a ruling striking down the mandate or the law might cause the Democratic base voters to work even harder to elect Democrats on November

I don't understand that with the latest combined poll shows 47% against it and 39% for it with more Americans opposed to the law why would that motivate the others............as the hard core left already is motivated as is the hard core right. The voters who decide this election are the independants and they don't like Obamacare as only 29% of them like it. I think if it said to be unconstitutional it is a hit on the President as it is his signature achievement.

Polls don't matter when it comes to constitutionality, which is good. I couldn't imagine the type of backward world we'd live in if the majority ruled.

We need health care reformation and not a health care law. This reformation should (hopefully) reduce the expense to health insurance policy holders. This should be the first step.

I, for one, don't need the courts decision to tell me how this will all end. If you look closely you can see the wood piled high on both sides. This verdict will start a fire that will not end to new years. It may not be the end of the world, but if we, as a people, are not carful it may truly be the end of a proud nation. I beg those of you who pray to do so and for those who don't hope that calmer heads prevail.

The government is trying to not destroy the health insurance industry and many peoples jobs and careers.

Many countries have government supported private health insurance.

The government is saying that you pay a health care tax (penalty); but, if you prefer, buy health insurance of your choice.

Today's system can not continue for much longer. Emergency room health care is too expensive for primary health care issues.

The government pays all claims for people 65 and over...and the private health insurance industry can not cover only the people 64 and under? If this is their calim not and refuse to support the current health care law; then they deserve the consequences (and the consequences are not far off in the future).

Polls don't matter when it comes to constitutionality

Actually in a way it does.......the poll of the 9 justices.........they will decide if it is constitutional.

If the law is struck down, Democrats will be furious, especially if its along political lines. Bush v. Gore, then Citizen United, and now this. For Democrats it will then be crucial to re-elect Obama so that he may have a chance to turn the court from the path of right wing activism.

If the law is struck down, Democrats will be furious, especially if its along political lines. Bush v. Gore, then Citizen United, and now this. For Democrats it will then be crucial to re-elect Obama so that he may have a chance to turn the court from the path of right wing activism.

You realize that most Americans oppose Obamacare and will celebrate it's downfall. Hardly a recipe for Democrat electoral success.

Whether the law stands or not - everyone understands that health care reforms are necessary. Reforming health care is NOT an option - it is a necessity.

If Obamacare is struck down - the decision will remove the only major obstacle to single payer, universal health care. If the individual mandate is found to be un-Constitutional - the Republicans will not be able to offer any market based alternatives. The Republicans will not be allowed to offer any market based transformation of any entitlement program. The Ryan budget would be null and void - it would be un-Constitutional. Striking down Obamacare simply means the era of 'personal responsibility' is over and cannot return.

If market based reforms, like Obamacare, are un-Constitutional -- which party do you believe can enact real reforms? What will Republicans be able to offer to reform anything? The Republicans may have won this battle only to lose the war ...

gtouch

I don't understand that with the latest combined poll shows 47% against it and 39% for it

Depends how you ask the question. If you ask "Do you support Obama Care" yes you get those results.

If you ask about the individual components, the numbers are very positive.

Republicans have successfully spun this one.

I hope they have an apple shoved in their face when we kick them out of the house.

Nerm

If Obamacare is struck down - the decision will remove the only major obstacle to single payer, universal health care. If the individual mandate is found to be un-Constitutional - the Republicans will not be able to offer any market based alternatives. The Republicans will not be allowed to offer any market based transformation of any entitlement program. The Ryan budget would be null and void - it would be un-Constitutional. Striking down Obamacare simply means the era of 'personal responsibility' is over and cannot return.

That is actually an excellent point... I had not thought of that, but you are right.

Once again, the Republicans do not see how this affects their other platforms. As usual, they view everything in a silo.

gtouch

a ruling striking down the mandate or the law might cause the Democratic base voters to work even harder to elect Democrats on November

I don't understand that with the latest combined poll shows 47% against it and 39% for it with more Americans opposed to the law why would that motivate the others............as the hard core left already is motivated as is the hard core right. The voters who decide this election are the independants and they don't like Obamacare as only 29% of them like it. I think if it said to be unconstitutional it is a hit on the President as it is his signature achievement.

I would agree with the assertion that this law falling would motivate the left. I wouldn't call myself "hard core left", but I do support single payer because it just seems most logical to me.

The individual mandate in the ACA seems like a particularly terrible compromise, and I would actually be happy if it got repealed if there were any chance that we would get another shot at this, politically. There is zero political will on either side to write another healthcare law, so if this gets pitched I'd say we're screwed for a decade.

marlen101917 We have to make cuts to those programs they cost to much.

Eric, activism is for your side. Just look at the Justices who are for it, all very far left. The right cares about the Law. Like not using the Commerse Clause for health insurance, because you could not get 1 Republican vote and needed 60 so why not try to circumvent the process because were so smart. HAAAAAA!

It was the fascist left wing court that said it was constitutional for government to steal your land and give it to a rich developer so they could collect more taxes. The court is now centrist, it only appears right wing to the radical left.

For way too long liberals have been legislating from the bench, totally subverting the constitution. This is one court that is balanced with the majority being strict constitutionalists. That means exactly what it says, they will adhere strictly to the constitution.

The Bush/Gore was not only correct, it was born out in a massive recount sponsored by five liberal newspapers. Under every count scenario Gore wanted, Bush won.

The Florida supreme court was violating it's own constitution, and the feds put a stop to it, period.

The law of the land has been that corporations are treated as citizens. Under that condition, the court had no choice but to grant free speech rights. If you don't like it, change the law that makes them citizens, don't trash the court for following the constitution.

ACA becomes more popular all the time. People like that their children with pre-existing conditions can now get care along with youth up to age 26 that can stay on their parent's policies.

Health care reform and insuring all Americans is important. Republicans seem to forget that.

And yet, THIS is what will determine Obama's legacy? He killed bin Laden, saved the automobile industry, ended the Iraq War, repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell, saved us from becoming Greece, and, most of all, was the first black president in the history of this country. Plenty of presidents have tried to pass health care (Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, and Clinton to name a few), and he was the one to actually do something. Screw the GOP, and forget the naysayers, he may not have been one of the greats, but he was damn good at his job.

Eric, Whats important is the insuring of all Americans Constitionally!

If the ACA act is struck down, will Romneycare be next?

Will there be the same challenges to Romneycare?

How will Romney handle being labelled 'unconstitutional'?

Fascism comes from the right, not the left.

The fascist rulings by the "strict constitutionalists" (aka right wing activist judges) have clearly made a mess of elections given citizens united. Corporations are not people and the ruling overturned 100 years of settled law.

Had the 2 counties been part of the final recount (which the right wing activists in the supreme court stopped) Gore would have had an additional 665 votes and would have won.

Democrats no how to protest and this will surely rally the base if its struck down.

@Geo, the mandate was constructed by the Republican party that now abhors it.

@geo:

If that is true, then prohibition would have never been overturned. You know, the amendments and what not.

Princess

Our military killed Bin Laden. President Obama just happen to reside in the White House at the time.

President Obama screwed many average American bond holders when he gave Gm to the unions.

President Obama oversaw the Bush plan for the end of the Iraq war.

President Obama got rid of DADT, a Democrat Congress written and Democrat President signature into law.

We don't know yet if we will end up like Greece. 4 more years of the same and we just might.

Who gives a rats ass what color our President is? But let's call him a white black man. Just like that white hispanic the left wants to string up right now.

JustSlapMe

There is a big difference between Federal Government mandates and State laws.

@IndieParty -- Striking down the individual mandate means that government cannot coerce citizens to purchase any commodity on the marketplace. The only Constitutional choice would be to purchase benefits and services directly from the government - either through fees or taxes.

Striking down Obamacare entirely will simply mean that health care is a commodity. The government can only offer the commodity as a benefit provided by government - or - not provide a benefit. The 'free market' is completely removed from the equation. The question then becomes whether lack of access to that commodity denies citizens an equitable opportunity to participate in the economy and society. The role of government, according to our founding documents, is to remove any such obstacles.

The Republicans can no longer use the politics of 'personal responsibility' because they cannot coerce citizens to participate in the marketplace. A Republican 'victory' with Obamacare completely destroys the Reagan politics of 'personal responsibility'.

Wow, so many opinions, so little education. Fascism is based in right-wing nationalist-identity politics. Why can they not admit this? We admit that the far left brings communism, why can't they admit the far right (authoritarian right) brings fascism? It's not that complicated.

Second, you "strict constitutionalists" people don't seem to understand what that means. It doesn't mean they follow the constitution, it means they follow the constitution as if nothing had changed since 1789, exactly as the founders would interpret it. The "left wing" judges also follow the constitution, but they believe (as do I ) that it's a living, breathing document that can be re-interpreted based on the time you live in.

Did they stop teaching Civics or History in High School or something?

@JH:

He is the commander in chief of our armed forces, therefore he gave the order to the SEAL's to capture or kill him.

Hundreds of thousands of jobs would have been lost if he didn't do anything to GM.

If McCain was elected, I bet you there would've been a chance that we would still be there.

His signature was all we needed to repeal DADT. Therefore, he repealed DADT.

Our economy is improving, unlike the crisis over in Europe.

Again, first black president. That is what will be seen as historic in twenty years.

Constitutionality may have nothing to do with it.

Supreme Court justices have decided before just to go with their pesonal preferences and ignore the law.

It wouldn't be the first time.

Democrats? Republicans? Independent voters are the major swing block... needing health care too. So this one ideology fits all solution doesn't work, for if it did there wouldn't be so many independent voters. Affordable health care means not jacking up medical care costs to pay for mega hospitals which stand mostly empty because smaller care clinics have moved to malls and grocery outlets, where the "middle class " gravitate to. Affordable health care must account for preventative health care too... the rise in price of fresh fruit and vegetables, and other healthy food and exercise choices. How much of my "personal health insurance cost " is going to someone else's not so healthy choices. or to some extremely rare debilitating disease or disorder which is hardly understood let alone treatable, but who's care is mandated by a medical ethic based on religion not science. ( The Right to Die question. )

I'm skepticism of the Conservative Justices going back to what they did in 2000 with "W" putting a interloper in the White House. I hope they don't make another mistake like "W"

“Do you not have a heavy burden of justification?”

If the idiot can't answer a question that direct by saying "we will meet whatever Constitutional burden you care to levy on us" he shouldn't even be in the room.

The government can require us to give up our lives in time of war, they can require us to pay for all kinds of taxes, they can require us to buy insurances of several kinds, but they can't require us to pay for our own healthcare?!?! Since when is healthcare considered "creating" commerce?

