Obamacare Upheld by U.S. Supreme Court [Poll]
Federal health care mandate deemed constitutional by five of the nine judges.
The Supreme Court announced Thursday that the Affordable Care Act, which mandates every American to purchase health insurance, is constitutional.
The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government can levy a "tax" on individuals who do not buy into the system. The judges said the individual mandate cannot be upheld under the commerce clause, but that Congress's ability to tax and spend in this case is upheld.
The individual health care mandate is the key provision in Obamacare, and many are calling it a huge win for the president as we approach the November elections. The Obama administration touted the law passed in March 2010 as its signature legislative achievement.
However, others decry the law because of concerns about the federal government's role in regulating the health care industry.
The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to uphold the law, with Chief Justice John Roberts casting the deciding vote and writing the majority opinion.
Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
"The act is invalid in its entirety," Kennedy said, according to Fox News.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
10:24 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
take that conservative losers
Joseph Richard snodgrass
10:26 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
you teabaggers have asked for it
Steve
10:35 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
A "tax" that has no repercussions for noncompliance? So who foots the bill for those who opt not to buy insurance? The rest of us. Socialist.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
10:40 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
you owe us all you people say socialist freely but its whats right
Joseph Richard snodgrass
10:41 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
you rip people off and get rich or get all the help in the world and get rich then you pay some to society
Ralph
11:14 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
You must be the love child of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
10:50 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
you republicans care nothing for the middle class and i will not go down
Joseph Richard snodgrass
11:21 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
no i dont like the media
Joseph Richard snodgrass
11:23 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
or maybe im your worst nightmare because im free
Ralph
11:27 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
If by "free" you mean "leaching off the tax payers" , then yes.
Steve
12:50 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
For now.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
11:31 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
yea why dont you realize you lost and man up and go away
NancyC
12:37 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Don't count your chickens Joseph, before they are hatched.Today's ruling is a disappointment but definitely not a defeat. Today's ruling only addresses the constitutionality of a few pages of Obamacare. The court did not uphold the HHS mandate today, they did not address it, or declare the whole 2700 page law to be constitutional. There are more lawsuits in the pipeline. The will of the people will prevail.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
11:32 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
im not here for some all day back and forth arguing but the fact remains your the loser
Jim R
11:38 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Seems the decision shows the incompetency of the president again or that he is a liar.Back in 2009 he argued that it was not a tax, but that was the only way that the Supreme Court liberals could justify it. Based upon his actions not sure which is correct, liar or incompetent. It is pathetic that the Supreme Court may have been rewriting the law to support it. What is to stop a person from canceling their insurance and paying the penalty when it comes out which seems to be a lot lower when the penalty tax comes out in 2014. How is he going to make up the 500 billion dollars that he is stealing from medicare. He does not have the financial backing for this program. Though something needs to be done about health care in the US, Obamacare is not a solution since it will cause a financial disaster. As is typical the hardworking middle class is being thrown under the bus.
The solution is simple - Vote Obama out of office.
Alyssa I.
8:34 am on Saturday, June 30, 2012
The supreme court has labeled the penalty as a tax. Language is powerful; using it tactfully does not make the president a liar. Why would an individual previously insured cancel one's insurance in trade for a penalty? At least to me, it seems illogical for one to purposely drop one's insurance when it's unpredictable what kind of medical care one will need. (But guess what! If one does decide to go without insurance but then falls into illness and needs it, no insurance company can deny an individual w/ a preexisting condition coverage or charge them more after 2014.) The "$500 Billion" you speak of is the difference between baseline spending and the changes the law intends to make over 10 years to reduce costs, most of which will be on the backs of healthcare providers.
How is the middle class being thrown under the bus? And, if you are a supporter of the GOP (which it appears) how could you believe Romney would benefit the middle class?
Joseph Richard snodgrass
11:40 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
better then what republicans want but im done with this for now argue between yourselves leave me out of it now
Ralph
11:53 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
A Democrat told a Republican, "I just got a great new hearing aid, thanks to ObamaCare."
The Republican asked, "What kind is it?"
The Democrat replied, "A quarter after two o'clock."
Doremus Jessup
12:02 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
You still got it Malph. Cha CHa Cha.
NancyC
12:23 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
At least now the lame stream media will have to report the truth about this new TAX. Repeal and replace.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
12:57 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Yea the people will prevail us not you
Melanie Watkins Gold
9:29 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Isn't the "Obamacare" pretty much what is working in Mass that Romney fought for...btw it is working in Mass, 98% of the population in Mass with health care as well as increased jobs because of it. Guess I am a little confused. The last thing I will say is having a pre-existing condition and paying triple the healthcare I appreciate that I will not be discriminated against when it comes to my choice of healthcare.
Okay one more thing, Republicans don't want the government telling them they have to do something because that is wrong and they have a rights to make their own choices, but why is it okay to push your religious beliefs on me when it comes to abortion. Before I get beat over the head with it, I don't think abortion is right however I do think I should be able to decide...which is what I keep hearing the Republicans say...guess you only want to let people decide when you are fighting for it.
Alyssa I.
8:41 am on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Agreed! The system is Mass. is incredibly similar AND successful. Sometimes I think the GOP will take whatever stance is most likely to make Obama fail. I cannot comprehend the contradictions in the GOP -- they want less government control, yet find a way to make women's reproductive rights up for debate.
Jim R
1:11 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Obama does not need the Republicans to fail, he is doing a good job of that himself. He is spiraling our debt and pushing a medical bill that does not have sufficient resources. Unemployment remains above 8% which is a mark he set, so he should be honest and just drop from the 2012, but he is not a man of his word. Nothing but a dictator that follows laws he wants and ignores other. He said he would not follow the Defense of Marriage Act which the Congress has passed. He tells a Church to ignore their teachings and follow his command which abridges first amendment rights.
