The money quote from the section on the mandate: Our precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it.
interesting, calling it a tax, as they should have simply done in the first place, was why it was upheld. So it wasn't a mandate of purchase it is a tax. I am glad they didn't expand the commerce clause.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Thoughts from any of the doom-and-gloom "no way the right wing judges will use there own opinion" people?
I'm not one of those, but I will be first to admit - my prediction was wrong.
Funny thing is, the folks you refer to will be back here pissed in 6 months when they realize what the law really did....
Which will be what?
More money for insurance companies, tax on the Middle/Lower Class (Upper already have coverage), increased health care spending, election of Mitt Romney (how can Obama run on his signature legislation when it was the direct cause of his losing Congressional seats mid-term?).
EDIT: Forgot to add...
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
I'm see that the penalty for not being insured is 1% of your income. So most people making more then the poverty line ($14K) will most likely choose to pay the fine versus costly health insurance. Someone making $28K will now pay the government an extra $280 each year.
That is a tax. And it is a tax on the blue-collar middle class.
I'm see that the penalty for not being insured is 1% of your income. So most people making more then the poverty line ($14K) will most likely choose to pay the fine versus costly health insurance. Someone making $28K will now pay the government an extra $280 each year.
That is a tax. And it is a tax on the blue-collar middle class.
This may be one Obama's all big-time backfires.
It also destroys small businesses. If they have 50+ emps, they mus offer coverage or be taxed themselves. Hmmmmm. I have 60 employees - is it better I get into the health care business, pay a tax, or just find a way to get by on 49 employees? Hmmmm....
The law wasn't read. It wasn't well thought out. And in classic Shakespearean ending, this hubris will be the downfall of the smug, arrogant ruler.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
As for today, I'm a bit unsure. I would not be surprised at all if it is overturned, but something in my gut says Roberts is too smart to do it. He does not want to go down in history as chief justice of the most insane supreme court in history
lucky guess. glad to see it. still not a fan of the mandate, but its better than before
As for today, I'm a bit unsure. I would not be surprised at all if it is overturned, but something in my gut says Roberts is too smart to do it. He does not want to go down in history as chief justice of the most insane supreme court in history
lucky guess. glad to see it. still not a fan of the mandate, but its better than before
we can't call it a mandate...it is now a tax
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
As for today, I'm a bit unsure. I would not be surprised at all if it is overturned, but something in my gut says Roberts is too smart to do it. He does not want to go down in history as chief justice of the most insane supreme court in history
lucky guess. glad to see it. still not a fan of the mandate, but its better than before
we can't call it a mandate...it is now a tax
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
As for today, I'm a bit unsure. I would not be surprised at all if it is overturned, but something in my gut says Roberts is too smart to do it. He does not want to go down in history as chief justice of the most insane supreme court in history
lucky guess. glad to see it. still not a fan of the mandate, but its better than before
we can't call it a mandate...it is now a tax
That's the interesting part. By upholding, they may have actually caused more problems for Obama. There is no doubt Romney picked up on that and it will be trumpted from here until November. I do wonder how Obama is going to spin that when the law itself wasn't wildly popular to begin with.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
I'm see that the penalty for not being insured is 1% of your income. So most people making more then the poverty line ($14K) will most likely choose to pay the fine versus costly health insurance. Someone making $28K will now pay the government an extra $280 each year.
That is a tax. And it is a tax on the blue-collar middle class.
Edit:
This IS Obama's big-time backfire.
I haven't seen the cut-offs, but with more people qualifying for Medicaid, wont those in the $14k+ range qualify for Medicaid rather than having to buy in. I've the the number of people who will have to buy in or face the fine is 6%. Not really that large of a number.
That's the interesting part. By upholding, they may have actually caused more problems for Obama. There is no doubt Romney picked up on that and it will be trumpted from here until November. I do wonder how Obama is going to spin that when the law itself wasn't wildly popular to begin with.
I imagine that Romney's campaign team are high-fiving each other based on how the mandate was justified. This may be the magic bullet that will flip battleground midwest states towards them.
I'm see that the penalty for not being insured is 1% of your income. So most people making more then the poverty line ($14K) will most likely choose to pay the fine versus costly health insurance. Someone making $28K will now pay the government an extra $280 each year.
That is a tax. And it is a tax on the blue-collar middle class.
This may be one Obama's all big-time backfires.
It also destroys small businesses. If they have 50+ emps, they mus offer coverage or be taxed themselves. Hmmmmm. I have 60 employees - is it better I get into the health care business, pay a tax, or just find a way to get by on 49 employees? Hmmmm....