I understand that many people do not like "Obamacare." ( I truly hate that term.) I don't see how it could be otherwise given the level of propaganda they've been fed. However, I fail to see anything unconstitutional in it. Now, if you don't like the health care law and you really want to significantly alter the system, abolish health care insurance altogether. Forbid it. Outlaw it. That'll shake things up.

Ruken

Polls don't matter when it comes to constitutionality, which is good. I couldn't imagine the type of backward world we'd live in if the majority ruled.

Damn straight! We need a king!

I hope it doesn't These liberal idiots took more than a year to write and enact the ACA but they never read what they were going to pass. Pelosi's excuse was you can read the law until you pass it. That has to be dumbest statement from a US representative in the last 100 years. She was basically saying they had not reviewed what they were trying to inact into law. With the number of states that are against this bill, if the Justices support it, you will have states backing away from the federal government, and the last time that happened was in 1861 and it was devastating for the nation.

@Black.Knight:

Wait, so are you saying it is plausible that many states are going to secede from the union if the SCOTUS rules for it?

I didn't object to the RULING in Bush v Gore so much as the lack of law or jurisprudence involved. The majority opinion looked like it was written without even so much as a cursory reading of the lower court's ruling that it swept aside.

And the Court had the temerity to admit it by saying "this should never be used as precedent", in violation of every principle of English Common Law.

Citizens United is just another way of saying "fat cats rule", and "what Constitution?"

@Valhalla Phil, Eric-913730 & We can do it

Actually Fascism is neither right or left. It is simply the ideal of a nation being ruled by a one party system controlled by said nations "elite". So that being said both the left and right have those they consider their elite.

As for where it comes from I would agree with Eric and We can do it. Italy's Fascist parties "elite" were that countries wealthy conservatives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

I'm sure Pelosi has said my others to compete with that one. At least it's being debated by the full (Kagan should recuse herself but didn't), bipartisan (liberals and conservatives) court behind closed doors. Quite different from the democrats development of the bill.

Fact: Three of the judges vote the Republican party line, no exceptions, ever.

Fact: Two of the other judges vote with the Republican party line, usually.

Fact: The remaining four judges vary a lot, but tend towards supporting liberty and progressive causes more often than not.

Conclusion: the law will be overturned, causing health care costs to skyrocket as confused insurance companies, HMO's and hospitals all scramble to profit from the chance to increase their billing of patients, which is why President Obama was working on this issue three and a half years ago.

• The fix is in for the $$$ interests as long as the court in the pocket of big money.

princess, you are the perfect example of a product of our media. you believe that Obama took out Bin Laden, and you believe that Obama ended the war in Iraq.

now you believe that Obama will be our health care savior. well, obviously you are a big fan, and that is fine, nothing wrong with that. but you need to really take a good look at what you read, hear, and see from our public media and educational system. don't believe everything you read, for most are biased and have an agenda.

it is absolutely amazing to me that you, and all your supporter friends believe the propaganda. but that is what our current administration has been VERY good at, targeting the youth of our country. now they are in full swing with campaign strategies. the president that you are such a big fan of, he better be a little more careful around those hot mics...

unbelievable that he was caught with an open mic, trying to convince a person of foreign power to lay low, and not bring up a certain sore subject until after his last election, his most important and final campaign. What a scandal, that is the stuff of movies right there.

You, and your facebook friends need to wake up. The rest of the world is much different than your bedroom window.

"The five Conservative Justices, are they Citizens" ????????????????????????????????????

Fascist

From Merriman-Webster

a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

You can go to any dictionary any where, before the heavy use of the internet, and that is what you will find.

Fascism can be EITHER party. The Health Care Law would be a good example of Fascism. It forces everyone into a system of committees that tell you

You have to purchase insurance or be fined

Demands employers provide insurance to you (from the exchange) or be fined

where you can purchase your insurance from (government exchanges - the only place you can purchase insurance.

Through the exchanges, dictate to the insurance industry what type of coverage the insurance has to provide (actually dictates a minimum cost AND maximum cost)

Has committees that will decide what medications and treatments doctors are permitted to

Has committees to decide if you can get your health insurance for free, or at a reduced cost, how much the cost should be reduced to you, and if you get the best plan in effect punish you by making you pay even more than what a premium plan will cost.

As costs still increase - the system will eventually cut costs by not providing services to people based on their age.

Now according to dictionary.com

fas·cist

   /ˈfæʃ ɪst/ Show Spelled[fash-ist] Show IPA

noun
1.
a person who believes in or sympathizes with fascism.

2.
( often initial capital letter ) a member of a fascist movement or party.

3.
a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views.

Most people today use dictionary.com. Who wrote this? You better find out, because they are changing definitions to ones of a particular political ideology. By using their "free" source - they are not educating you (notice the definition is drastically narrowed and simplified, but indoctrinating you to the very narrow negative view they want you to have.

Varilli is a Phd from Columbia. Because he has succumbed to indoctrination - he looked like a total fool Monday by being cornered into arguing ideology to try to overcome the precedent and order of law.

“We’re going to pay the price of this Supreme Court for a generation,” Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., lamented back in 2008

Again, we're seeing MSNBC push their own liberal political agenda by going back 4 years to quote Schumer who has shown more hatred for the Constitution, ( and is perhaps one of the greatest dangers to it) than
literally any other member of congress! Please retire Chuck! Congress may stink but the center of the stench emanates from you!

marlen101917

Check out Romney's plans for deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare should he be elected:

I can only hope that means that he will also, equally reduce that same amount that is deducted for SSi and Medicare from your paychecks as well.

mike-1125760-- Personally the doom and gloom talk turns me off. The current system is broken, and the Teapublicans have no solution other than a more severe version of the same broken system (hey, let's end Medicare and throw old people to the private insurance wolves!). What if progressives, and moderates for that matter, join together to give the Dems a filibuster-proof 60 vote congress again to get a single-payer system in place?

The reason the president didn't go the single-payer route is because he is too much about compromise, but inevitability we end up with watered-down or flawed bills that don't fix the problem (Dodd-Frank too -- We need Glass-Steagall). With this lesson learned, we need the will to make real changes. It may need to be phased in, but health care needs to be single-payer.

Just reelect the president and give him a congress that will work with him, and heck that will work with each other.

Jake Turner

marlen101917 We have to make cuts to those programs they cost to much.

What's with the right-wing and "black and white" thinking? Have you no ability for creative or critical thinking "outside the box" in which there are many other possibilities? For example, why not increase the current cap on FICA with-holding, and means test, and negotiate with Big Pharma for lower drug costs, etc.? Do you only think about eating mac n cheese, or do you think about getting a raise, maybe a better job? The only solution is to eat less, really? Gees!

geo-1957883

Eric, activism is for your side. Just look at the Justices who are for it, all very far left

Your first problem is you need to become informed, starting with reading other posts before you post. Did you not see this?

Eric-913730

If the law is struck down, Democrats will be furious, especially if its along political lines. Bush v. Gore, then Citizen United, and now this.

Name what the so-called activist liberal judges have passed to prove they are legislating from the bench. You can't, but we can name at least two from right-wing judges, with Citizen's United overturning a century of precedence.

We need to reelect the president, and then elect a Dem in 2016, if for no other reason than preventing additional right-wing appointments to the SCOTUS. -- Obama/Biden - 2012!

Survival of the fittest, natures way. Socialism, leftists way. Which way will doom human kind to extinction?????????

Haha, nope, both ways will. One just sooner than the other.

The democrats will be furious!!! Who cares? The democrats and republicans are "tempests in teapots", independents determine the outcome of elections.

A few years back I read a book by a well recognized author regarding the back room deals that go on in the supreme court. It sounded just like a lot of the same political posturing that goes on in the halls of the legislative branch. And of course we all know of the deal making that goes on in the executive branch. Basically, it comes down to none of the three branches that were intended to serve as a checks-and-balances system of government are really independent. They all sell out to the best compromise.

It will be curious to know whether the "swing" justice will vote his conscience or "sell out" for some future case or is he already "in debt" for a past vote.

"Health Care is a Priority, not a Political game"

Fascism, as constituted by its creators, was centrist, as they hated both the far left and the far right. Its only true characteristics were extreme authoritarianism and extreme nationalism, traits that have been exhibited by governments across the political spectrum.

Perhaps it's time we stopped allowing arguments to devolve into argumentum ad fascerum, and played a little nicer?

Healthcare obviously has LOTS of problems. It cost too much and too many cannot afford it. However, this botched piece of legislation was NOT a fix. It was the result of pandering to way too many lobbies and merely shifted the problems. Sure, the insurance companies jumped onboard, because the individual mandate FORCED Americans to buy their products. The AARP bought on so they could make a billion dollars pushing gap insurance policies to the elderly (talk about an organization fleecing those it portends to represent!) Doc Fix was put in to get doctors onboard. Even specific legislators were thrown bones to get them to help push it over the line. In the end, you had a camel (a horse designed by a committee) that served a few constituents very well, but screwed the American taxpayer (isn't that always the way it is with democrats?).

Congress should wipe the slate clean and start over with the involvement of both parties to start finding some REAL solutions. How do we REALLY cut costs? Focus on the actual cost of care, not just who is paying for it. Enhance competition. But don't toss out freedom and don't have the government dictating to citizens what they MUST spend their after tax income on.

You realize that most Americans oppose Obamacare and will celebrate it's downfall.

Of course, it all depends on how "Obamacare" is described. If you ask people if they think that insurance companies should be required to insure everyone, even if pre-existing conditions, or if dependents should be allowed to be on their parent's plan until age 26, a lot (huge majority, probably) of people will say "yes." But, removing the pre-existing coverage restriction is only possible with the individual mandate.

What I find funny is my Blue Cross plan cost $350 a month just for me, with a $5,000 deductible, and I still had to pay SSI and Medicare on every dollar I earned for every hour of everyday, of every week of every year for the last 30 + years.........and Romney wants to cut SSI Disability and Medicare that is my money to begin with........does he not get it?????.

In CA, we can bring any issue to a vote provided it gathers enough signatures. The one rule is that any proposition can only address one issue.

Why can't Congress do something similar at the federal level? No more funding for the military tied to abortion rights or whatever goes on with the dealing. In this scenario, I think it'd have been much more palatable had the pieces been broken out. It would've given more transparency at the very least. If all or part of the law gets struck down, this approach should be considered when healthcare gets brought back to the forefront.

DB Akron -- No. Try as you may to spin this, no -- fascism is a right-wing phenomenon.

It really refers to Mussolini. Now, there has been confusion, for example Nazism, which is a form of fascism and power-hungry individuals like Hitler who use populist (or liberal) rhetoric to come to power. But once in power, the government quickly reverts to some form of a right-wing dictatorship.

