IS IT TRUE: March 30, 2012
IS IT TRUE that sometime this afternoon that the justices of the United States Supreme Court will be holding a closed meeting for a discussion regarding the constitutionality of the bill that is commonly referred to as Obamacare?…that this afternoon these justices will know what the outcome will be in this matter?…that the next two months will be spent by the justices writing their personal interpretations for publication about why they each voted the way that they did?…that it is even possible that in the case of a 5 – 4 initial vote that one of the moderate justices like Justice Kennedy may reconsider and change the outcome of the vote?…it is projected that the rest of the country will learn the outcome in late June?…that there are essentially no moles for anyone at the US Supreme Court so don’t look for anything to leak out?
IS IT TRUE that if and we do mean if Obamacare is overturned that it will reflect very poorly on the vetting for constitutionality that should have been done before rushing into a vote two years ago?…that if Obamacare is overturned it will significantly disrupt the direction of the United States healthcare system?…that if Obamacare is overturned it will render many millions or even billions of dollars invested by private businesses to comply to have been wasted?…that rushing to a vote, succumbing to pressure tactics, and failing to VET is not just a way of doing business in Evansville, IN, it is becoming a way of governing at all levels?
IS IT TRUE that Obamacare could have been VETTED properly and crafted in a way that the US Constitution would not have even possibly been the instrument that may strike it down?…that people who knew or should have known this would be a problem avoided and prevented that discussion from happening on the floors of Congress by RUSHING THINGS TO A VOTE WITH AN ARTIFICIAL DEADLINE?…that there is a very high probability that someone on the team that crafted the bill and did the research on constitutionality may even have WITHHELD MATERIAL INFORMATION from our elected leaders?…that our elected leaders were most certainly prevented from doing individual VETTING efforts by the RUSH TO VOTE?
IS IT TRUE that when an elected official or a surrogate for an elected official has material information with respect to an important vote and fails to disclose it to all of the elected officials whose reputation is on the line that this person has truly obstructed the unknowing elected officials ability to do their job?…that it is a tragedy when certain members of the United States Congress, the Indiana State House, or even the Evansville City Council are forced to make their decisions blindly due to withholding material information or accelerating a vote to avoid the scrutiny that can only come from research?
IS IT TRUE we are hearing that the leader of the Republican Party of Vanderburgh County is vetting a couple of well qualified individuals in order to determine which one shall run against the current County Recorder?…that after talking with many people in the political know he is totally convinced that the Vanderburgh County Recorder office can be won by a Republican?…that Wayne Parke never takes on anything unless he is knows that his political goal is achievable?…that it looks like current Democratic Vanderburgh County Recorder may be facing the political battle of her life in this coming General election?
I find it curious that among all your “Is It Trues” regarding “Obamacare,” you did not ask what the impact of the Supreme Ct. overturning the Affordable Healthcare Act will have on Americans with preexisting conditions, Americans who cannot afford healthcare, or the rest of us who must absorb the costs imposed by health providers to cover their expenses for extending charity to the uninsured, or the exhorbitant premiums the insurance monopolies impose upon those of us who do pay for health insurance coverage.
Most of your what ifs seem to be asking what impact the overturn of the AHA will have on the very people who will profit the most regardless of which way the ruling goes.
As to constitutionality, I assume the vote will be 5 – 4 against the individual mandate. And once again, allow me to advocate for the only truly constututional way for Congress to establish universal national healthcare: Single Payer Medicare paid by raising the withholding tax sufficiently to cover the program. The Constitution allows for the government to levy taxes for programs that protect the health and well being of the citizens.
How exactly does AHA do what you allude needs to be done in your first paragraph, especially in light of the revelations that the costs are much higher than what was originally stated when this bill was passed.
Soon2b
The preexisting condition question can be worked out in future legislation without adopting this total takeover of the American healthcare system by the Alinskyites.
People come here from all over the world to get the best healthcare on the planet. Lets not screw that up, okay?
__
My fear is that if (when) the Supreme Ct. rules the individual mandate unconstitutional, they also will throw out enough of the Affordable Healthcare Act to gut it, thereby scuttling the provisions for covering preexisting conditions.
Now, considering the timeline for past healthcare improvements, major legislation averaging what … once per generation or less … your prediction that “the preexisting condition question can be worked out in future legislation” is a death sentence or a sentence to a miserable quality of life over many, many years to come for millions of Americans.
Soon,
what is the difference between requiring everyone to pay in to Social Security vs. requiring each of those same people to pay in to Health Insurance (i.e., buy a policy). Don’t both help “protect the health and well being of citizens ” ?
Leo, the difference is the individual mandate is a law that forces everyone to buy health insurance coverage, and that is what the constitutional challenge is based on … the objection to Congress forcing a person to purchase something that person does not wish to purchase on the open market.
On the other hand, Medicare is provided via “socialized” universal healthcare coverage by means of Congress levying a tax which then subsidizes the cost of individuals covered by the Medicare system. The Constitution allows Congress to levy taxes, so universal Medicare for everyone, funded by a tax, would be constitutional same as Medicare for citizens age 65 and older currently is considered constitutional.
soon,
sounds like a “distinction without a difference”. Whether it’s a “premium” (health insurance)or a “tax” (FICA), both laws would require individuals to spend their money. You are correct, however. If the health care overhaul is, in fact, overturned (by defeat of individual coverage mandate), we really will be looking at a single-payer system (your favorite uncle); we will all be on Medicaid; and we will pay “tax” for health insurance; and “tax” for social security. More bureaucracy !!!
