care tax.

The Court ruled on the constitution and not on whether it was good or bad policy. Policy is for the elected officials.

The individual mandate is an economic measure to have the healthy pay for the sickly just like the working generation pay for the entitlement (old and poor) generation do for social security and Medicare.

You see, once you walk into an ER and get treated, somebody pays for that. The Obama argument was that payment is a TEMPORAL thing, whether you pay for it up front or at the time of consuming health care services. Thus the inter-State commerce clause becomes applicable.

sorry...5-4

Roberts vote must have killed the repubs

Interesting interpretation with an apt decision.

=================================

Obamacare upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court

National Post Wire Services 

Jun 28, 2012 – 10:18 AM ET |

Last Updated: Jun 28, 2012 10:41 AM ET

SAUL LOEB/AFP/GettyImages

Demonstrators protest as they await a decision by the US Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the Affordable Healthcare Act, US President Barack Obama's signature healthcare legislation, outside the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, June 28, 2012

 

 

Source

A victory for Obama now and in Nov too. This seals the deal.

Dem Guyanese CUNUMUNU and LAMATAS bring their illiterate ways here and were SPEWING their Garbage. They gun run and hide now!!!!!

Yall don't get too cocky on the recent ruling. Obama has to answer for high unemployment rate and the staggering economy. Obama is busy bowing to foreign Kings, and he pays no attention at home. He's worse than George W. Bush. Obama has four years to show off his charisma and it over. Charisma doesn't run a great country. We need fresh ideas and strong leadership and not good looks. Vote for Mitt Romney in November 2012.

OBAMA 2012 ALL THE WAY. MERIKA GOING TO THE MOON WITH OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA.

Can you name a fresh idea offerred by Romney. You can't give the "we are going to make Obama a one term president" because that was floating around since the days of Michelle Backman.

Ksazma, you really think Abidha-me-time deserve a reply? He knows it's not where the economy is now, but where it's going. He knows that Obama has corrected course since he took over from the cliff in 2009 and the trajectory is upward. He is just a hater who knows these things, but, he must put in his 2 cents.

Actually Kari, I am surprised that I actually understood what he wrote given his poor language skills.

The Harvard Law Professor, Laurence Tribe, whose students included Justice Roberts and President Obama told MSNBC last Tuesday evening that he believes Justice Roberts will vote to uphold the ObamaCare in its entirety.

How can I be a hater when I am a registered Republican all my life? You guys want to debate American politics with Guyanese mentality. Before Obama took his historical oath of office, there were white men of both parties in the white house ruling the nation. They were all voted in and out of office based on their performance. Nothing was based on hate. Kari, you're quick to jump on hate and race as though you took notes from that haram Chief. 

OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA!!!! THANK YOU MR PRESIDENT. NOW I CAN SLEEP WELL KNOWING DEM PICKNEY GAT HEALTH COVERAGE.

That sound fishy if you ask me. This is like Guyana Justice. How professor Tribe can make such a positive assumption on how Justice Roberts will rule in Obamacare?

How More Pagla you can get Badlu(neh?u) accusing Guyanese of littering,you are one empty skull-empty hungry belly.

UH??? LAAD AH MERCY ARE YOU POSTING FROM BERBICE MAD HOUSE. OH SCRATCH, I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. GROW A BRAIN BEFORE YOU COME YAHSUH NAH.

stop listening to Rush and hannity...come up wid something new

This is clearly a legal victory for Obama and rightly so, just as getting Osama.  However, this does not hide the fact that the overall economy is still in the doldrums and Obama has failed to move the needle on that one.  Obama care affects 1 in 10 Americans to varying degrees.

Obamacare in basically institutionalizing the issue of who pays for the uninsured.  Infact, today all insured already pay due to cost being passed on.  The only incremental part here is the individual mandate which will tax people who could afford and do not take out health insurance.  This is a marginal group.  It will bring in persons who could not be covered previously, thus increasing the overall costs to the system.

The US healthcare system has a lot of NVA costs primarily driven by lawsuits, forcing defensive medicine, which cause Americans to pay 40% higher costs than most developed nations but ranked 27th in life expectancy.