Come on, pro-military is liberal? Nationalism, which includes symbolism, for example obsession with lapel flag pins are not like obsession with the Swastika? Technically pro-corporatism is fascism too, and what Party is pro Big Business?

Not to mention you cherry picked definitions (imagine that). You may note the cross-over in definitions for right-wing, conservative, and fascism:

In politics, the Right, right-wing and rightist has been defined as the acceptance of social hierarchy.^[1][2][3] Inequality is viewed by the Right as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,^[4] whether it arises within social structures that value order, status, and traditional social differences,^[5]or within market economies which value private property, free enterprise, and capitalism as the only economic model that can preserve freedom.^[6][7]

Man, that sounds like Romney, huh?

con·serv·a·tive

   /kənˈsɜr vətɪv/ Show Spelled[kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv] Show IPA

adjective

1.
disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

Another common definition for conservative is the status quo. Now here is the definition for fascism you didn't share:

fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/

Noun:

1. An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
2. (in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Did ya see that? The word "right-wing" right there. This definition was at the top of my search.

Muslim terrorists and Chinese party elite making a decision behind closed doors? I sure hope those 9 unelected mullahs and chairmen can screw this up as much as possible.

I would like to comment on the Welfare state that we are becoming. ACA states that anyone below 133% of the poverty line will get Medicaid. That means that a family of five that makes $26170 year will nearly qualify. A family of four that has the same income simply has to have a kid. Likewise down the line.

Now, 133% of 26170 is $34810

Currently 35% of the population has a household income of $35000 or less. That means that it is very conceivable that 35% of US households will be on Medicaid. A much larger number than the government forecast due to peoples incomes dropping compared to when the bill was passed. Now, I can guarantee instead of paying for insurance a large number of people will drop their income or have kids to qualify for free health care, and the more that do, the higher rates will be for those that pay the bills.

This law is not the answer.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/11fedreg.shtml

http://www.mybudget360.com/plundering-the-middle-class-35-percent-of-american-households-live-on-35000-or-less/

If the individual mandate is declare unconstitutional , Obamacare is over, regardless what is left. Liberals will cry aloud demanding "occupy" the Supreme Court. The 2 liberal judicial activist nominated for Obama will support Obamacare, Ginsburs another liberal who don't beleve in our constitution and Judge Breyer will go along, the other five are not convinced of the constituonality of the individual mandate, we will see what they rule.

But, but, but....the final question, the 800lb gorilla question, how do you pay for it?

Medicare and Medicaid take taxes and they're almost insolvent. They don't cover 100% of the population, they cover maybe a third, if that. Obamacare raised taxes, it was (and if passed) will be the largest tax hike in American history. Across the board and we can't even cover Social Security and Medicare with our taxes but we will cover all Americans with this? Really? Mandate that everyone has insurance, great. Those who can't pay for it now, will suddently grow rich overnight? Oh, no problem, the government will pay for them. WTF? What fairytale land do the bill supporters live in? It sounds great, insure the uninsured, cover kids til they're 26 (an age when most should be on their own, but that is another story)and all this largesse is coming from raising taxes...on the rich, presumably.

@oskar: Yes, those Chinese will be crying, but remember all the crying the Muslims who call themselves Republicans have been doing up to now. Its enough to make a burqua shrink!

Fils d'Artemis -- Unfortunately, since low-information voters think for-profit health care provided by the private sector is "socialized medicine," we have to get into these arguments about the what terms like this mean.

Bruce-308647 -- I agree with a lot of your post. However... I have no faith in Teapublicans to cooperate, let alone doing so in good faith.

If you don't want "the government dictating to citizens what they MUST spend their after tax income on" (which includes expensive car seats for babies to emissions tests and so forth), then I suggest you contact your Teapublican representatives about mandates regarding drug tests or ultrasounds. These not only are medically unnecessary, but the individuals are forced to do it and pay for it as well.

So there is a large credibility gap due to non-stop hypocrisy when it comes to the mandate--which was originally a Republican/Heritage Foundation idea FOR individual responsiblity rather than medical bills being picked up by the state (Charity Fund).

I currently pay an insurance company 598$ a month. I'd gladly convert that to a government funding healthcare in a heart beat. All striking down the republicans mandate is going to accomplish is that come November, we will vote in a much larger democratic majority and with that, it will open the door to simply bring back the original democratic public options mandate. The democrats should have left it in to begin with and let the five conservative democrats vote with their republican sponsors and vote it down and used that as further ballast for this Novembers elections.

If this fails the Repubics will try to pass the no law suit for doctors to reduce the price of medical care plus reduce the medicare and medicaid payments for the elderly to cut costs. So when you are wronged by some doctor you get nothing for his malpractice and negligence. And they get to push the eldery off the cliff to make room for others

So if they say "Obamacare" is unconstitutional then I guess "Romneycare" would be unconstitutional also given the fact that it has the individual mandate just as "Obamacare". And we better get to repealing the Governor's signature piece of legislation ASAP, that would have to be somewhat embarrassing right before an election when he was running on his record as governor.

It's funny how this is a republican plan straight out of the Heartland Institute and yet they act as though it is the end of the world now that a Democrat put it forth.

Strange how everyone in the world loves President Obama except for Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the GOP!

Aw TP, @1.56

You know better...

fascism is a right-wing phenomenon

You know as well as I do that Fascism is a term for totalitarian, authoritarian control. It doesn't matter where is evolves from and can just as well evolve from Leftist sources as Rightist sources.

Perfect example is the German and Italian Fascisti of the '30's

the Germans representing the Socialist Statist path, the Italians the Capitalist Statist path.

To allude that Fascism is only a right wing phenomenae is sophistry in the extreme

Lets not forget that there are a lot of liberal socialist statist authoritarians out there in history land, Mao, Stalin, Castro, Chavez, Marx, Lenin and the like.

Seeing as Goldman-Sachs is as big business as it gets, and it doesn't matter to them who is in power either Republicans or Democrats, they are supported by both, and creditable argument can be made that they control both.

Thus this statement,

Technically pro-corporatism is fascism too, and what Party is pro Big Business?

Is also sophistry in the extreme also because BOTH parties are pro Big Business.

Just because we do not agree on political philosophies, does not mean we are stupid.

I still don't understand how they could strike this down as unconstitutional without striking down social security as well? As a self-employed person, I am ordered by the government to pay double what everyone else does into social security. How is that constitutional and the healthcare mandate unconstitutional? '

@rrobeson -- Social Security is not a private sector commodity. The government provides a direct benefit - and - you pay for the benefit through taxes to the government.

The arguments from both sides of the health care issue is that health care is a private sector commodity. Since health care is considered a commodity, the question is if the government has Constitutional authority (through regulating commerce) to require the private sector to provide a direct benefit. The government does not provide the direct benefit, as it does with Social Security. The law regulates a private sector commodity - and - requires you to pay the private sector for any benefit you receive.

The differences between Social Security and the health care law is who provides the direct benefit and who receives the fees (or taxes) for providing the benefit.

The government operated Social Security works. The private sector operated health care law is unproven, at best. The arguments against the health care law are based on fear that the private sector cannot provide a direct benefit as well as the government does.

Actually 'Sic-n-tired', the facts are three of the Justices are extremely conservative and vote that way consistently, four of the Justices are extremely liberal and vote that way consistently, both sides of which have made majority rulings that make a mockery of true liberty for their own sides causes. Two of the justices left side with both the right and left depending on the issue, though only slightly more often for the right, particularly one of them.

As far as health care costs skyrocketing, that's exactly what the PPACA is causing all on its own even with the threatened mandate coming down the line.

The only way to really fix the system is to deregulate, get individuals making informed decisions in a real competitive market, shopping for their own insurance rather than having the cost of it obfuscated by just being work benefits, and shopping around for the best quality care at the lowest cost when it comes to real health care, mostly with insurance covering catastrophic injury. The health insurance market has been so perverted and distorted by government policy its no wonder to anyone with an understanding of economics why it works so poorly. No government fiat system from which you can not escape even if you want to can fix that, it will only make it worse while setting the country on a path to bankruptcy.

As far as the difference between Social Security and the PPACA individual mandate, the main difference is that Social Security is funded through taxes, Congress has the expressly enumerated authority to levy taxes. The individual mandate is not a tax, it is a penalty designed to force individual *into* a market they are not otherwise in, in order to gain the ability to regulate them through interstate commerce. It is not a power Congress has, and is an gross expansion from any precedent ever allowed by Supreme Court as Constitutional before.

Derek, @1.57,

Muslim terrorists and Chinese party elite making a decision behind closed doors? I sure hope those 9 unelected mullahs and chairmen can screw this up as much as possible.

I agree, but I do have to point out one thing, they probably can't screw it up any more than the 600+ some odd party aparatchiks already have..... ;-0)

For all of you debating about Fascism. It's the hard core socialist left. So left that if you looked at a political spectrum as a circle, they would be so left that it would seem to be next to extreme right. Do not mix up conservatives with extreme religious believers.

Keep health care the same?

Well, that's been working so well. No reason to improve it.

Yeah right.

No matter how this court rules, we will have a government run, universal, single payer, health care system in this country. Otherwise, the nation collaspes. The hodge podge mess presently in place, with costs skyrocketing, quality care for the general population diminishing, and the continuing revelations of rampant corruption at all junctures of the collective industry of medical arts, cannot be tolerated, nor can it be monetarily sustained. Additionally, Employers do not need the cost and burden of carrying health care for their employees, nor can they. The whole damn system is presently, totally out of control.

Wyomingliberal:

Boy, sad state of affairs when Wyoming is producing liberals!

Anyway, you are delusional to think "everyone" in the world loves Obama! Are you f-in kidding? Half Americans dislike or hate him. And we don't much care about the rest of the world. Sure some countries like him - because he takes their position. This o-bomination is neither an American in mind, heart or soul!

This disgrace, as he said himself, wants to fundamentally change America. We got news for him - most Americans love their country and are just fine with it continuing to be what it has been and will be after November 2nd. The best and brightest of the world - and yes, superior. Just how many countries butts have we saved? I'm beginning to think we should have let some of them fall.

Mac Forrester:

No matter how this court rules, we will have a government run, universal, single payer, health care system in this country. Otherwise, the nation collaspes.

WRONG! Government running the health care system is what would collapse the nation. You might want to take a look at the economy of England. It is is shambles because or their entitlements, mainly healthcare.

Hell, women die of breast cancer in England because the government will not pay for some of the wonderful treatments because they are too expensive.

Sorry Mac, the government is already much to entrenched in our lives. I have excellent health insurance and I certainly don't want crap government parceled out health care. No, I'll make my own decisions, thank you very much. I don't need bug eye Pelosi or limp as a noddle Reid deciding if I get an MRI or not.

