US Health Care Law Ruled Consitutional (Sort of)

[Steve R.]

The breaking news is that the US Supreme Court upheld Obama’s health-care law though a verbal sleight of hand, by declaring fines for non-participation to be really taxes. While I believe that the law as originally proposed by Obama to be unconstitutional, my intent is not actually analyze the appropriateness of the decision or the law itself.

My fundamental concern is that Obama promised a "transparent" government that would have high ethical standards and would not sink to running the government based on partisan politics. Well, the recent Supreme Court decision, once again exposes Obama's disingenuous practices. Kathllen Parker wrote: "The Supreme Court ruling essentially demonstrates that the Obama administration won the day with deceit. "

Regretfully, passage of the health care bill is only one of many examples of Obama's use of lofty rhetoric that fails the truth test. Obama for example proposed to address the deficit spending in the US. He appointed a deficit reduction commission and promptly dissed it. Obama nixed the Keystone Pipeline project, then approved a short section before the cameras claiming that the project was moving along. In February 2012 Obama submitted a proposed budget budget to the House, it was rejected. Obama apparently washed his hands of it, based on the lack of any news.

In November US citizens will be once again voting on who will be President. So, for me; would you want to vote for a person who will say and do anything to get re-elected and who treats the electorate as pawns to be manipulated? (PS: Don't construe this as being pro-Romney. We will be voting for the lesser of two evils.)

For those in the rest of the world; what is your take on the US Health Care Law? Is it workable? Does it seem to be reasonable?

 

[Adam Caramon]

My fundamental concern is that Obama promised a "transparent" government that would have high ethical standards and would not sink to running the government based on partisan politics. Well, the recent Supreme Court decision, once again exposes Obama's disingenuous practices. Kathllen Parker wrote: "The Supreme Court ruling essentially demonstrates that the Obama administration won the day with deceit. "

link

The majority, however, also found that requiring Americans to pay a penalty if they did not buy health insurance was constitutional. The government did not call the penalty a "tax," but the court found that it is indeed a tax, and thus, within Congress’ powers.

...

The majority ruling "creates a debilitated, inoperable version of health care regulation that Congress did not enact and the public does not expect," said Justice Kennedy, reading from the dissent. "It makes enactment of sensible health care regulation more difficult, since Congress cannot start afresh but must take as its point of departure a jumble of now senseless provisions, provisions that certain interests favored under the Court’s new design will struggle to retain," he said.

So, the Obama administration did not propose it as a tax, Chief Justice John Roberts interpreted it as a tax, his colleagues called that decision a bad one, and somehow this was all an Obama conspiracy from the beginning?

I've hear a lot of crazy theories since the Supreme Court decision, but this once may take the cake.

 

[Thales750]

The breaking news is that the US Supreme Court upheld Obama’s health-care law

It’s name is Affordable Health Care Act.

Why do conservatives always try to denigrate concepts the obviously do not understand?
The conservative movement is the scourge of the American way of life.
Americas is in last place when it comes to reining in health care cost. And middle class Americans still prefer to let the insurance companies take everything, and give very little back.
Take a look at the factors that led to the French Revolution.

 

[Steve R.]

The problems with the Affordable Health Care Act, to use the official name, is that it was passed in a highly deceitful manner with a lot of arm twisting. This can summed-up by the arrogant statement by Nancy Polosi's that the bill would need to be passed for you to find what was in it. This is not how laws should be passed in a free society.

So I hope that your are not advocating that it is OK for our politicians to use deceitful tactics that are possibly illegal and unconstitutional when it is done for the "public good".

As to health care, should the electorate want a national health care system, it should be a national health care program.

The purpose of insurance is manage risk, not to provide services. So if you are prone to certain diseases, insurance companies should be able to charge you more. Furthermore, insurance companies are also in the business of denying claims to maximize their income. To force the insurance companies to accept everyone equally, is wrong from the free-market perspective.

To get around this, the US needs to have a health care program where you go to a health care provider to receive your health care. Furthermore, it would be single payer.

 

[Fifty2One]

Amazing hot a country which self declares that it is the greatest democracy that ever existed, yet there are so many people who distrust the government.

The long hard struggle to get some of your fellow citizend affordable and available healthcare is a long process and becoming very costly just to get small parts of it passed through two sides which can not agree on many levels. I do not fully understand why a developed country would not want universal health care, unless they are waiting for charities to start taking up collections in order to help poor Americans get medical care (sufficient food, clean water and education).

 

[Adam Caramon]

I do not fully understand why a developed country would not want universal health care, unless they are waiting for charities to start taking up collections in order to help poor Americans get medical care (sufficient food, clean water and education).

Well, some people are of the mind that everyone is responsible for them self. If you're poor, that's your fault. You should have made better choices in life. Can't afford health insurance? Your fault.

Basically there is a segment of the population here that thinks they should only worry about them self and their family. Any kind of assistance to the poor or disabled tends to irk these people, as they feel it is not their responsibility.

Add in a political party that tells these people that they are right, throws around the word socialism as if it were a four letter word, and paints anyone that disagree with this outlook as anti-American, and you have the present state of America.

 

[Fifty2One]

Widening the devide between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' has historically proven to be an initiator to civil unrest or civil war.

 

[Vassago]

So I hope that your are not advocating that it is OK for our politicians to use deceitful tactics that are possibly illegal and unconstitutional when it is done for the "public good".
.