There are distinct differences, but I’m tired of trying to explain it. And it’s Medicare, not Medicaid. There’s a difference there, too.
Having worked in health care offices for over 30 years, the very thought of government run health care is frightening. Large insurance companies are bad enough but at least patients can choose their coverage, policies and premiums.
I do agree however that there must be something done to provide everyone with adequate health care. Hospitals are required to provide help to anyone regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay thereby making us all responsible for paying for those services. I do understand why this is necessary.
One way or the other we need to find the SIMPLEST, MOST ECONOMICAL WAY TO PROVIDE EXCELLENT HEALTH CARE FOR ALL.
292, I’m scheduled to go on Medicare in just under one year, because it’s mandated that I do so due to my age. I’ve paid into the Medicare fund since the time the withholding tax was taken out of my paychecks many, many years ago. So, I’ve paid for the program, and it’s mandated that I enter the program if I want healthcare coverage after age 65.
My question to you, after reading your comment, is should “the very though to government run healthcare” frighten me so thoroughly that I seek other means of healthcare coverage than Medicare?
Soon,
Two points. (1) The thought of our government taking over all the health care in the entire country all at once is frightening. Too much too fast. The magnitude and complexity is unfathomable.
(2) Medicare (and Medicaid for that matter) is confusing and convoluted enough without adding millions more patients to the system. Most offices spend much more time dealing with these systems, billings, collections, corrections, etc, etc, etc, than the doctor/nurse/therapist/provider ever spends with patient care. The fact that these office employees must be paid for this totally unnecessary time being spent due to poor government designed health systems is a real life reason why health care is so expensive.
By the way, this is also true of most major insurance carriers. There are however departments of insurance in most states that can help address the major injustices that insurance companies try to get away with. I have taken a few to task on our patient’s behalf. This however cannot apply to medicare or medicaid because these are government programs.
By the way, I will be on medicare in 2 years myself. I also have a chronic health issue that I am sure will cause me to spend several months working through the system to get medicare started for me. The prescriptions will be the most challenging. Currently my meds total around $4400.00 per month. That may give you a picture of what our current monthly insurance premium is.
I honestly see this insurance problem from many sides. There is no easy answer. To get a really good system for all Americans will take a long, long process lead by non-partisan people highly educated in all the health care areas, finance, business, and government. The first try will not be perfect. Neither will the second, third, or fourth. And the public will need to be willing to work through the endeavor together. Good luck with that.
Thank you for your thoughtful and complete answers. I’d like to speak with you personally some day this year.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but truly the only ones being “mandated” to buy healthcare are those currently not covered? Further, if you already have health coverage (employer- or privately-held) then you really have nothing to worry about because you are already covered, no? I am currently one of the 40M Americans without healthcare coverage, but I did receive healtcare via my school. However, at least thanks to Obamacare, I can’t be denied for my preexisting conditions. My younger siblings can retain their parents’ insurance until age 26. Children may not be denied coverage for preexisting conditions. Are we really willing to abandon all of this progress just because 40M of us need coverage? I surely hope not.
Which, might I add, does anyone really believe that a bag of normal saline in a hospital really costs over $100? Same thing for really anything on my hospital bills. Why is it that way? Well, my answer is because government has told hospitals to treat the indigent, but provided them with no way to pay for it. Left to their own devices, just as any good corporation, they jacked up the prices on everything. How does that save anybody any money? In my opinion, it doesn’t. At the end of the day, we are all paying more. In 2012 United States, one’s value of life should not be placed on how much they earn. Make healthcare available, make it cheap, make it mandatory. We all know health insurance is not the first insurance to be mandatory; want to drive a car in the US, you had better have insurance!
Agreed. And more reasons to go with single payer universal health care coverage.
ThatsWhatISaid,
Very valid points. Everyone slams “Obamacare” when it has some very good and one could argue necessary points. We have to start somewhere. This health care issue has been wound so tight in so many directions for so long that, as 292 said, it will take many tries to get a good final product. We all must get auto insurance. We must lower health care costs. We have to insure pre-existing conditions. We must support to working poor. We must stand together.
Mandated health insurance is not the same as other mandated insurances. If you “choose” to buy a car than yes it is mandated you buy car insurance. If you “choose” to buy a home you have to get homeowners. If you “choose” to buy a home in a floodplain you are forced to buy flood insurance. People don’t “choose” to live yet they are forced to buy health insurance.
The most dangerous piece of the Obamacare or AHA if you prefer is the freedom that it gives companies to just pay a nominal fine as opposed to continue providing coverage. The City of Evansville for example pays something like $16,000 per employee per year for health insurance. Under Obamacare if the city or a business that is paying that much for coverage can just pay a $3,500 per person fine and drop the coverage then mark my words, they will do exactly that. The same will go for the very sick whose premiums will be higher than the fine. Imagine you are the Mayor of Evansville and are looking at a $15M insurance bill or a $3.4M fine during a year you can’t afford a firetruck. That $11.6M would be irresistible even if it is unpopular with the employees. It would be quite popular with the other 116,000 people who live in the city.
For a business it is even easier. The only competitive position will be to pay the fine and be done with it. This is the unpublicized time bomb in Obamacare.
What is the point of making everyone have health insurance in a country where there are over 100 million people who are obese? What is the point of making everyone have health insurance when there are untold tens of millions of people who still smoke cigarettes, and/or take illegal drugs such as crack and meth? A huge portion of the American public is trying to destroy themselves with reckless behavior of all kinds.
Yep, and the dems want folks like you and me to pay for those unhealthy and irresponsible sloths.
Comments are closed.