The government can never do anything equal to the private sector as good for the same amount of less. You might want to take note of the mess government run Medicare and Social Security is in. Are you totally clueless to what's going on in those government run programs? Apparently so.

Nobody owes you free health insurance - just like nobody owes you free car, homeowners, earthquake, flood, life, etc. insurance. Or do you think the givers should be giving that to the takers too?!

@Hopeful: You don't mean Liberals, you mean Chinese. And I know what you mean! Wyoming is the state of Republicans Muslims!

Behind closed doors, high court weighs 'Obamacare'

HA HA..."Obamacare" was CREATED "behind closed doors".....LOL

Obamacare sounds like Utopia!!! I can't wait! But of course everything our government gets involved in always becomes cheaper and simpler and easy to access with no hassles, unlike what we experience in the private sector, which is driven by the greed of the one percenters. I always hate how the private sector makes it so difficult to do business with them, unlike the government, which is always a quick, hassle-free, in-and-out. Our politicians, who will be in charge of allocating our health care dollars, will never be driven by petty politics or personal gain! Finally, people I can trust to make my health care decisions for me! Utopia!

But remember, we are Americans. We are smarter than everyone else in the world that gets his or her government more and more involved in health care. We will never ration health care because we have greedy, wealthy one percenters to tax, who will gladly provide an endless supply of money to fund all our needs. Sucks to be the rest of the (poor) world! We will never have long waiting periods for medical treatment, that would be un-American and our politicians said that would never happen! Doctors, and all health care providers, will love this new partnership with our benevolent, caring government, they will never want to leave the profession! There will be more doctors than ever before! I just thought of something, what am I going to do with all the extra money I will save on health care as the President has promised? Oh joy! I see a new fishing boat in my future! Let's all hope the Supreme Court does not allow the outdated U.S. Constitution to stand in the way of our future health care Utopia! Oh happy day!

JPM77 -

As far as health care costs skyrocketing, that's exactly what the PPACA is causing all on its own even with the threatened mandate coming down the line.

The health insurance market has been so perverted and distorted by government policy its no wonder to anyone with an understanding of economics why it works so poorly

The only way to really fix the system is to deregulate, get individuals making informed decisions in a real competitive market

The elements of PPACA that affect costs have not been phased in yet. The costs are indeed exploding, but that is driven solely by the private sector. For example, the costs of health insurance premiums have risen nearly 20% since last year, and yet demand has not increased significantly.

The health insurance industry exists, and that is the reason the market cannot control costs. If I buy a new sofa, I can expect to pay anywhere between $800 and $2000; I can also shop until I find the best deal on a sofa I can afford. Because the costs are affected by supply and demand, and I can always choose where I get my sofa, I can get a reasonable deal on a sofa thanks to the private marketplace.

But the health insurance industry eliminates the market’s built-in controls. For example:

The standard markup on aspirin in a hospital is over 176,000% ABOVE RETAIL. At that markup, my $800 sofa would cost $1,408,800 and my $2000 sofa would cost $3,522,000. If I had a “sofa insurance” policy, they would cover the costs, driving premiums up for all policyholders. But without the existence of a “sofa insurance industry”, my costs would go right back down as the free market drove the costs down.

But as long as my “sofa insurance” covers the costs, I don’t have to worry about the markup, because the cost of the sofa isn’t coming out of MY pocket. If I had to actually PAY for that sofa, the free market would regulate the cost via supply and demand.

The health insurance industry should not be “deregulated”, it should be eliminated.

"Sofas" and "asprin".....take another toke dude....good grief

There is a simple explanation for why American health care costs so much more than health care in any other country: because we pay so much more for each unit of care. If you leave everything else the same the volume of procedures, the days we spend in the hospital, the number of surgeries we need but plug in the prices Canadians pay, our health-care spending falls by about 50 percent.

This why American needs to phrase these out the bottom I listed graduately.

Tremendous leadership by President Obama, in setting goals, but letting Congress work out the details of a final plan. "Any plan," he said, should have "four major components parts: access, quality, coverage, and cost control." Although he opposes a "public option," as such he makes Congressional Quarterly panel discussion as "favoring anything that leads to a "pathway for covering the uninsured.

1) Physicians and hospitals in America are compensated at a rate three times higher than their colleagues in other developed countries .

2) Pharmaceuticals sold in the U.S. are priced double because American prices are just plain higher.

3) U.S. insurance companies are run as for profit businesses while their cousins in other countries are mostly not for profit.

4) The labyrinth of administrative overhead today unnecessarily consumes one out of every four health care dollars.

5) Frequently cited problem of malpractice lawsuits. Although litigation itself consumes only about one percent of health care costs, the fear of being sued encourages defensive medicine. Extra unneeded tests and procedures nationally are responsible for up to nine percent of the total national medical bill.

Because of the above ,I'm applause the Prisident Obama heading towards the RIGHT direction as first step.



commonsense....

"The government can require us to give up our lives in time of war, they can require us to pay for all kinds of taxes, they can require us to buy insurances of several kinds, but they can't require us to pay for our own healthcare?!?! Since when is healthcare considered "creating" commerce?"

Health care itself most likely would not be considered commerce, however the purchase of health insurance from private companies quite clearly is. Health care and health insurance are two very different things. The federal government can not require us to purchase insurance, only state and local government has the power to do that. If the law was based on a tax/credit system instead of a mandate there would be no question of it's constitutionality.

Maybe in the future they should read things before signing them.

If we thought health care was in trouble before, oh my gosh, now we have this mess going on. Maybe we could get a president who between golf games, vacations and appearances on late night talk shows might just try to run the country with some genuine thought of the result of his actions. Nobody on Capitol Hill gives a rats behind because it will never affect them. Votes, it's all about votes. And sadly most Americans aren't thinking this whole thing through. We need a little Six Sigma in government. Not more talk show appearances. I don't see a dang thing Obama has done and hope he is not my president for another 4 years.

' “For the court to strike down this law would be to presume the powers of the Congress and abandon its role as an impartial and deliberate decider of constitutional law," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. Wednesday.'

What a silly statement - In effect, he's saying that the Supreme Court has no right to determine whether a law is constitutional, and that Congress, by a majority of the votes, should be able to do anything they wish - including trampling on the rights of minorities.

Did this Senator ever take a civics class?

Hopeful American#1.75: About as "ass backward" a post as I have ever read. Government does many things better than the private sector. Insurance companies are just one of those various proofs. We owe ourselves the peace of mind that comes with adequate health care for all, and whether you like it or not, we will have it. No longer a matter of whether or not we will, It's now a matter of when.

I, for one, don't need the courts decision to tell me how this will all end. If you look closely you can see the wood piled high on both sides. This verdict will start a fire that will not end to new years. It may not be the end of the world, but if we, as a people, are not carful it may truly be the end of a proud nation. I beg those of you who pray to do so and for those who don't hope that calmer heads prevail.

Me, too! I've worried about this sort of thing ever since the Red State/Blue State divide in 2000. This country is SO polarized, and reading these posts you can see the heavy villification of "the other side," but the article itself read like a THREAT from Dems if Obamacare gets overturned. Could that be the match that leads to a 2nd Civil War??? I PRAY that both of us are wrong about that.

fas·cism

   /ˈfæʃ ɪzəm/ Show Spelled[fash-iz-uhm] Show IPA

noun

1.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc.,

I saw a couple of people arguing over fascism whether it is right or left. Let me see is says fascism is a dictator who regiments all industry and........COMMERCE.......isn't that what Obamacare is all about? I'm pretty sure the word COMMERCE is at the heart of this law and this hearing. Now I'm not saying Obama is fascist but in this instance his stance is closer to the definition than the opposing side.

The debate on Obamacare obscures the obvious which is; as government attempts to provide all things to everyone (healthcare, food stamps, welfare, subsidies, credits for pretty much everything, etc.) we are discovering that we can no longer afford ourselves, the inevitable result of a society on a gradual but steady march towards Socialism.

This realization is already apparent to the progressive left which is why they continue with their class warfare rhetoric. If successful, the poor will remain poor and the formerly wealthy will join them in poverty.

The end result will be a socialist state where poverty, rationing, and despair will become the norm.

Wet Willy

Soylent Green

The ACA is the result of Republican law makers having their amendments and retractions to the original bill. Understand, simple ones, that the democratic version of the bill included a single payer system managed by the government that would put limits on profits for Health insurers and would remove them from the game if they did not play accordingly. The 2700 pages of hogwash are the results of harry reid allowing Republican BS to be incorporated into the bill.

Oh please, enough with your drama ... limited profits of insurers and elimination of "bad players" is still in the passed bill ... as if those provisions are not primed for abuse and bribery and a huge source of concern for any sensible thinking American who believes in private business rights and that still more ability for government to influence private business and vice-versa is a recipe for still more disaster.

Many liberals are commenting that this case is about the ACA and it isn't. This SCOTUS discussion is about the legality of the commerce clause as it pertains to legislation enacted by that Constitutional scholar, the President and his merry band of dysfunctional Progressives.

The Republick game plan will backfire on them. Kill the ACA, which is their idea to begin with, to replace it with what? Personal responsibility in a "market based" solution. The only reason the Dems adopted it is because it was the only thing that they thought the Republicks would go along with. Alas, those traitors decided defeating Obama and the Dems is all that matters. This bill was debated and hashed out for over a year and actually many decades. It was only taken over by the Dems when the other side resorted to all manner of delay, offering the "endless amendments" for which The Speaker had to say frustratingly" you have to pass it to see whats in it" comment, quite realistically. Now the SC(R)OTUS will seek their "activist judgeship" role and the people will lose. So will the Republicks.

ask Massachusetts how they're liking RomneyCare... Last I heard it was something like 98% approval or something...

Hey Conservatives: THIS WAS A CONSERVATIVE IDEA IN THE FIRST PLACE TO FIX A REAL PROBLEM!!!

The only reason it's hated by the moonbats now is because Obama is associated with it! Ridiculous!!! (and I thought the Supreme Court was above all this political nonsense... lol)

Simple answer, those who want single payer are taxed for it and must fund it 100%. Those who do not, are not taxed and must pay their own way. You get one chance to opt in or out. Hospitals are then allowed to refuse admittance to anyone who is either not covered or can't pay their own way up front. Children are held to the choice their parent chooses until they are 18 when they are presented with a one time chance to opt in or out.

Why this Mandate Program is good for Americans, HealthCare is very complicated issues in many aspects as it turned it politically.

1) President Obama is in the stage of planning to fight ,The Expensive Health-Care Cost ,but before he did that, he needs to implement this basic Drafted Document into law to include ALL AMERICANS at first stage.This main Reason why Private entity are against fiercely.