The Republicans recently argued against the HHS mandate since that stepped on the first amendmendment right of religious freedom not what you claim. An actually the other argument which has been a big difference between the republicans and the abortion party is the protection of the unborn.
In this latter case Obama has taken the most immoral stance of all the presidents. He not only pushes abortion and would not even take a stance about the forced abortion case in China. He also has supported partial birth abortion which means a child may be destroyed as long as the head remains in the mother. The murderer pulls the child by the legs, and pushes the arms aside so this person may attack the head of the child still in the mother. This president would not even support the act supporting the protection of a child who survived an abortion. What type of person can take these stances?
Stewart Levine
10:26 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Demicans and Republicrats--- Both parties are controlled by the same people.
I feel that people who do not have health care completely and 100% totally deserve health care. Especially if someone has cancer, or is terminally ill.
I am empathetic and sympathetic to their plight. What liberal's and Conservatives must understand is that this Health Care law is not about health care ,it is about the individual mandate, which means that the government can force you to buy something. It shouldn't work that way, the government should tax marijuana, and give free health care to those that need it or, tax chinese imports.
If you study the history of health care in America most americans were never obese, never had cancer(s), etc. The problem today is that the corporations put toxic corn syrup in everything you eat, there has been huge amounts of nuclear weapons detonations within the past 60 years which many isotopes thereof have 250,000 year half lives and are bio-accumulative, meaning they lodge in your lungs, or GI track. Also the Fukushima disaster in Japan has 7 nuclear reactors melting down and dumping hundreds of tons of nuclear waste into the pacific ocean every day. People never used to eat the crap we eat today. No wonder everyone is sick. On top of it leave it to the banksters to create an economic crisis and they use every chance they can to push communistic feudal serfdom. This is it America, Government Education, Government Health care, ETC.
welcome to 1984
Alyssa I.
8:57 am on Saturday, June 30, 2012
A fear that big government will control our lives is a valid fear -- a feeling, which is something that cannot be measured. However, this is NOT the biggest tax increase in US History. The biggest tax in US can be measured by facts, by data, by math; it is not an opinion. (You can read up on it here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/28/rush-limbaugh/health-care-law-not-largest-tax-increase-us-histor/ ) How can one "feel", as this poll question reads, in a way that dismisses fact?
In my humble opinion, this poll, along with a lot of news media, perpetuates the belief in many Americans that it is OK to act so strongly, and sometimes speak so hurtfully, over issues one has done little effort to investigate in a scholarly manner.
NancyC
12:27 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." They further defined the "pursuit of happiness" as the right to have and enjoy the fruits of one's labors. We the people are the masters/creators of our government. No servant can/should be greater than his master. This health care bill, specifically the mandate that was found "constitutional" demands that each person buy a pair of shoes, whether they fit or not, or are needed or not, and if they refuse to buy that pair of shoes they must pay. Alyssa, this is fine with you?
It is an incredible overreach by the federal government that we the people have allowed. I will not stand for it. People can give to government only those powers as they themselves have in the first place. Here is an example: suppose Mr. Jones decides he needs an automobile but doesn't have the money to buy one. The Smith family next door has two cars, so Mr. Jones decides he is entitled to share in his neighbor's good fortune. Is he entitled to take his neighbor's car? If the Smiths wish to give it or lend it that is another question. But so long as the Smith family wished to keep its property, Mr. Jones has not just claim to it. If Mr. Jones has no power to take the Smith's car, can he delegate any such power to the sheriff? No. A person cannot delegate a power he does not have.
NancyC
12:35 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Even if everyone in the community desires that the Smiths give a car to the Jones, they have no right individually or collectively to force the Smiths to do it. What if they held a public vote on the issue? The answer is the same. Individuals cannot delegate a power to government they themselves do not have. "for nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in himself..." (John Locke) People should commit no act in the name of government which would be wrong for them to do as individuals. Remember those unaleinable rights we have/had? Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, to enjoy the fruits of our labors. When each of us, through those we elect consent to the adoption of a law we are specifically instructing the police/government to take either the life, liberty of property of anyone who disobeys that law. Most of the federal laws we are now enslaved by are not needed. Charity begins at home, here in our community, from our own families and hearts. We don't need laws that take from one to give to another determined to be in need from thousands of miles away. No this is too much. I haven't even begun to talk about rights of conscience.
Alyssa I.
11:47 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
This is not over a car or a pair of shoes which do not fit. (And to be noted: the ACA makes it easier for Americans to compare health insurance plans, thus allowing them to choose which FITS best.) This is about life -- LIFE, which you have quoted from The Declaration of Independence twice. It is in absolutely no way -- no shape or form -- fine with me for money or luck to determine if an individual lives or dies, has to choose between feeding their family or getting necessary care for their child, or has to make the touch decision between life-saving treatment and insurmountable debt. It would be wonderful (and I really mean this) if all people did good for others of the community, looked out for each other, and acted with their hearts and not their own gain. Behavior as described can be observed in small indigenous cultures, in incredibly tight-knit small towns/communities, in communes, and in other similar scenarios. I cannot see how putting faith in something like looking out for each other could work in a country as large as the USA.
Joseph Richard snodgrass
12:51 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Yea we have the right now deal with it you lost
Joseph Richard snodgrass
1:58 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
sorry for being harsh we have a right to all disagree friendly
Joseph Richard snodgrass
1:59 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
if it helps i dont agree with some of it or some of his laws
Jim R
8:00 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Obama is an immoral president who does not respect life or marriage. He would not even support a bill that would protect the life of a child who survived an abortion.
I do not want this man making any decisions about health care. We need him out of office. His HHS mandate is only one of the signs of what is to come.