The law wasn't read. It wasn't well thought out. And in classic Shakespearean ending, this hubris will be the downfall of the smug, arrogant ruler.
I'm curious how many businesses there are with 50+ employees that aren't offering healthcare currently?
I haven't seen the cut-offs, but with more people qualifying for Medicaid, wont those in the $14k+ range qualify for Medicaid rather than having to buy in. I've the the number of people who will have to buy in or face the fine is 6%. Not really that large of a number.
Polls have Obama and Romney within 4% of each other. Yes, 6% is huge.
I'm see that the penalty for not being insured is 1% of your income. So most people making more then the poverty line ($14K) will most likely choose to pay the fine versus costly health insurance. Someone making $28K will now pay the government an extra $280 each year.
That is a tax. And it is a tax on the blue-collar middle class.
Edit:
This IS Obama's big-time backfire.
I haven't seen the cut-offs, but with more people qualifying for Medicaid, wont those in the $14k+ range qualify for Medicaid rather than having to buy in. I've the the number of people who will have to buy in or face the fine is 6%. Not really that large of a number.
And how are we going to pay for all these newly eligible Medicaid members? Our good looks ran out a while ago...
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
they mandated it based on international/interstate commerce. Care to show me where that applies to a product that isn't interstate commerce
they didn't pass this because of interstate commerce, they did so because it is a tax.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
More from the ruling: In another portion of the ruling, the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional a piece of the Obama administration’s health care law that expanded Medicaid, a joint federal-state insurance program for the poor. The court, however, didn't throw out the expansion. It ruled instead that the federal government can’t threaten resistant states by threatening to full all of their existing Medicaid funding
May be the smartest Chief Justice we've ever had. He didn't strike the damn thing down. He went one better - he gave the guy what he wanted knowing it would be his downfall.
This keeps getting funnier. So, now the Feds MUST either fund States or not. They can't pick and choose their favorites or bully States into doing what the Feds want. Too funny.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
they mandated it based on international/interstate commerce. Care to show me where that applies to a product that isn't interstate commerce
they didn't pass this because of interstate commerce, they did so because it is a tax.
adams passed a health care mandate in 1798 i believe. Washington passed a mandate in 1792 that all men buy guns. How are either, in concept, different than passing a health care mandate now? this is coming from someone that does not support the mandate btw.
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
they mandated it based on international/interstate commerce. Care to show me where that applies to a product that isn't interstate commerce
they didn't pass this because of interstate commerce, they did so because it is a tax.
adams passed a health care mandate in 1798 i believe. Washington passed a mandate in 1792 that all men buy guns. How are either, in concept, different than passing a health care mandate now? this is coming from someone that does not support the mandate btw.
the mandate passed to buy guns was done so because the congress has the power to regulate militias.
the health care mandate wasn't just passed by adams, washington signed it to. Interstate and international commerce can be regulated. Notice they didn't require all citizens to buy it.
neither used interstate commerce to justify non interstate commerce. The mandate is now a tax, and that was how it has to be viewed in order to be constitutional. It is right in the opinion.
I am glad they didn't uphold the idea based on interstate commerce...many more things could have gone down that road...now it is a tax, and we all know how popular taxes are ... 10 years from now when this is fully in motion, we will see what has happened. I think I might read the entire bill. Would be nice if everyone in congress had done the same. We may have ended up with something better...although that is probably unlikely
Post edited by mikepegg44 on
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
Wrong, again.. The Court couldn't be clearer -
More from the court: But the good news for the government begins on page 31 of the majority opinion: “That is not the end of the matter,” says Chief Justice Roberts. Chief Justice Roberts says that because the federal government’s primary argument fails, the court must consider its secondary justification for the insurance mandate: that the mandate is supported by Congress’s power to levy taxes.
The court agrees.
“It is well established that if a stature has two possible meanings, one of which violates the Constitution, courts should adopt the meaning that does not do so,” the chief justice writes.
So, the mandate fails the test. ONLY as a tax does the law pass constitutional muster. So, want to try another spin?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
they mandated it based on international/interstate commerce. Care to show me where that applies to a product that isn't interstate commerce
they didn't pass this because of interstate commerce, they did so because it is a tax.
adams passed a health care mandate in 1798 i believe. Washington passed a mandate in 1792 that all men buy guns. How are either, in concept, different than passing a health care mandate now? this is coming from someone that does not support the mandate btw.
the mandate passed to buy guns was done so because the congress has the power to regulate militias.
the health care mandate wasn't just passed by adams, washington signed it to. Interstate and international commerce can be regulated. Notice they didn't require all citizens to buy it.
they did require sailors to buy it. They had to buy personal health/hospital insurance. Even so, not sure how that is interstate commerce and health care isn't.