Stage by Stage Implementing the law first ,then down to "Culprits" that made the cost high.

Patience with the plans , Doctor & Patients are going to get this Mandate Program done.

where the money, he's going to pay for

Here is How the (50 percent)methods.

There is a simple explanation for why American health care costs so much more than health care in any other country: because we pay so much more for each unit of care. If you leave everything else the same the volume of procedures, the days we spend in the hospital, the number of surgeries we need but plug in the prices Canadians pay, our healthcares spending falls by about 50 percent.

Why this has to be Mandate Program,since all American need it , "DRAFT" for the needs all citizen to participate in reducing overall cost in a bungle,to make affordable to all his citizen.

By this law its covering ALL Americans of all back-ground that deprived before from having one Because of its COST.Now the famous expensive healthcares can be DONE cheaper with the includes of 50 million americans to have insurance coverages , the middleclasss and the poor and best of all its services come with Government U.S.GUARANTEES a law drafted "Mandate Program".History had shown ,even the private giant AIA, should be bankrupted list ,if not because the "PEOPLE" to save it.

This has to be Mandate Program, The law aslo requires the upper 1% & his cronies to have Insurance ,they will choose and opts the purchase of their own expensive 5 stars insurance by all means.this Including "those AGAINST this mandate program".

Consists of "The Poor & but arrogance idiots" some maybe naive,some just plain stupid,worst the racism ditto head.Nothing But against the President Obama ,even to his own benefits.This are the same majority of the HIPOCRATES people you can see at ER for Free treatments.

Let me see, we expect results for the American people from the Supreme Court which harbors the likes of Justice Clarence Thomas who has admitted but not been charged with not claiming $700,000. of his wife's income who works for the Koch brothers

AND

Justice Stephen Breyer directly owns stock in several major companies in the health sector. His stakes in three of them are worth between $50,000 and $100,000: biotech pharmaceutical company Sigma-Aldrich, pharmaceutical company Novartis and Quest Diagnostics, a lab and diagnostic firm. Breyer also owns smaller stakes in biotech drug companies Amgen (valued between $15,000 and $50,000) and Genzyme (a stake worth less than $15,000.)

Neither of which reclused theirself and we expect something good to happen for the 99%? Keep dreaming.......

The article states, "It’s not likely Congress can do anything substantive until 2013" (i.e. enact new legislation in the event the law is overturned).

In reality, it is not likely that Congress can do anything substantive while the Party of Obstructionism and Hate is part of the discussion. Their answer to health care reform: limit an individuals right to sue for malpractice.

Yea, thanks Tea baggers. Fight for the malpractice insurance carriers. Screw the rest of us.

I am already taxed to cover the cost of medical care for those who choose not to buy it but none the less access when they need it..........so how is that constitutional and mandating that all buy their own insurance and lift that burden from me and bring down the cost of health care overall NOT constitutional?

The new regulations allow me to extend insurance, which I do pay plenty for, to my two sons until they are age 26.............non pre-existing condition clauses.......no limit on the amount of funds for care (and if you have cancer or a chronic illness this could be a life saver).......

If these things go away we are left paying more and getting less and footing the bill for those who would choose not to pay and yet when they are in need of health care they seek out health care services just like the rest of us...only they pay nothing for it.

How can the Supreme Court see protecting some from paying anything while NOT protecting me from being required to pay for not only myself and my family but for those who say they don't need insurance and choose not to buy it and yet avail themselves of the services they choose not purchase at the cost to others?

This is not justice..........this is unfair...........this is not cost effective............this is not good for anyone..........

one way EVERYONE has access to health care and ALL PAY and the other EVERYONE has access to health care and SOME PAY the cost for ALL........

Fine, if some don't want to pay then let them sign a waiver stating that if they ever need health care services and cannot pay in cash then they can be refused services....EVEN ON PAIN OF DEATH.....

I guarantee you few if any not paying customers would sign such a waiver....because they expect something for nothing............as if when they get sick they are owed help without payment while the rest of us must pay for our care and that of the non paying users as well.

According to republicans they feel each man should pay his own way...........so let it be so.........I'm tired of footing the bill for those who would not pay their own way when it comes to health insurance and the care it covers................

When are my constitutional rights going to be protected from having to carry the burden of health care for more than my own family?

This should be a no brainer.

Some insurance companies refuse to pay some doctors the amount those doctors believe they are entitled to be paid. When that happens, the doctor will stop accepting that form of insurance as reimbursement.Then, of course, once the doctor no longer accepts that insurance company's reimbursement schedule, then doctors no longer accepts patients who use that payer's insurance.Insurance companies jack-up the Premium till nobody can afford.

Each year, doctors and healthcare facilities like testing labs, hospitals, pharmacies and others, negotiate pricing with health insurers and payers. In its simplest form, it goes like this:

When a patient with diabetes visits my office, I charge $100 for the visit, and $75 for the blood work.

Payer: That's too much money. We'll pay you $55 for the visit and $35 for the blood work.

Doctor: I can't pay my staff or keep my lights turned on for that paltry amount! How about $65 for the visit and $45 for the blood work?

That's still too much.

Doctor: Sorry I can't help you.

Payer : I'll join Obama care then

Its all Your call.

Roughly about 30 patients a month,Mr President.

Yes ,I think so.

That great Mr President,Its a DEAL,but how about the increase of patients,I'm afraid I'll be sue for negligent,since I'll be attending extra patients and how can I manages ?

Thanks You,Mr President,You are the smartest President we ever have!

And say hello to thousands of people once again needlessly dying because they don't have access to or can't afford health care.

Cameron Ford....."And say hello to thousands of people once again needlessly dying because they don't have access to or can't afford health care.

That is exactly what will happen if ObamaCare persists. Businesses will "dump" covering the health care cost of workers thus more folks WITHOUT health care, there will NOT be funding to support the MILLIONS without health care, some medical facilities will close, other medical facilities will give limited care, and folks will be "dying" at the ER doorstep waiting to get their Obama "limited care".

Meanwhile, a $ 15,000 a year DHS secretary is probably drafting the thousands of pages of health care rules for the masses.

Wait a minute, "we have to pass it before we know what is in it !!!"

Yep, ObamaCare is nothing but a complete and total DISASTER.

Notice I said "DHS" instead of "DSHS" since it might just be a DHS worker drafting DSHS regulations. That is the way this administration works.

And say hello to thousands of people once again needlessly dying because they don't have access to or can't afford health care.

You mean the thousands that just go to the ER and increase the cost of those that actually do pay?

And say hello to thousands of people once again needlessly dying because they don't have access to or can't afford health care.

Democrats fault for over-promising and delivering a severely flawed bill. Next time try a little bi-partisanship. Won't get everything you want but at least both sides will be invested in the final product.

Some people have it backwards. Health care costs will go down with Obamacare, as you insure more people and add prevention costs will go down. It's been proven time and time again in countries with universal care. Republicans love to scare everyone that they won't get health care due to lines etc., which is not true.

Q22, there were 3 from each party on the committee to write the legislation. Whenever the republiCONS would offer something, they were asked if we include this in the bill, will you support it, they would answer, "No" Why should there have been "bi-partisanship" when the republiCONS were never going to vote for it, anyway?

Q22? The individual mandate was a CONSERVATIVE idea...but as soon as our President proposed it, the CONs were against it... So your comment, "Democrats fault for over-promising and delivering a severely flawed bill" doesn't hold water. Many of the concepts in the ACA were first proposed by Conservatives.

It wouldn't matter how much input from Conservatives...they were going to obstruct our President at every level.

That's a lie. If republicans wanted it they could have easily passed it during the first six years of Bush. It is democrats that jambed it down our throats.

Throwing an idea out does not mean we support it. Republicans never even attempted to force it on us. Republicans listen to voters, democrats ignore all but their radical base.

Eric, Obamacare while Obamacare will not end up insuring more people. The fact is, as businesses realize they can save money to the tune of $5,000 to $10,000 per year per employee by paying a fine for not providing health insurance coverage, employer sponsered health care will be vastly reduced. This will cause more Americans to have to purchase their own health care at substantially higher premiums they cannot afford and will chose to pay the penatly instead until they get sick as the subsdies the governement will provide won't nealry cover the cost. And don't tell me the subsidies the government will pay will cover the costs as that is the lefts complaint about issuing vouchers for medicare saying the vouchers won't cover enough of the costs. And is is now, this country will not be able to afford paying the subsidies this bill promises when millions of Americans lose their employer paid coverage. If you cannot see this fact, you are either stupid and need to take a basic economic and business course or you are hoping this is the case so that the health care system crashes and forces large tax increases on middle and upper income Americans to provide a government run program, which will be far more costly and inefficient to this country. The federal government can't even control the billions of dollars for fraud in medicare now. What makes any one think it can control it better in a single payer, government run medicare for all type plan?

The Republicans invented the mandate and Romney took it to Massachusetts and made it a success.

It's already proven to work.

If republicans wanted it they could have easily passed it during the first six years of Bush.

They prefer the status quo and will fight tooth and nail any attempt to reform health care even though it is badly broken.

Obama campaigned against the mandate because Hillary for it. Lieing POSOTUS.

Eric,

The problem with this bill is it is forcing healthy people to buy insurance to pay for the unhealthy, this is unconstitutional because it is not looked on as a tax, what is congress going to do next tell us what to eat (opps the first lady and the czars are already doing this).

OneForAllAndAllForOne,

To blame this on either party is nonsense, both parties have their noses so far up insurance companies that one can not tell where one starts and one ends. This is nothing more then to force healthy people that do not need this service to pay for people that do. There are much better ways to fix this then Obama Care that will put this country that is teetering on financial collapse another 1.8 trillion of expenditures.

Quit the propaganda. Its not "Obamacare" it the Americans HealthCare Act.

• Its not "President Obama's" it is our healthcare, yours and mine.

The importance is it reduces health care costs across the board, to everyone, rich or poor, black or white.

The AHA is OUR health care act. It is there for American Citizens.

• Quit reading Rupert Murdoch's talking points! He's not even an American!!!

"I think Conservative is a disease in Iran"

Sic, "Its not "President Obama's" it is our healthcare, yours and mine."

True enough, both Obama and Congress are exempt from this monstrosity! We are not!

Let's see... If the Supreme Court strikes this down... I no longer feel I have too:
1. Require Me to Wear a SeatBelt - The Government can't mandate my safety.

2. Require me to have car insurance - The republicans on the insurance lobbyists payroll can kiss my 'legally required' donation goodbye...

3. Require me to have house insurance - The republicans on the insurance lobbyists, bank lobbyists, and mortgage broker lobbyists can kiss my 'legally" required donation goodbye.

