because we have human bodies.

We're all in it. The gov't isn't forcing you to have a human body. You're going to buy healthcare services. They have to be paid for.
The nature of the American insurance industry is unique. It can't be compared to buying cars or broccoli or gym memberships. There is no slippery slope, no loss of freedom.

That's the line justice Kennedy seems to be taking. We'll see if he follows that to an argument in support of the gov't case, and can convince Roberts, who seems to be worried about his court's reputation as being overly politicized.

Interesting observations, but the justices are notorious for being able to play both sides in oral arguments, but return to their own considerations and reasoning when it's time to decide. I think it's risky to get ahead of the game in predicting how any of the justices will ultimately decide this case. This court is not known for reliably 'telegraphing' decisions; they prefer to keep their candor in camera.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

The "loss of freedom" to quote you is the government mandating we buy it or be fined if we don't. Pretty simple issue.

Quote
samintx
The "loss of freedom" to quote you is the government mandating we buy it or be fined if we don't. Pretty simple issue.

Actually, the argument above isn't that the government mandates that you purchase healthcare services or not; it's that if you have a human body, you will purchase healthcare services, period. Therefore, the 'mandate' really just regulates activity that is inevitable for everyone. The 'freedom' in this case would be the freedom to spend your money in the market however you like, with no restrictions, and Congress absolutely has the power to limit and regulate that freedom.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
samintx
The "loss of freedom" to quote you is the government mandating we buy it or be fined if we don't. Pretty simple issue.

We're all already fined if people don't buy insurance, through higher premiums. That's the reality of what Kennedy calls the unique American health insurance market. The fine is $95 a year and would apply to around 3% of the population, at the most. That's people who could afford insurance but don't buy it.

It's actually not simple, and the freedom you claim to be losing is freedom you don't currently have.

Quote
samintx
The "loss of freedom" to quote you is the government mandating we buy it or be fined if we don't. Pretty simple issue.

Yeah, loss of freedom to live on the backs of others and to further the have and have not's divide. Please. cry a different song.

How do you defend the indefensible? Obummer's solicitor general is doing a piss-poor job. Thank goodness!

Quote
rjmacs
Interesting observations, but the justices are notorious for being able to play both sides in oral arguments, but return to their own considerations and reasoning when it's time to decide. I think it's risky to get ahead of the game in predicting how any of the justices will ultimately decide this case. This court is not known for reliably 'telegraphing' decisions; they prefer to keep their candor in camera.

I didn't make any predictions.

Quote
Grace62

Quote
rjmacs
Interesting observations, but the justices are notorious for being able to play both sides in oral arguments, but return to their own considerations and reasoning when it's time to decide. I think it's risky to get ahead of the game in predicting how any of the justices will ultimately decide this case. This court is not known for reliably 'telegraphing' decisions; they prefer to keep their candor in camera.

I didn't make any predictions.

Nor did i say you did. My comment was generically about how difficult it is to see, from comments in arguments, how a case will be decided or written.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Grace.... interesting assumption, and remarkably false. Given that there are certain religious sects which refuse to use 'modern' 'health services'.

Justices ask great logical questions in their review of the case at hand. It's quite a lot of fun, but as noted above, not necessarily an indication of how the voting will occur.

And, of course, Justice Thomas never has anything to ask. I expect he prefers to simply read about it later.

Quote
cbelt3
Grace.... interesting assumption, and remarkably false. Given that there are certain religious sects which refuse to use 'modern' 'health services'.

Our society has dealt with that, and our courts have decided we can charge those people with neglect and abuse if they don't get health care for their children.
again, people are claiming losses of freedom that they don't have


ACA does not exempt Christian Scientists, but it does exempt the Amish and other groups that object to all insurance and/or have their own community-based systems of paying for care (IOW, they don't expect the rest of us to cover them as we cover the uninsured now.)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 01:21PM by Grace62.

Health Care for everyone in the USA should come from tax dollars "One and Done"
Tax dollars should also be bundled to improve and modernize all Public Health Facilities.

Gross misuse of tax dollars deprives everyone.

ymmv *(:>*

---

“Stay Hungry Stay Foolish"
"There are only two mantras yummm and yuk "
"There is a fine line between a rut and a groove"
"The quality of Congress is not strained. It droppeth like a fetid cow patty from a bovine cloaca." cbelt
"I got to that part and I knew there was going to be some weapons grade stupid to follow"Lux Interior
"When all the trees have been cut down, when all the animals have been hunted,
when all the waters are polluted, when all the air is unsafe to breathe, only then
will you discover you cannot eat money."
~ Cree Prophecy

Quote
cbelt3
And, of course, Justice Thomas never has anything to ask. I expect he prefers to simply read about it later.

Do you have proof that Thomas can read?

As I recall, he misunderstood the filing instructions of his disclosure form...repeatedly for 20 years.

He's bought and paid for. We need to get 5 of 8.

Quote
samintx
The "loss of freedom" to quote you is the government mandating we buy it or be fined if we don't. Pretty simple issue.

I suffer a similar loss of freedom every time i get into a car and i'm compelled by law to buckle my seatbelt.

oppression!