What a sad day. The saddest part is that so many people are too fucking stupid to realize this is an absolute boon for the insurance corporations, and offers zero benefit to the citizens of this country. Why anyone would ever be in favor of putting even more money into these vultures is beyond me. We have lost our minds.
May be the smartest Chief Justice we've ever had. He didn't strike the damn thing down. He went one better - he gave the guy what he wanted knowing it would be his downfall.
If so, Roberts is a diabolical right-wing mastermind.
The ruling is starting to make sense from that perspective. If is was struck down, Obama's campaign would use it against Romney in the elections as an attack on the lower and middle class. But by approving it as a tax, Romney can use it as Obama attacking the middle class and gain steam by vowing to repeal it.
This is an interesting chess game with big time stakes.
adams passed a health care mandate in 1798 i believe. Washington passed a mandate in 1792 that all men buy guns. How are either, in concept, different than passing a health care mandate now? this is coming from someone that does not support the mandate btw.
the mandate passed to buy guns was done so because the congress has the power to regulate militias.
the health care mandate wasn't just passed by adams, washington signed it to. Interstate and international commerce can be regulated. Notice they didn't require all citizens to buy it.
they did require sailors to buy it. They had to buy personal health/hospital insurance. Even so, not sure how that is interstate commerce and health care isn't.
[/quote][/quote]
health insurance is not interstate. that is what is being required by a mandate to purchase.
Sailors were involved in interstate and international commerce. both of which can be regulated.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
adams passed a health care mandate in 1798 i believe. Washington passed a mandate in 1792 that all men buy guns. How are either, in concept, different than passing a health care mandate now? this is coming from someone that does not support the mandate btw.
the mandate passed to buy guns was done so because the congress has the power to regulate militias.
the health care mandate wasn't just passed by adams, washington signed it to. Interstate and international commerce can be regulated. Notice they didn't require all citizens to buy it.
they did require sailors to buy it. They had to buy personal health/hospital insurance. Even so, not sure how that is interstate commerce and health care isn't.
[/quote]
health insurance is not interstate. that is what is being required by a mandate to purchase.
Sailors were involved in interstate and international commerce. both of which can be regulated.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
Wrong, again.. The Court couldn't be clearer -
More from the court: But the good news for the government begins on page 31 of the majority opinion: “That is not the end of the matter,” says Chief Justice Roberts. Chief Justice Roberts says that because the federal government’s primary argument fails, the court must consider its secondary justification for the insurance mandate: that the mandate is supported by Congress’s power to levy taxes.
The court agrees.
“It is well established that if a stature has two possible meanings, one of which violates the Constitution, courts should adopt the meaning that does not do so,” the chief justice writes.
So, the mandate fails the test. ONLY as a tax does the law pass constitutional muster. So, want to try another spin?
i understand what the court says, i just think its bunk. im not spinning anything.
based on scalia's mocking line of questioning in the hearings he made up his mind before even hearing the arguments.
i expect nothing less from a court of justices who legislate and pontificate from the bench. any court that decides that money is speech and not property is fundamentally flawed at best, and outright partisan at worst. i have zero faith or confidence in the supreme court.
it isn't the money that is the speech necessarily, it is the ideas and expressions paid for with that money that are tough to silence. When regulating free speech it needs to be shown that a clear and present danger is there. It wasn't shown. If it is challenged again, with better data and presentation of the clear and present danger to the election system it may be silenced. Not a decision I like, but the argument does make sense.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
May be the smartest Chief Justice we've ever had. He didn't strike the damn thing down. He went one better - he gave the guy what he wanted knowing it would be his downfall.
If so, Roberts is a diabolical right-wing mastermind.
The ruling is starting to make sense from that perspective. If is was struck down, Obama's campaign would use it against Romney in the elections as an attack on the lower and middle class. But by approving it as a tax, Romney can use it as Obama attacking the middle class and gain steam by vowing to repeal it.
This is an interesting chess game with big time stakes.
The more I read the more I think that while Obama is about to trumpet victory in the Rose Garden, he's feeling less safe than he did a few hours ago.
So this is from MSNBC and NOT FoxNews - read carefully -
The essence of Roberts’s ruling was:
• “The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part,” Roberts wrote.
• “The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it.”
• But “it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but (who) choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.”
The law, Roberts wrote, “makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income. And if the mandate is in effect just a tax hike on certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance, it may be within Congress’s constitutional power to tax.”
He said “The question is not whether that is the most natural interpretation of the mandate, but only whether it is a ‘fairly possible’ one.”
He said that Supreme Court precedent is that “every reasonable construction” of a law passed by Congress “must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality.”
NBC Pete Williams reported that Roberts reasoned that “there’s no real compulsion here” since those who do not pay the penalty for not having insurance can’t be sent to jail. “This is one of the scenarios that administration officials had considered that if the court did this they would consider it a big victory,” Williams said.
But in a major victory for the states who challenged the law, the court said that the Obama administration cannot coerce states to go along with the Medicaid insurance program for low-income people.
The financial pressure which the federal government puts on the states in the expansion of Medicaid “is a gun to the head,” Roberts wrote.
“A State that opts out of the Affordable Care Act’s expansion in health care coverage thus stands to lose not merely ‘a relatively small percentage’ of its existing Medicaid funding, but all of it,” Roberts said,
Congress cannot “penalize States that choose not to participate in that new program by taking away their existing Medicaid funding,” Roberts said.
The Medicaid provision is projected to add nearly 30 million more people to the insurance program for low-income Americans -- but the court’s decision left states free to opt out of the expansion if they choose.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
so why is it commerce if i am a sailor, but not if I work on a farm?
...insurance companies cannot sell insurance across state lines. If you work on a farm, you aren't engaging in interstate commerce, the farm owner is if it is selling those grains across state lines I suppose...but that would be regulating business, not individuals. I don't know how corporations worked back then
I couldn't tell you why sailors were required to buy their own insurance back then. Could have been the nature of the specific business and their organizations. Notice they didn't require all individuals in the country to buy it.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
so why is it commerce if i am a sailor, but not if I work on a farm?
...insurance companies cannot sell insurance across state lines. If you work on a farm, you aren't engaging in interstate commerce, the farm owner is if it is selling those grains across state lines I suppose...but that would be regulating business, not individuals. I don't know how corporations worked back then
I couldn't tell you why sailors were required to buy their own insurance back then. Could have been the nature of the specific business and their organizations. Notice they didn't require all individuals in the country to buy it.
I don't know the specs of the law back then either, but to me it doesn't seem that different than a sailor shipping cotton to a different state then by boat, and a truck driver shipping gmo corn to a different state today.
plus insurance is still accepted across state lines, so isn't that interstate? I know that this is not what the decision today was made on, but still a good topic.
Comments
interesting, calling it a tax, as they should have simply done in the first place, was why it was upheld. So it wasn't a mandate of purchase it is a tax. I am glad they didn't expand the commerce clause.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
More money for insurance companies, tax on the Middle/Lower Class (Upper already have coverage), increased health care spending, election of Mitt Romney (how can Obama run on his signature legislation when it was the direct cause of his losing Congressional seats mid-term?).
EDIT: Forgot to add...
That is a tax. And it is a tax on the blue-collar middle class.
Edit:
This IS Obama's big-time backfire.
It also destroys small businesses. If they have 50+ emps, they mus offer coverage or be taxed themselves. Hmmmmm. I have 60 employees - is it better I get into the health care business, pay a tax, or just find a way to get by on 49 employees? Hmmmm....
The law wasn't read. It wasn't well thought out. And in classic Shakespearean ending, this hubris will be the downfall of the smug, arrogant ruler.
lucky guess. glad to see it. still not a fan of the mandate, but its better than before
we can't call it a mandate...it is now a tax
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i'll stick with the founders. they called it a mandate when they did the same thing.
That's the interesting part. By upholding, they may have actually caused more problems for Obama. There is no doubt Romney picked up on that and it will be trumpted from here until November. I do wonder how Obama is going to spin that when the law itself wasn't wildly popular to begin with.
I haven't seen the cut-offs, but with more people qualifying for Medicaid, wont those in the $14k+ range qualify for Medicaid rather than having to buy in. I've the the number of people who will have to buy in or face the fine is 6%. Not really that large of a number.
I'm curious how many businesses there are with 50+ employees that aren't offering healthcare currently?
And how are we going to pay for all these newly eligible Medicaid members? Our good looks ran out a while ago...
they mandated it based on international/interstate commerce. Care to show me where that applies to a product that isn't interstate commerce
they didn't pass this because of interstate commerce, they did so because it is a tax.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
May be the smartest Chief Justice we've ever had. He didn't strike the damn thing down. He went one better - he gave the guy what he wanted knowing it would be his downfall.
This keeps getting funnier. So, now the Feds MUST either fund States or not. They can't pick and choose their favorites or bully States into doing what the Feds want. Too funny.
adams passed a health care mandate in 1798 i believe. Washington passed a mandate in 1792 that all men buy guns. How are either, in concept, different than passing a health care mandate now? this is coming from someone that does not support the mandate btw.
the mandate passed to buy guns was done so because the congress has the power to regulate militias.
the health care mandate wasn't just passed by adams, washington signed it to. Interstate and international commerce can be regulated. Notice they didn't require all citizens to buy it.
neither used interstate commerce to justify non interstate commerce. The mandate is now a tax, and that was how it has to be viewed in order to be constitutional. It is right in the opinion.