4. Oh heck, any other GOVERNMENT required services that I must purchase are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

How's that Republicants... don't like mandatory health care.. then let's get RID OF ANY OTHERs out there..

Where do you people come up with the crap you post? The Affordable Health Care Act will not lower costs, its going to force costs to skyrocket. Look how they skyrocketed after this Act passed. The "for Profit" health insurance companies stuck it to their policy holders with huge increases in the premiums. And what did Obuma do to protect those policy holders, nothing.

46% of all Americans are living in or at the edge of poverty. These people can't afford "for profit" health insurance policies. Where in the heck do you think the money is going to come from to buy them their policies?

Obuma has this country in debt with his debt crises to the tune of over $15 trillion dollars. He can't pay for what he's spent so far without putting this country so far in debt we will never be able to get of it.

You people who support this Act sound like you believe that our government is in a position to actually pay for the premiums of people who can't afford to pay for them themselves.

Grow the "f" up and leave your fantasy world. Try thinking and acting like an adult for a change.

what happened - Wow.. You mean Obama ran up this debt all by himself? You mean no one else contributed to this and its all Obama fault? You mean Congress (see the Constitution on how revenue is spent in this country) didn't do this either?

You tell people to grow the F* up, and yet you are whining/complaining about what Obama has done here, and offer no other solution to fix the problem. I think you are the one who needs to grow up.

Many are to blame for the debt but, Obama and the Democrats are responsible for roughly the last 8 of the 15 trillion dollars of debt...and they did it in only 3 years. And it will only get worse unless they are stopped now.

When Obuma took office your families share of the National debt was $45,000.00. In 2.75 years under Obuma when his debt crises struck at the beginning of August, 2011, your families share of the national debt had grown to $122,303.00.

Since then it has grown an additional $18,000 or so and we are still in a debt crises 7 months later.

Obuma's borrow and spend policies are the reason for this growth and his uncontrolled borrowing and spending are the reason for the debt crises.

I think the term to explain Obuma's involvement is "The Buck Stops Here"

Thousands of people dying every day!? Thousands of people will continue to die every day, not as a function of a Supreme Court ruling, but as a function of biology, (old age for instance.) Didn't your mother tell you to wash your hands regularly, eat your fruits and vegetables, get outside in the sunshine and exercise, and do some of your own research on your individual health demands. Public displays of heath support with the tax dollar in mind, should favor clean water, sewage treatment, and solid waste disposal at the local level, and air and water quality on a regional level, which would be a first tier cost mitigation strategy for public health. In my mind, paying for a local hospital expansion, for the benefit of a few, with a tax burden for the region, and insurance rate increase for bordering state ( cost statistics ) planning, is NOT COST MITIGATION STRATEGY. Also having public employee union members not contributing to their health insurance costs, another addition to the tax burden, is not cost mitigation strategy.

So the next time you cut your finger, before you go find a lawyer to sue the pop top manufacturer, wash your wound with soap and water, apply a clean dressing, and go look up on your computer about blood clotting. If you happen to be a hemophiliac, know about such a condition for yourself personally, before attempting to open pop top containers. This will help cut emergency room costs, for you and others. If you have a disorder, or disease that you cannot pronounce nor spell, don't expect others to understand your personal plight exactly. And if you are buying eyeglasses with insurance, for your looks, not your eyesight... your personal vanity is giving you a black eye... not your designer frames.

Its about time

Why don't you grow up and start thinking like an adult. You have a choice to either drive a car with insurance coverage or not. If you don't buy car insurance the car can't be driven on public roads. You only get fined if you are driving on a public road without insurance.

Someone who doesn't own a car or who can't afford car insurance isn't getting forced to buy car insurance.

Why do you morons open your mouth without thinking about what you are going to post and how foolish it makes you look.

sic-n-tired,

Please explain to me why Ohioans went to the polls to overturn the loss of their collective bargaining rights, (this makes them solidly pro labor democrats) and these same democrats enacted a law that EXCLUDES and EXEMPTS the state of Ohio from Obamacare by a 3-1 margin?

Please explain why the hard working, loyal union workers DON'T WANT IT!!!

WHY? Because as it's provisions come into effect, it will be cheaper for the business to forego healthcare costs by dropping coverage, effectively passing 100% of the costs onto their workers. Private sector union workers are against this almost 100%

What about the last twenty years has you so optimistic about company provided healthcare. You do know premiums have exceeded inflation every year. You do know that more and more companies have dropped healthcare insurance. You do know insurance companies are not feeling any pain whatsoever. You do know that the percentage of American citizens without coverage have skyrocketed during this time. You do know corporate profits are at an all-time high while wages for all except the uber wealthy have declined in real dollars while the upper 1% taxes are at the lowest levels since Reagan took over. Tinkle down alright. You do know the Republicans have jammed their economic policies down the people's throat for this period of time. Funny how people's real wages (including ironically the wealthy) during Clinton rose.

Why this Mandate Program is good for Americans, Health Care is very complicated issues in many aspects.

President Obama is in the stage of planning to fight ,The Expensive Health-Care Cost ,but before he did that, he needs to implement this basic Drafted Document into law to include ALL AMERICANS at first stage.This main Reason why Private entity were against fiercely.

Stage by Stage Implementing the law first ,then get real cost down.

Patience Americans ,We the Patients going to get this Mandate Program done.

Where the money, he is going to pay for subsiding the Poor and middle class ?
Tackle then ,Here is How the (50 percent)methods.

There is a simple explanation for why American health care costs so much more than health care in any other country: because we pay so much more for each unit of care. If you leave everything else the same the volume of procedures, the days we spend in the hospital, the number of surgeries we need but plug in the prices Canadians pay, our health-care spending falls by about 50 percent.

Why this has to be Mandate Program,all American need it , "DRAFT" for the needs all citizien to particpiate in reducing overall cost bungle it, to make affortable to all his citizens.

By this law it's covering ALL Americans of all background that deprived before from having one Because of its COST.Now the famous expensive health-cares can be DONE cheaper with the includes of 50 million americans to have the insurance coverages , the middle-classs and the poor and best of all its services come with Government U.S.GUARANTEES a law drafted "Mandate Program".

History had shown ,even the private giant AIA, should be bankrupted list ,if not because the "PEOPLE" to save it.

This has to be Mandate Program, The law aslo requires the upper 1% & his cronies to have the Insurance ,they will choose and opts the purchase of their own expensive five stars insurance by all means.this definately Including "those AGAINST this mandate program". Consists of "The Poor & but arrogance idiots" some maybe naive,some just plain stupid,worst the racism dittohead.Nothing But against the President Obama ,even to his own benefits.This are the same parasites of the HIPOCRATES you can see at ER for Free treaments.

Uhhhh, better send that bill to Senator Murray who stated she was responsible for part of the drafting of ObamaCare to get re-elected. Maybe she is the one who left out the "survivability clause".

Oh, BTW....Senator Murray is a DEMOCRAT, and very Progressive at that, so I am sure she will pay your bills.

I think that in Washinton State we will continue to send Democratic senators to Washinton DC. States rights!

NO....peoples choice at the polls.

uuuummmm....I think you meant to write "severability clause", but I could be wrong.....

Cameroon - good luck with that - you'll still have to pay.

Give me a list of people you know who was denied healthcare, and if you do I'll call you a liar. My wife is a nurse and whether a person has Insurance or not they get treated.

Yes they get treated and if they can't pay we all pay for them. THAT'S THE POINT!!!

Everyone needs to pay for their own health care. Of course Republicans call that "socialism" because they believe only the rich should get GOOD health care.

Cliff: Ask your wife if you need a heart tranplant and no Ins..if you get one..or maybe a lung or kidney. ..Your going to die.....Your going to die......Thats what Republicpukes want.....

maze? no....no they don't. What Republicans "want" is smaller government and responsible stewardship of our tax $$$. Please note that today's uber-conservatives are NOT Republicans. They hijacked my Republican party....warped the platform to some extreme level. There are precious few true Republicans left. The uber-con's purity test ran them all out.

It is conservative republicans that want smaller government and responsible stewardship. All the responsible idea's are coming from conservatives. We don't kick people out, we vote them out if they don't represent the peoples wishes.

Maze...just because you have insurnace doesn't mean that the companies are going to pay for your transplant. They will find 1,000 reasons to deny your claim. Why didn't the legilation require the insurance companies to be NOT-FOR-PROFIT. There is an inherent conflict when you have a For-Profit insurance company deciding your treatment.

The people never wanted the policies of starving the beast.

First you cut revenues by cutting taxes, then you got into deficit spending by going to war twice. Then a financial crisis comes out of this that leave Republicans a justification to cut entitlements.

It's all here if you want to read it: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Yes there has never been a correlation between lower taxes and higher returns. Its all a bunch of lies that even Kennedy believed in and practiced. Both wars cost less than what Obama and the dem congress spent in the last 3 years. And of that money roughly 20% would have been spent just to maintain or military even without the wars.

You tell 'em Cameron Ford,

Obamacare sounds like Utopia!!! I can't wait! But of course everything our government gets involved in always becomes cheaper and simpler and easy to access with no hassles, unlike what we experience in the private sector, which is driven by the greed of the one percenters. I always hate how the private sector makes it so difficult to do business with them, unlike the government, which is always a quick, hassle-free, in-and-out. Our politicians, who will be in charge of allocating our health care dollars, will never be driven by petty politics or personal gain! Finally, people I can trust to make my health care decisions for me! Utopia!

But remember, we are Americans. We are smarter than everyone else in the world that gets his or her government more and more involved in health care. We will never ration health care because we have greedy, wealthy one percenters to tax, who will gladly provide an endless supply of money to fund all our needs. Sucks to be the rest of the (poor) world! We will never have long waiting periods for medical treatment, that would be un-American and our politicians said that would never happen! Doctors, and all health care providers, will love this new partnership with our benevolent, caring government, they will never want to leave the profession! There will be more doctors than ever before! I just thought of something, what am I going to do with all the extra money I will save on health care as the President has promised? Oh joy! I see a new fishing boat in my future! Let's all hope the Supreme Court does not allow the outdated U.S. Constitution to stand in the way of our future health care Utopia! Oh happy day!

People can't vote on whether or not to keep an unconstitutional law. I'm not saying the ACA mandate is unconstitutional. I'm just saying that if a law DOES violate the Constitution, people can't vote to waive that violation.

By the way, if the mandate is struck down, that is also the end of Romneycare. States cannot violate the U.S. Constitution.

Not quite, anything not covered in the constitution is left to the states. That gives the states freedom the federal government does not have.

Not that many would care if Mass dumped it's plan, from what's I've read it is becoming a disaster as well.

We don't need to vote on it, that is why we have a constitution and if the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional then that's the way it is.

Yes, many states are waiting with back up plans to implement their own mandate if the mandate is struck down.