Obama's socialism will come and go and some, like any other, will stick and become embedded in society.  What we are witnessing in the US is a reaction to too much wealth in to few hands.  For this reason guys like Romney will not be listened to as they and seen represent the "too few" rich folks.  The clowns in the radical Right did not help the case either.  The US is having a trisk with Obama's socialism but will eventually revert to a more centrist free enterprise system as the imbalances work themselves out.  Today is a watershed event for this as it seals Obama's 2nd term.

Obama, on the economy, has been a failure.

Worldwide, economy is a failure.

Correct, but this was the true test.  And who you calling dunce?  You need a good kick in your ass.

Please remember that it is not "Health Care" that passed. It was "compulsory purchase of private insurance," after which there is no guarantee that you will actually get "health care," because of all the rationing provisions that are designed to help out the Wall Street insurance firms under the guise of "cost cutting."

If you actually want "health care," you need a government-owned insurance plan like in France.

Henry raises a good point, bit it needs some qualification.

As Chief Justice Roberts said in his statement the individual mandate is to "encourage" the purchase of a health insurance product through its ability to levy taxes ( the Obama people call it a "penalty"). This is what Henry means by "compulsory purchase". It's not a purchase Henry, if you chose to not buy and instead pay the penalty (or as Roberts put it - a tax).

Now regarding guarantee of health service Henry, you're getting into the realm of Economics. I take it that somehow doctors will flee the industry and become musicians or IT professionals or construction workers. Hospitals would look at the increased demand and do the counter-intuitive thing and shut their doors, sell their buildings to Chinese to build a mall. You see Henry, saying "rationing" will be a characteristic of a US industry (good God) is to demagogue the issue. You also fail to mention the provisions by law that Insurance companies have to adhere to with respect to "cost cutting", a phrase you enjoin to sound like an authority on something patently false and misleading. Insurance companies exist because they are licensed to do so and with this license come certain rules. Let a lawyer tell you those rules as they pertain to your euphemistically stated "cost cutting" measures to "help out Wall Street Insurance companies". Henry, Henry, the health insurance companies are NOT Wall Street companies.

This is an appeal to stay with the facts and common sense.

Kari, two points in response. The "business model" favored by Romney and Obama is that of the HMO, which operates on a very simple premise: if you can increase the number of people who are paying members, while reducing the amount of money that is paid to actual physicians, nurses and technicians, and the amount spent on tests and surgical procedures, the result will be higher profits to shareholders, and, of course, higher mortality rates among the patients.

Number two: before 1999, the Glass-Steagall Act mandated that insurance companies, investment banks, and other financial institutions must be kept segregated from one another. That is no longer the case. How do insurance companies make money? By taking the fees paid by policy-holders and speculating with them, until such time as they must pay something back. They may not have a literal office address on Wall Street, but make no mistake, they are part of the same general apparatus that runs Obama and Romney.

Henry, you are a Leftist demagogue.  You should offer advise to Castro and Mugabe how to improve their nation's miserable situation.

The gist ot the matter.

Time for payments can be a hassle.

Understand carefully the fine-prints.

Henry.....Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) does not do a good job addressing costs. But it's helping it along. Firstly, there is less fee-for-service in health care delivery. What this means is that to cure an ailment doctors and hospitals no longer charge the number of visits or operations, but rather what the actual cost of the cure is. Thank this Act for that. Also preventative care is now part of your premium., This means less sickness and less consumption of this resource. Samjeh? Thanks to this Act. The Administrative costs are coming down thanks to digital storage and look ups of records - thank the ObamaCare for that too. They still have to tackle tort reform as it relates to litigation of malpractice. But eventually you will see the cost-cutting measures after a few years, and a healthy America. Eventually the conversation will float towards single-payer/private delivery of health care. It works for medicare recipients, VA and elected politicians.

On the Insurance companies investing premiums, let me say this....AIG as an insurance company (for financial securities and not health care) collapsed simply because of its insuring faulty CDS not because of investing. So show me the speculative investments by Aetna, Oxford Health; and especially the non-profit giants like Blue Cross Blue Shield.

First, let me say that speculation is not the same as "investing," although "investing" is a popular euphemism. And while we're on the topic of euphemisms, trading in derivatives is, for the most part, not "hedging" or "mitigating risk." Here are some two-year-old statistics from this rather dry and defensive article: