Photo: LaDawna Howard/Flickr
It was a close ruling, but a 5 to 4 decision by the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate, the key part of the Affordable Care Act, or more popularly known as Obamacare.
Tom Curry of NBC Politics wrote:
What do you think? Does Obamacare spell doom for the country or will it become just another Women's Suffrage/Medicare/Social Security/Desegregation - all of which were controversial way back when.The majority opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who held that the law was a valid exercise of Congress’s power to tax.
Roberts re-framed the debate over health care as a debate over increasing taxes. Congress, he said, is “increasing taxes” on those who choose to go uninsured. [...]
The law, Roberts wrote, “makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income. And if the mandate is in effect just a tax hike on certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance, it may be within Congress’s constitutional power to tax.”
For the next year, try living on $1450 a month.
Cancel your current healthcare and resolve that no matter what, you'll only spend $1450 a month.
Because that is the federal minimum wage, at 50 hours a week (we will assume that you are a hard worker and be happy to work overtime for a chance at some extra cash), and you can even keep the significant portion that the government would normally take each week. During that 1 year period, you MUST visit either a doctor or dentist, and pay out of pocket (remember, you have to give up your current healthcare plan).
I'll go out on a limb and say that none of you will be willing to try this social experiment. A shame, really.
It is very easy to say, "Let them eat cake."
In every economy, there are "haves and have-nots", without this dynamic, you can't have a viable system - some people HAVE to be poor so others may be rich. The rich often forget that without the labors of the poor, they wouldn't enjoy the lifestyle that has made them sassy and fat. Remember the lessons of the past - when the rich become too contemptuous of the poor, the poor even the playing field, often violently...
That works great for world leaders. They can afford it. If everyone simply existed for the sake of the elite few, the USA would be another Libya or Iraq.
Sadly, the whole idea of having to buy health insurance stems from the fact that your government is too scared to institute a full-fledged state-run health care system. If they did, I'm sure you'd complain about the loss of free enterprise. What's a government to do?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6DrH6P9OC0
However, you might argue about the principle. I hate that private for-profit insurance companies are reaping the benefits here, instead of a single payer system like Canada and most of Europe. If we took the profit motive out of the insurance business, prices would be more manageable for all. And the wealthy could still pay extra for premium service.
I'd guess that based on that statement, you're a young guy with no health issues. In reality, a) you can't take your business elsewhere - buying healthcare insurance isn't easy when you're older and/or have pre-existing conditions and b) paying out of pocket for healthcare for serious conditions can bankrupt you quickly.
@Alan...yes THAT Alan - How about income tax? Do you have the option not to work and earn income to avoid being subjected to income tax?
It's not the "social medical care" that bothers us. It's that, for the first time in US history, we are required to go out and buy something from private companies, whether we want it or not. If we choose NOT to buy it (or cannot afford the price that they feel like charging us), then we are penalized by paying a tax.
Essentially this is now a tax that is paid just because we're US citizens.
Graystone2000,
Car insurance? I have a choice on whether or not I own a car, and if I don't, I don't get punished with extra taxes.
House insurance? I have a choice on whether or not I own a house and I also have a choice on whether or not I want to insure my house (assuming it's fully owned by me and not financed). If I don't own a house or if I don't choose to insure it, I don't get punished with extra taxes.
How about this? All Americans MUST buy at least 2 cans of Coca-cola/week, whether they want to or not. If they do not (or cannot afford) to buy the Coca-cola at its new prices, they will be punished with a penalty tax.
Curious what will happen in the future when millions of us refuse to pay that Citizen-tax. Will the prisons start filling up with all of us non-violent, hardworking people because we're considered criminals now?
And you'd better believe insurance costs are going to skyrocket when it's required for people to buy it.
iron-hands, charity is the correct answer. Not coercion at the hands of bumbling politicians.
Rooboy, in case you hadn't noticed, when world leaders from other nations need the best treatment, they come to the USA. Medically, scientifically, our health care is the greatest in the history of the world. What's broken is the economic, payment side. The ACA does not fix that problem, but only exacerbates it by increasing government regulation.
All of the above ignore the fact that the decision handed down was terribly reasoned. CJ Roberts determined that, in order to get what he wanted, the text of the law would be interpreted contrary to its very specific meaning. The precedent set, that the gov't can compel any type of behavior through taxation, is dangerous and antithetical to the purpose of the Constitution.
/rant.
In case you hadn't noticed, low cost or free public health care works in MANY MANY countries around the world, try evolving to something outside of yourselves, oh and drop the religious arguments they're off topic and a complete waste of time and energy
Does the child of someone with no health insurance deserve to be treated differently than one who does?
As it stands, the court struck down the requirements that states expand medicaid. So depending on the state you live in, you may get the tax increase and get nothing in return. Depending on how that pans out, this may end up being once giant tax on those who already can't afford health insurance.
Our tax code is full of such punishments: don't own a tree farm? Then you're not getting the tree farm tax break. Don't own an oil drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico? Then you're not getting The Oil Drilling Platform in the Gulf of Mexico tax break.
They raised taxes on everyone, and if you have health insurance you get a tax break.
Do you honestly think working people will give up jobs just because they are now eligible for subsidized health care? It still ain't gonna be free -just affordable.
You better believe I vote every opportunity I get. But those with more money will always have more power in the US.
People want to see doctors and nurses paid by the government. Well, friends, let's think that through. If the government is paying the bills, the government is calling the shots. Some bureaucrat in an office somewhere would be deciding what health care services you can receive. You want more or different care? Not your call, pal.
What today's Supreme Court decision means is that the federal government, in all of their infinite wisdom, may now compel any behavior they like through penalties, erm, I mean, taxes. It means that the power of the federal government is no longer constrained by the Constitution. Our liberty and freedom is now explicitly and only what temporary politicians decide that it is.
It was a nice run while it lasted.
Well, that makes it alright then. Why work? Just feel free to vote yourself all the wealth from the "otherside of town" that you feel entitled to.
Or, on one failed "stimulus" program.
Everyone should be responsible for their own health insurance. We would get a better bang for our bucks.
I find that most of the not quite as "neat" blogs that i've previously stopped reading contained enough of a toxic mix of ignorance and proselytizing when it came to politics (even excluding the comment section) that it was difficult to stay aboard. When it became a regular thing to see politics mixed in the articles of the day, i just lost interest.
Please keep the "neatness" to stuff we can all enjoy, not stuff that half of us will enjoy, while half of us roll our eyes.
(yes, snark, but why not?)
...and you have read all 2,409 pages? I have yet to encounter anyone who has. This is the problem, nobody full understand how this mess of a bill will pan out. the bulk of the bill itself is a reason to repeal it.
> how it BENEFITS you vs. the cost to you
So we should disregard how this bill will impact us as a nation and only look at the selfish benefits that it will offer us personally? If this is what we have become as a nation, we have a very dark future ahead of us.
1) Why aren't people as offended when they have to buy homeowners insurance or auto insurance? Where's your outrage when the government pays for flood insurance for people building in flood zones? Insuring sick people is no different... Why pick on health care?
2) Who in their right mind would rather have their employer choose their health insurance? You may not like 'government mandate' but every job I've had gave me one choice (if that) for health insurance and one price. And you like that BETTER? And when my employer decides to make a change, I have no choice. GREAT SYSTEM!
3) Governments purpose is to do things we can't do individually. Why do I pay for a bridge I don't drive over? (until I need to). Why pay for education? (until I want proper change from McDonalds) Why pay for roads? (Until I want food delivered from field to grocery store).
4) The tax is 1%. That's the biggest tax increase in history? I think not... I've had bigger increases than that in the last couple years on the state and local level (combined it's more than any savings from the Bush Cuts)
5) If you don't know any details about the Health Care Act please stop talking until you've understood how it BENEFITS you vs. the cost to you (if you know the cost either)... I'd rather see arguments of what you are RECEIVING for this cost vs. just rhetoric.
Thanks!
And, much of it hasn't taken effect, yet. The benefits will expand after 2014. Medicaid will be significantly expanded, Medicare's trust fund will be extended, seniors have free preventive care and check ups. Preventive care will (eventually) be free in all insurance plans. Tax credits will help millions afford coverage; and small business tax credits will be magnified.
Come to think of it, most of them already are on Medicare. Which I am billed for every year.
I'd REALLY REALLY like to see this changed to a system where doctors and nurses are paid like police and fireman (why do I have to worry about my insurance coverage when an ambulance shows up? I don't worry like that when a firetruck rolls up.) But until that happens, this strange stopgap is what we get.
What a wonderful day for you, comrade. Now the government will send someone with a gun to your neighbors door to insist that they help pay for your healthcare. You must be so proud.
That being said I'm sad to see a divisively political article posted here on Neatorama. This is not the blog for left and right, red and blue, with international kibitzers. If I wanted that I would go to a news blog/forum/news source. Stick to neat things, neatorama.
This is a liberal wet dream. This ruling allows that a tiny pseudo-intellectual elite to dictate the personal decisions of hundreds of millions of Americans. And to enforce their dictates through the imposition of a malignant Skinnerian behavior modification program.
I only wish this "tax" were actually going to the government instead of the profits of the insurance companies.
this ruling doesn't mean you're going to be handed health care coverage..
it means that if your employer doesn't offer it to you, you have to
purchase it on your own, or face fines ("taxes") to offset the cost of
any medical care you need, but can't pay for.
When viewed as a tax, this law is doing exactly what Obama said he wouldn't do... raise taxes on the poor and middle class. So if you can't afford health insurance, you are now saddled with an added tax burden. Granted the tax is less than the insurance, but still it's a blow to those struggling to make ends meet.
Looks like Obama will still need to convince the overwhelming majority of Americans who still hate the law to suddenly embrace it, along with an enormous new tax to pay for it in a horrible economy, all in four months.
Not saying it is impossible, but look back to 2010 and along with the fact that public opinion has not wavered in three years, Obama has his work cut out for him.
In my opinion, the law will be repealed before it gets a chance to be implemented by a new administration and we will all look back on this as a horrible but necessary mistake needed in order to define the role of the government.