Too bad deciding whether a law is Constitutional or not is so subjective, it depends too much on the current makeup of the court and their political inclinations.

So if the Tea Party gets it way and does away with America's unifying federal government, and the U.S. becomes a collection of 50 countries, watch how Tea Party members and Libertarians will then campaign against the very existence of your state's governments.

And you politically naive people that keep quoting your interpreted version of the Constitution or obsessing on just a few amendments within it? You "know-it-alls" actually believe that's the only laws on the books that matters in life? Oh, let me take a guess ...some of you believe that the Bible matters even more, right?

And if you want to see all of "Obamacare" repealed , and want to see Social Security and Medicare radically changed and cut back, then I say good luck in taking care of your health and affording your sky-high, private insurance claim costs when you're feeling ill in your retirement years!

Eric 5.4 "Yes, many states are waiting with back up plans to implement their own mandate if the mandate is struck down"

And 26 States are parties to the Current Supreme Court case that is before the SCOTUS. Those 26 states are are listening to the voices of their people and demanding that it be struck down because it is unconstitutional. Some States still serve the people instead of dictating to them!

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”-Thomas Jefferson.

The government taxes us and gives a large sum of its money to healthcare.This is the very thing Thomas Jefferson is against.

"The duties of supreme court judges are to ensures "the people wishes and interpretations" are carry out,not corporations"

That is a lie. The purpose of the supreme court is to interpret the constitution and determine the fate of each case brought before it, ONLY weighing the constitution.

The people have a right and responsibility to change the constitution to right wrongs, (slavery, etc.), or to change with the times. The court has no right to do that, only interpret what the public has decided via amendments.

The People is ultimate here,not Corporation,not justices....American are smarter to know that whether who lie

You should look at the number of people in the Obama administration who haven't been forthcoming with their tax dollars. The few own the many large sums of $$$$$.

Glass ball says:

"The SCOTUS will not strike down the complete ObamaCare. The Justices will go through the 2.600 or so pages of legislation and determine which parts will remain effective....that is....if they can read the dad gum thing."

Even if SCOTUS just strikes down the mandate, the entire thing should just be repealed since many of the provisions were built around having a mandate.

Republicans sure as heck don't have anything to replace it with.

Nope. If the individual mandate is unconstitutional on a federal level, the doctrine of preemption says that it is unconstitutional on the state level. Romneycare will be dead too.

Again, I believe that is not true. The states have their own constitutions. The US constitution forbids the federal government from having a mandate. It doesn't necessarily determine what a state can do.

I may be wrong on this one but I don't think so.

Wrong Social Security is a "MANDATE PROGRAM" almost 100 years serving americans Well being and Court Justices said it's the Law is Constitutional.

Why this Obamacare Mandate Program is being challenge by GOP?

Valhalla Phil,

State Law cannot be less that Federal Law, but can and easily be more than federal law. If the concept of a complete mandate to purchase a specific product is unconstitutional under federal law, it's unconstitutional in state law also...

Federal Law created by the SCOTUS mandates that Abortions are legal in all 50 states, territories and DC. State law, ANY state law that bans abortions of any type are illegal. (as most democrats are proud to point out)

Therefore, if the individual mandate is unconstitutional it is unconstitutional and no state can enact one. (this would effectively render the main driving force of Romneycare unconstitutional also)

Also any commodity like a CDL? Flood insurance? ANY MANDATE! Anything that is a fee or penalty would be struck down? The SCOTUS is walking on thin ice and giving a dangerous precedent here.

Egilman, you, elyhim, and clotho are all wrong, and Valhallaphill is correct.

Any power not given to the federal govt under The Constitution is given to the states.

By definition, if the federal govt CANNOT do it, then the states CAN.

This is why your state can require you to purchase auto insurance, or in Ma, health insurance.

Your SCOTUS Roe v Wade argument fails because you do n ot understand how the SCOTUS functions, as illustrated by what you wrote here:

"Federal Law created by the SCOTUS mandates that Abortions are legal in all 50 states, territories and DC. State law, ANY state law that bans abortions of any type are illegal. (as most democrats are proud to point out)"

See, first off, SCOTUS does not "create federal law". Secondly, in Roe v Wade, which is what I assume is your reference, the SCOTUS decided that not allowing an abortion, and therefore forcing a woman to give birth to a child, interfered with the womans rights as described in The Bill of Rights, which is part of The Constitution.

A state cannot deprive someone of thier Constitutional Rights. This does not mean that states cannot do things that the federal cannot do. In fact, it's the opposite.

Each state also has it's own constitution, which it's govt is forced to follow.

Jack, your argument about SS is wrong as well.

SS is a tax. Nobody disputes the govt can tax you.

If Obama was as smart as he thinks he is, he would have known that.

Maybe he did, and didn't have the stones to call it a tax, and that's why he's failing with it.

Either way, it's kind of funny, don't you think?

They're already trying to spin it as a positive, it will "energize the base"

LOLs for days!

Obama chased a rabbit, and it disappeared down a hole.

Since when does the supreme court deliberate in public? This is just MSDNC trying to justify democrats lame maneuvering.

Oh, the "rabid right"? We're just people who want the madness to stop.

Why are they corrupt? Because they disagree with you? I happen to think they are filled with integrity for undoing what a corrupt administration and congress put together that is opposed by the majority of Americans.

To be honest Davoyager, I don't think you or I am the decider of who is corrupt. Could it be that Obama and the Dems were sincerely trying to solve a problem? I will grant that. Could it be that the Supreme Court is sincerely trying to decide whether that law is constitutional? It seems like you cannot grant that.

Really! If anything it is the liberal side of the court that is legislating from the bench. The issue at hand is not about whether we need healthcare reform, the issue is about the constitutionality of the law. It is not constitutional- period. The liberal justices are willing to overlook our constitution....that is VERY scary.

Oh but only impeach the Conservative judges, without even knowing how anyone will vote yet? Wow, sure sounds like a step towards Communism to me, eliminate the opposition voices, only keep those who support your agenda. What next? Prison for anyone who doesn't share your view? You are a hypocrite.

The country can no longer afford political actors on this powerful body that is suppose to be impartial

What about the Liberal political activists on the Supreme Court huh? What about Ginsberg, Kagen, Breyer. What about them? They are no more impartial than I am a Chinese brain surgeon.

Alright lets not go that far, the only member of SCOTUS who might be characterized as corrupt is Thomas. As much as I dislike how Scalia and Alito make decisions, they are not corrupt.

All the members of Scotus on the Presidential decision are suspect. Also the fact that Scalia and Thomas have been fratanizing with the Koch Brothers,voila Citizen United.Don't tell me this court is bi-partisan.it's not. J-MAL

if you paid any attention to the 3 days of oral arguments presented there is no question which side of the fence the Liberal justices are on. Ginsberg tried in vain to coach Obamas inept solicitor general as he stumbled with his answers to legitimate questions of constitutional law. When Verilli couldn't come up with intelligible statements in his answers Ginsberg cued him several times, putting words in his mouth that he couldn't find on his own. Ginsberg may be old and an over the wall liberal but she still has more intelligence than the clown in the white house (Constitutional law expert my a$$) Obama or his lawyer Donnie ( the Weasel ) Verilli. However her active aid to the weasel shows a clear bias which shows her to be an activist judge.

If they strike it down? Of course they will they have two judges who went to the Republican outing to get their orders from the Koch brothers and they cannot deny their peple a small victory can they. Just think about it this way. Republicans and the Supremes are about to ruin 50 million peoples chance for freedom from the insurance couples so less than 10% of the the entire package would have had any right to complain about the edict. Thats right less than 10% of the people would fall into the gray area of maybe not being able to take a tax break! Read this Senate 1770 This is Grassley putting forth a bill that does tha same thing. Now he is against it.

With Soros buying off every democrat under the sun as well as CBS, NBC, NPR, Moveon.org and a host of other radical leftist propaganda outlets, you really have nothing to talk about.

bread -

I guess the fact that Kagan actually argued the ACA case in a lower court on behalf of this administration slipped you mind then?

She should recuse herself from the decision as it is a clear conflict of interest. If she doesn't, I hope the republican-controlled House has the chutzpa to actually impeach her, as her ethics would be proven to be non-existent.

Ya, "Can't wait" is always a scare tactic.... I am reminded of the Auto Dealer's sign " NOW is the best time to buy!!" Well, what about two weeks ago when he said the same thing, and probably in another month also, which is it, then or now LOL

Amen.

The stimulus that even Republicans admit saved the economy? Yep, Obama was right about that too. The states would have gone bankrupt. Give the President credit for making tough, unpopular decisions that turned out to be the right thing to do. Which is what a real leader does.

The stimulus was a disaster. Cities are already going bankrupt and many leftist states are so far under water it would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

@ Clotho,

The stimulus that even Republicans admit saved the economy?

Really? And what Republicans would that be, huh? I haven't heard a one support that idea.

As it should be.

Batrax,

Can you be honest and admit there are the same number of activist judges on the left as there are on the right? Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor, Stephens (retired) and Souter (retire) ALWAYS vote as a block. What do call that?

No, I don't agree. You are entitled to the level of care that you can afford.

With a bottom safetly net for the less fortunate though

Road warrior are you stating that you believe only those that can afford an operation are the ones that deserve it?? What a heartless jerk you must be. I assume there is no one you love more than yourself or you would not make such statements... Jeez!

So, Road warrior, if you suddenly need, say, a very expensive heart operation, but you can't afford it because you worked 30 years in a steel mill and never accumulated the kind of $$$ to pay for such- I suppose you would just have to say "oh, ok" when told you can't have it, and go off with a smile and die in a corner somewhere? Oh, and btw- that neighbor of yours who made a killing in the stock market- he's going to get HIS operation. So you're saying that's Okey-dokey with you, Road? You are gonna die with a smile on your face, because you're just sooo happy for your neighbor's good fortune? And your family will all be ecstatic that your neighbor survived, and just say "Oh, well, too bad we weren't rich" at your funeral?

Good man! Generous to a fault!

If you think socialized medicine is any better, dream on. In Britain you can't get the latest chemo drugs, too expensive. In Canada one province has a target wait time of 9 weeks for chemo, they are missing it at 13.

Again, all socialist medical programs use rationing to control costs. Obama has already said his will as well.

I really wish people who know zilch about socialized medicine would stop griping about it. You only know what your just a stupid as you friends are telling you, unless you live in a country that actually has socialized medicine. Which YOU DON't, BUT I DO. It is nothing at all as you describe it. You would be lucky here to have it. When the court rules, which is more than likely with the Republicans, you're going to get exactly what the republicans want for you, which is NOTHING. Suckers!!!