You mean, not unlike the Patriot Act originally passed by Bush? NDAA 2012? An illegal war justified by lies? etc... etc... etc...

That is the way of politicians in both the Left and Right. They only care about control and pushing laws that support their own PERSONAL ideas (and I use that term loosely as their own ideas seem to be in the interest of their respective parties rather than what they know is right), screw what anyone outside their box thinks.

 

[Vassago]

Widening the devide between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' has historically proven to be an initiator to civil unrest or civil war.

This is exactly what is happening here. The two sides are dividing the country. The sad thing is, most of the people who actually believe helping others is a form of socialism aren't exactly rich either. They just fail to see how much the scale is tipping. The average workers wages in the bottom 99% have raised dramatically slower than the average workers wages in the top 1% in the last 30 years. How is that keeping everything balanced? How is that going to fix the economy? As the rich get richer and poor get poorer, there will be a breaking point.

Anytime people complain about providing healthcare on our tax money's dime, I quote the Statue of Liberty:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."

We are supposed to be an open country for people to escape to. For people to seek help. That is how we were founded. Unfortunately, many people seem to have forgotten that. Where's the humanity in denying healthcare to a homeless man because he has no money? I just don't understand what is happening to this country. That's about as Un-American as you can get.

 

[Shisho2k]

Widening the devide between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' has historically proven to be an initiator to civil unrest or civil war.

As well as detrimental to the economy and many other under appreciated social outcomes.

 

[Brianwarnock]

I think the us have leaded the rest of countries in the field of public health care.

If this means what I think it means then Danny needs to get out more, the NHS was started over60 years ago.

Brian

 

[ColinEssex]

Where's the humanity in denying healthcare to a homeless man because he has no money?

The impression the USA gives the world is that if you are sick and need healthcare in the US and can't pay - you don't get treated - end of.

I'm sure healthcare in the US is as good as it gets - providing you can pay for it.

Col

 

[Vassago]

The impression the USA gives the world is that if you are sick and need healthcare in the US and can't pay - you don't get treated - end of.
Col

That appears to be the Republican position on healthcare.

 

[KenHigg]

...Where's the humanity in denying healthcare to a homeless man because he has no money?

Next time you see a homeless person give him a lift to the hospital and pick up the tab. While you're at it buy him some clothes and take him home with you until he can get back on his feet. Then come back and give a lecture on humanity.

 

[Vassago]

Next time you see a homeless person give him a lift to the hospital and pick up the tab. While you're at it buy him some clothes and take him home with you until he can get back on his feet. Then come back and give a lecture on humanity.

Personally, I can't afford to do all of that all on my own, but as a whole, society can take care of each other. That's what humanity is about. Everyone helping everyone with basic needs. I'm not saying buy him a flatscreen tv, but basic medical needs? Seriously!? You would be opposed to that?

Besides, not all homeless people need to go to the hospital, why would I just assume the next one I see does? You're not making any sense.

And don't lecture me about helping out with the poor. I do, in bulk. I volunteer at soup kitchens. I've been involved in fundraisers for the less fortunate, including collecting goods to donate to the local safe houses for both the homeless and battered women. I've even helped get companies I work for involved.

I wasn't lecturing anyone. I was standing up for, again, what our own Statue of Liberty, probably our most popular landmark and a symbol for our country, stands for. Are you saying that the statue is wrong?

We can afford to spend billions a month in a country that doesn't really want us there, but we can't afford to take care of our own. I see plenty wrong with that.

 

[KenHigg]

..take care of each other.

I don't see an 'each other' in your solution. I only see a one sided equation.

 

[Vassago]

I don't see an 'each other' in your solution. I only see a one sided equation.

How so? Someone who is healthy is far more likely to be able to give back. If you've ever done anything at a shelter, you would see how willing they are to help each other. When my company delivered goods to a local shelter here, the homeless came out to help unload the trucks. But if someone is injured, how likely CAN they help? Again, basic health needs. How hard is that to provide to people? We already know that medical costs are greatly inflated.

 

[KenHigg]

Yeah, yeah. fyi - My wife and have been helping feed homeless tent people in our community via our church (for over 2 years for this one group) We buy fruit, sandwich bread and meat, etc. and they hand deliver it to them on wed. Walk up a path in some woods to the little tent city. The first winter one says something like, 'this is fine during the holidays but we get hungry all year long'. How about this - I'll buy him a broom and he can start his path to recovery by sweeping the walmart parking lot for a few bucks.

 

[Vassago]

Yeah, yeah. fyi - My wife and have been helping feed homeless tent people in our community via our church (for over 2 years for this one group) We buy fruit, sandwich bread and meat, etc. and they hand deliver it to them on wed. Walk up a path in some woods to the little tent city. The first winter one says something like, 'this is fine during the holidays but we get hungry all year long'. How about this - I'll buy him a broom and he can start his path to recovery by sweeping the walmart parking lot for a few bucks.

That's cool too. I'm all for the whole "teach a man to fish" strategy. My grandmother worked for a agency that helped people out of luck gain skills and then paired them with people looking for people with those skills. I helped design some of the courses for computer skills.

 

[KenHigg]

That's cool too. I'm all for the whole "teach a man to fish" strategy. My grandmother worked for a agency that helped people out of luck gain skills and then paired them with people looking for people with those skills. I helped design some of the courses for computer skills.

What's your grandmothers name, I'll ask our CIO if she knows her