I am glad they didn't uphold the idea based on interstate commerce...many more things could have gone down that road...now it is a tax, and we all know how popular taxes are
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Wrong, again.. The Court couldn't be clearer -
More from the court: But the good news for the government begins on page 31 of the majority opinion: “That is not the end of the matter,” says Chief Justice Roberts. Chief Justice Roberts says that because the federal government’s primary argument fails, the court must consider its secondary justification for the insurance mandate: that the mandate is supported by Congress’s power to levy taxes.
The court agrees.
“It is well established that if a stature has two possible meanings, one of which violates the Constitution, courts should adopt the meaning that does not do so,” the chief justice writes.
So, the mandate fails the test. ONLY as a tax does the law pass constitutional muster. So, want to try another spin?
they did require sailors to buy it. They had to buy personal health/hospital insurance. Even so, not sure how that is interstate commerce and health care isn't.
The ruling is starting to make sense from that perspective. If is was struck down, Obama's campaign would use it against Romney in the elections as an attack on the lower and middle class. But by approving it as a tax, Romney can use it as Obama attacking the middle class and gain steam by vowing to repeal it.
This is an interesting chess game with big time stakes.
health insurance is not interstate. that is what is being required by a mandate to purchase.
Sailors were involved in interstate and international commerce. both of which can be regulated.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
health insurance is not interstate. that is what is being required by a mandate to purchase.
Sailors were involved in interstate and international commerce. both of which can be regulated.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
how is health insurance not interstate?
i understand what the court says, i just think its bunk. im not spinning anything.
it isn't the money that is the speech necessarily, it is the ideas and expressions paid for with that money that are tough to silence. When regulating free speech it needs to be shown that a clear and present danger is there. It wasn't shown. If it is challenged again, with better data and presentation of the clear and present danger to the election system it may be silenced. Not a decision I like, but the argument does make sense.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
The more I read the more I think that while Obama is about to trumpet victory in the Rose Garden, he's feeling less safe than he did a few hours ago.
http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/ ... e-law?lite
So this is from MSNBC and NOT FoxNews - read carefully -
The essence of Roberts’s ruling was:
• “The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part,” Roberts wrote.
• “The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it.”
• But “it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but (who) choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.”
The law, Roberts wrote, “makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income. And if the mandate is in effect just a tax hike on certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance, it may be within Congress’s constitutional power to tax.”
He said “The question is not whether that is the most natural interpretation of the mandate, but only whether it is a ‘fairly possible’ one.”
He said that Supreme Court precedent is that “every reasonable construction” of a law passed by Congress “must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality.”
NBC Pete Williams reported that Roberts reasoned that “there’s no real compulsion here” since those who do not pay the penalty for not having insurance can’t be sent to jail. “This is one of the scenarios that administration officials had considered that if the court did this they would consider it a big victory,” Williams said.
But in a major victory for the states who challenged the law, the court said that the Obama administration cannot coerce states to go along with the Medicaid insurance program for low-income people.
The financial pressure which the federal government puts on the states in the expansion of Medicaid “is a gun to the head,” Roberts wrote.
“A State that opts out of the Affordable Care Act’s expansion in health care coverage thus stands to lose not merely ‘a relatively small percentage’ of its existing Medicaid funding, but all of it,” Roberts said,
Congress cannot “penalize States that choose not to participate in that new program by taking away their existing Medicaid funding,” Roberts said.
The Medicaid provision is projected to add nearly 30 million more people to the insurance program for low-income Americans -- but the court’s decision left states free to opt out of the expansion if they choose.
you can't buy it across state lines
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
so why is it commerce if i am a sailor, but not if I work on a farm?
...insurance companies cannot sell insurance across state lines. If you work on a farm, you aren't engaging in interstate commerce, the farm owner is if it is selling those grains across state lines I suppose...but that would be regulating business, not individuals. I don't know how corporations worked back then
I couldn't tell you why sailors were required to buy their own insurance back then. Could have been the nature of the specific business and their organizations. Notice they didn't require all individuals in the country to buy it.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I don't know the specs of the law back then either, but to me it doesn't seem that different than a sailor shipping cotton to a different state then by boat, and a truck driver shipping gmo corn to a different state today.
plus insurance is still accepted across state lines, so isn't that interstate? I know that this is not what the decision today was made on, but still a good topic.