IS IT TRUE June 19, 2012
IS IT TRUE the United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the healthcare law widely referred to as Obamacare that was passed a couple of years ago along party lines?…the drug companies and the American Medical Association had quite allot of influence in the writing of this law and thus the savings that were promised have not been realized and projections for premiums and healthcare itself are now expected to rise even more?…there was a series of op-ed pieces in yesterday’s New York Times by a wide variety of authors from the practical liberal professor and former member of President Clinton’s cabinet Robert Reich through some fairly right wing authors?…that the New York Times being what it is there were more opinions from liberal authors than conservative ones but both points of view were represented?
IS IT TRUE the authors all expect to minimally see the mandate to force the purchase of health insurance to be struck down as unconstitutional?…that a clear majority expect the entire law to be struck down because there is no severability clause anywhere in it?…maybe if the congress would have actually read the bill or hired someone smart enough to understand it to read it for them that a severability clause would have been inserted and the country would not be faced with an “all or nothing†situation?…the drug companies and the AMA will be the ones having a stroke if the purchase mandate is struck down but the rest is allowed to stand because the purchase mandate was the means to pay for things like pre-existing conditions and 26 year olds staying on the parents plan?…the bull being tossed about regarding the 21 – 26 year olds is fairly false on the part of the insurance companies because the premiums for these young adults are currently paid by their parents?…this writer knows this because the premium for the two young adult daughters is about $600 per month and is paid by this writer?…this is much higher than it was before they turned 21?
IS IT TRUE it is disturbing to see that such a wide and impactful piece of legislation could make its way through the United States Congress without sufficient constitutional review?…this is what we get as a people when we do not even demand that our elected officials read the bills before they pass them?…in the case of most procedures that the United States already has universal health care?…that between Medicaid, Medicare, the Veterans Administration, and public health departments that many millions of people are already outside of the realm of private insurance and healthcare?…that of course going to these places for healthcare is not like going to the Ritz Carleton to get stitches or give birth but for the most part the care is equivalent?…that flu shots are a perfect example of a distribution system that is both public and private and are affordable to everyone?…that such routine things like that if we can’t get over needing to be treated like Princes and Princesses is the only way we will ever be able to afford universal health care?
IS IT TRUE that upholding the Constitution of the United States is more important than preserving a law that is now seen as flawed to the point of needing massive overhaul?…that the CCO encourages the Supreme Court to rule on the basis of constitutionality and to render opinions that the American people can understand and accept?…that in nearly every case that the health of each person is significantly impacted by their own lifestyle and that wellness programs, diet, and exercise are the keys to affordable healthcare for all but those that are impacted by actions outside of their control or by the dice of nature?…that we already have programs that can be adapted to provide care to those people should the law be struck down?
Some points (facts) relative to the Affordable Healthcare Act, presented without bias, for the reader to take into consideration:
President Obama is a constitutional lawyer.
There are constitutional lawyers from both parties in both houses of Congress.
The insurance industry is overjoyed with the mandated health coverage.
Big Pharma is estatic about the provision to outlaw reimportation of pharmaceuticals.
A robust public option in Obamacare would’ve avoided the constitutional issues raised by the universal mandate.
Single payer, universal healthcare (Medicare) for all U.S. citizens would’ve resolved all constitutional issues and provided adequate healthcare equal to or superior to universal healthcare in other developed nations.
Oh, and I forgot one other fact: “allot” is a word meaning “to apportion,” and not a word meaning “a lot.” That one is for the editor who chronically uses “allot” to mean “a lot.”
Everybody keeps saying Obama is a constitutional lawyer yet he keeps doing things that violate the constitution. He has been overruled for his dictator type of edicts several times. This healthcare thing is just a big one with lots of publicity.
You are right about them big companies liking this plan cause Obama and the congress sold out to them and yes a good public option would have kept this out of the Supreme Court. The trouble is them fools in Washington that passed this POS didn’t do their job.
You can call them constitutional lawyers all you want but the results of their is not the result of anyone who knows and values the constitution. The disregard for the constitution is coming straight from the top.
In my attempt to present the facts without bias, I simply neglected to offer editorial commentary, such as yours, with which I happen to agree.
many pparents, including my sister pay a flat rate for their family plan insurance no matter how many children they have. Her out of college, gainfully employed 24 year old son will finally start using his employers corporate policy a year from August, when he will have graduated college and had his own apartment for two and a half years. This does not lower my insurance costs.
No, it does not lower anyone’s insurance costs except for his during the period of time he is covered by his parent’s policy. Yet one more reason to go universal, single payer, Medicare for all U.S. citizens. Then if you want something better than basic, spring for optional supplementals at whatever rate you can negotiate with the insurance giants. Hopefully, Congress would see fit to legislate some robust public options for the supplementals (rather than once again selling out on behalf of the investment funds associated with insurance company’s excessively high premiums).
Is it true that the Michigan Statehouse is not the only place where you cannot say “vagina?” … that you also cannot say “vagina” in the Courier and Press comment blogs?
Comments are closed.