I really wish people who don't live in this country would not feel it necessary to lend their uninformed comments to a matter that is none of their concern. Since you don't live here, you don't know. You only know what your just as stupid as you friends are telling you.

you can't afford it because you worked 30 years in a steel mill and never accumulated the kind of $$$ to pay for such

Medic400,

Whose fault is it that a steel worker has not saved enough money for emergencies? After 30 years, he should have a nice little nest egg. I worked at US Steel. The pay was excellent. If you spent it all, don't expect the rest of us to pay your bills.

b113- whith optimism like that, I am sure you have the winning Mega Millions ticket also...

I really do hope that Santorum goes against Obama. Obama would win again for sure. I want Santorum to be the candidate so I can continue to laugh at how ridiculous he is. I wish my state would turn Democrat.

Obama 2012!!!!

Why not just move to California? I's sure they would love you there.

Naw donn, we have enough fruits and nuts here on the left-coast. Just look at the CA state dysfunctional legislators and Gov. Moonbeam II to see how spending for liberal causes is more important than balancing a budget.

It's not that. We don't really believe that giving control to politicians on health care will solve the problems. Also, Possibly Democrats have already finished "Medicare as we know it " if and when the 1/2 trillion cuts they already made with Obamacare kick in.

Please try to educate yourself and quit believing false propaganda. Your post is very far from being true or accurate.

What a marroon.

They want to give breaks to those who make money from capital gains, and saddle the people who get up and go to work for wages with the bills. and her her post is very close to if not completely accurate.

Maze - With that same old, left wing drivel.......shouldn't you be with the occupy pinheads somewhere....like maybe Occupy a Mental Ward? What ya think?????

People only wish it was the masses but Roe-vWade, Prayer in schools and many other issues that SCOUS has decided have not been for the masses but for the Meek. The Meek shall inherit the earth. Hopefull they will do the right thing in this case.

You are right, but stupid people keep voting for them. I'd say they deserve what they get, except they are too stupid to realize they've been screwed. Case in point: the old teaparty ladies who yelled at democrats to keep their hands off her health insurance - THEY GET SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, AND DON'T KNOW THOSE ARE GOVERNMENT insurance?? How dumb can you get in those Southern States.

Many liberals believe that all of the money belongs to the government first, and it is the role of government to decide who should get to keep how much of what they earn so things will be "fair". It is very easy to discern the liberals who embrace that philosophy because their statements almost always involve phrases like "giving tax breaks to so and so". The money an individual or corporation makes does NOT belong to the government first. The government can't give what doesn't belong to them in the first place...but they sure can take it.

A government that is powerful enough to give you everything you need is powerful enough to take everything you've got.

Kevin.....you do understand that rates will go up more under Obama care than they would without. The GOP plans were to try to make health care less expensive. The democrat plan focused on getting more people covered which is going to increase our rates and our spending on health care substantially.

Put America, please explain how millions of people buying insurance will make the rates go UP. We're all waiting for you to spell it out.

Medic400 - Let's spell this out....Obama declared that the cost of the ACA would be around 900B over a ten year period. The CBO has just revised those numbers and the true cost is at least double the estimate....so who's going to pay for that? The answer is the U.S. tax payer...in the form of higher rates or taxes.

And what will the cost of the health care for all the uninsured multitudes who show up at emergency rooms? They will receive care and where do you think the money comes from for that? It comes from You and me, in the form of higher taxes, and higher insurance rates for those that do have it. There are no free rides- we all pay, one way or the other. The costs will ultimately be even higher, since the uninsureds won't see a doctor regularly, thus resulting in more cases of serious illness that requires more expensive, advanced care to treat. If all were insured, costs would go down, since people would be inclined to visit the doctor for regular care, resulting in a generally healthier population.

Quit deluding yourself with the GOP fairy tale that some how all the uninsured won't figure into the final tally of costs.

So would you rather pay for the poor or pay for the poor AND a huge overreaching bureaucracy as well? Tell me how that can possibly be less expensive.

Sorry, I'll be glad to pay higher premiums if it keeps government out of our lives.

Phil- bully for you if you can afford higher premiums- but what about the guy who picks up your garbage? think he can afford to pay more? - BTW- garbage collection is a government provided service.

For all of you. It dosn't matter who you are. Insurance companies have already planned to hike your rate irregaurdless of weather or not this law is deemed constitutional. Hospitas don't have any such thing as line item set charges so their billings arent like your auto repairs. Hospitals can charge Medicare $1 for an asprin and then charge Insurance co A $5, Uninsured $10 and then turn around and charge Insurance Co B$20 for the same asprin. So for any of you arguing about your insurance preauims please tell me how did this bill fix the situation. And that is just the start. You pay your taxes and the government gives a drug company a larg grant they invent a new drug and then you pay the same drug company big $$$$ for a product you already paid them big $$$ to create. They claim it cost them X and have to recover the cost but it cost you X and are paying for it again where is the logic. Congress can set a price the hospital can charg for Medicare and Medicade and hospitals are getting rich off that but no one will tell the hospitals they must conform to standard business practices and when anyone brighs it up your political lobbists are right there saying they can't set any such prices come on where is the logic to this. Insurance is one industry and Medical is another where is the logic?

@Medic400
What a bunch of tripe...
Obamacare doesn't address the cost of healthcare.

And as to the "poor" that keep showing up to the emergency room because their kid has the flu...
Maybe the hospitals could save money by using PAs to handle routine cases instead of doctors padding their wallets by having 10 doctors charge a patient for a routine call...

The biggest scammers in the Healthcare industry are doctors and medical billing companies...
What congress needs to do is limit the government's liability to one doctor per patient instead of the typical 10 doctors...

And what will the cost of the health care for all the uninsured multitudes who show up at emergency rooms?

Medico - you're suffering from an extreme dellusion if you believe that the ACA will relieve the pressures experienced at emergency rooms and as a result lower costs. The lions share of the people to be affected by the ACA will be those that are added to Medicaid, aoorox 16-20 million. Without question, the largest category of people who show up at emergency rooms are those on Medicaid....not the uninsured. That's because private practice physicians, on a regular basis refuse to accept Medicaid patients, i.e. reimbursement. They have nowhere to go but the ER. So instead of relieving ER rooms of overcrowding, ACA will only make things worse...much worse.

Medic400: BTW- garbage collection is a government provided service

uh.. no it's not. IF it's available, it's contracted by your local city/state I believe. I know for fact it's not government (i.e. federal) because we don't have it in my area (Maine) unless we pay out of pocket for it. Last I costed it out, it was $90.00 every 3 months. We choose to take our stuff to the local dump instead. We also had to pay when we lived in Connecticut.

Interesting that Candidate Obama built his campaign opposing the mandate. I guess we all change our minds. By the way, use your spell checker

Huh?!? The R's never came up with this mandate. If fact, only one Republican voted for this act. This was squeezed out just before congress changed hands. In fact it led to Congress changing parties in 2010. Obama opposing the mandate? He is the one that signed it into law. What are you talking about Analyst?

analystgirl - your tricorder has a malfunction...

Do you get it if obama-care is so great why is he letting the unions and other companies he deems not to participate. All congress has already voted against having obama care for themselves. Quit following like sheep and look at this disastrous legislation. If obama was really interested in comprehensive health care reform he would have gotten the Democrats, Republicans, Insurance companies, lawyers and elderly to come-up with something that would work for all. Instead the president and the Democrats secretly went behind closed doors and push a bill in two months no one could read or understand. Of course I understand the Democrat think their smarter and know more then the rest of us. They have made that very clear and that's why you lost 120 seats in the last election and most of the governorships. Next gone Obama, I know allot of democrats that are sorry they voted for him as well.

Looks like those "activist judges" the republicans warned us about are going to be at it again.

Affordable? Affordable by whom? We can't even pay for SSI and Medicare/Medicaid and you want to saddle us with even more entitlements?
Do you people even know how to balance a checkbook, much less a budget????

Or do you just use your daddy's credit card to buy whatever you want?

...the 'activist judges' are the ones who want to violate the constitution by upholding this 2700 page monsterous POS. The ones in Congress who passed it STILL do not know what's in it.

The Commerce Clause allow Congress to regulate commerce. The individual mandate in ObamaCare forced people into a contract that they would not otherwise enter - botton line: it created commerce which is not a power of Congress therefore unconstitutional

Yes, affordable; A lot more affordable then the route we are now on! I also find it interesting when a judge basically says he can't be bothered to read what a law actually says (i.e. the kickback is not in it). And some people think you can run the United States Government the same way you would run a families budget (if it were only that easy). Get the money out and pass some laws to overcome the greed (from the Greedy Ba$tard$). If SCOTUS does rule against the Affordable Care Act, then maybe an intelligent Congress (that hasn't been bought and paid for) can pass a Health Care Act with a single insurer mandate!

I have never heard Obama use the term "turds" in any of his speeches.

raddave,

It's a figure of speech. The justices were paying the President respect by attending his first state of the union address. They were sitting twenty feet from Obama. He looked them in the eyes and basically called them idiots for their ruling on campaign finance, and the Democrats in the chamber gave Obama a standing ovation for his comments. Several justices have said since that they will no longer attend his state of the unions. They were totally disgusted. Why he did that is anyone's guess. I said at the time it will come back to bite him because Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in the case.

Road Warrior

I believe the Justices will simply view the constitutional legality of the mandate. Fortunately the SCOTUS isn't an elective branch and decisions are made based on law...without rose colored "This will get me re-elected" glasses.

cms5,

Why is it then rulings are generally made on ideological lines, 5-4?

Democrat Appointees: Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, Ginsburg

Republican Appointees: Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia, Kennedy

Apples and oranges. You don't have to drive.

First - In my state CA you are not required to purchase auto insurance you only have to prove financial responsibility using one of the following methods:

Types of financial responsibility
A motor vehicle liability insurance policy
A cash deposit of $35,000 with DMV
A DMV issued self-insurance certificate
A surety bond for $35,000 from a company licensed to do business in California.

Second- The tenth amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Third - No federal, state, or local government entity assesses an income tax penalty if you don't purchase an automobile.

Cotton Cat - Federal Government isn't the one mandating you to buy auto insurance. Your State government can mandate you buy something if you live in that particular state.

The only similarity between the two is that driving an automobile is a privilege, not a God Given right. Having health care for yourself is also privilege, not a right.

Poor MSNBC, I have watch them put this way up when it looked to them like it was going well, then bury it when it was not going so well, both interpreted by MSNBC.

Deal is simple, and I would guess the court sees it this way, Obama cannot DICTATE !!!!!! As he has done with his stupid health care bill.

Somebody tell OBAMA this is a Democracy, when this gets shot down maybe the rest of what he has done behind closed doors will be exposed.