---

I am compelled by law to buy automobile insurance. I am compelled by law to buy homeowner's insurance. Stop whining, righties. Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

Oh, waitaminit. That was a Democrat said that. Well, dang. I guess the Republicans were busy writing up subsidies for polluting, job-offshoring, tax-evading corporations.

Quote
Grace62
because we have human bodies.

We're all in it. The gov't isn't forcing you to have a human body. You're going to buy healthcare services. They have to be paid for.
The nature of the American insurance industry is unique. It can't be compared to buying cars or broccoli or gym memberships. There is no slippery slope, no loss of freedom.

That's the line justice Kennedy seems to be taking. We'll see if he follows that to an argument in support of the gov't case, and can convince Roberts, who seems to be worried about his court's reputation as being overly politicized.

Tax every breath of fresh air while you're at it.

After all, if it weren't for big bro' we wouldn't have any.

Why are people so confused about the difference between powers of the state and powers of the federal government?

Seat belt laws, auto insurance, homeowner's insurance (really? compelled by law?) are state laws. Your state legislature can require you to do virtually anything.

This mandate was passed by Congress, which has only certain enumerated powers. The power to require people to do things (called the police power) is not one of them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 02:41PM by Mr Downtown.

Quote
Mr Downtown
Why are people so confused about the difference between powers of the state and powers of the federal government?

Seat belt laws, auto insurance, homeowner's insurance (really? compelled by law?) are state laws. Your state legislature can require you to do virtually anything.

This mandate was passed by Congress, which has only certain enumerated powers. The power to require people to do things (called the police power) is not one of them.

Commerce clause.
Congress can regulate interstate commerce and commercial matters that have national importance.

Quote
Grace62
Our society has dealt with that, and our courts have decided we can charge those people with neglect and abuse if they don't get health care for their children.

Society ? No. Courts. And those rulings are specific for Children, and only in very specific cases. What about Adults ? Under the new law, an adult that fails to obtain health insurance is fined. Not jailed for self-negligence. Or are you thinking that should be the case ? (yes, I know... I'm not serious about that)

Gute- Your State requires you to have car insurance, OR, in most cases, to post a bond. (some people do this). All you need is liability against hurting others. You typically are not required to insure your own car against damage by other sources. Your Bank requires you to have home insurance, not the State, typically. At least Ohio doesn't.. dunno about your State.

I think we can all agree that the law is a definite case of legislative sausage making.... cut away all the good stuff and leave the fat and floor sweepings. The active role the health insurance companies had in writing the law from within the Congressional offices was rather hideous, IMHO.

I am personally benefiting from the law.. my 24 year old daughter is now insured through my employer, as is my 21 year old dropout son. And that's good. My healthcare costs are still going up faster and faster. Is that caused by the law ?

No. It's caused by what the law did NOT address. Waste, stupidity, greed, and manipulation of medicine by ignorant and uncaring governments and businesses.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 02:54PM by cbelt3.

Quote
cbelt3
My healthcare costs are still going up faster and faster. Is that caused by the law ?

No. It's caused by what the law did NOT address. Waste, stupidity, greed, and manipulation of medicine by ignorant and uncaring governments and businesses.

You really aren't familiar with this law at all are you?
It addresses very specifically a multitude of problems that lead to higher costs.
You are using emotion and hyperbole to describe the problems, I'm not agreeing with your characterization, just the reality that there are serious inefficiencies and some profit motive that is harmful to consumers.

also, I mentioned above that there ARE religious exemptions in the bill. However, as a society (through legal expression in courts, yes, that's how we put weight behind our values) we acknowledge the good and benefit of health care, we don't acknowledge that going without it is a societal good. Sorry Christian Scientists. They can fight their $95 annual penalty in court if they are among the 3% of Americans who might be subject to it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 03:02PM by Grace62.

Grace, I think the crux of the philisophical issue is that the law requires me to purchase something from a private company, thereby making the government a sales agent for these private companies. And that selfsame requirement was, in the main, written by those companies. The term 'Conflict of Interest' applies rather heavily to this concept. Ultimately that's the main objection many of a quasi-libertarian bent have to this regulation.

And you'll find that objection to cross political boundaries... Americans tend to be a rather independent and cranky bunch, who don't believe that the Rodina is always right.

I personally don't believe in all religious exemptions when it comes to overall public health, unless those exempt are fully segregated from the public as a result of their religion. Immunization comes to mind.. when the objections of a few endanger the many.

I actually don't have a problem with paying taxes and receiving a service from my government. They provide me with many valuable services. But this regulation sticks in my throat.

I love the divine understanding you-r always selling

Quote: Grace
"""You really aren't familiar with this law at all are you? """

Quote cbelt: """No. It's caused by what the law did NOT address. Waste, stupidity, greed, and manipulation of medicine by ignorant and uncaring governments and businesses."""

cbelt has this nailed down sad to say *(:>*

---

“Stay Hungry Stay Foolish"
"There are only two mantras yummm and yuk "
"There is a fine line between a rut and a groove"
"The quality of Congress is not strained. It droppeth like a fetid cow patty from a bovine cloaca." cbelt
"I got to that part and I knew there was going to be some weapons grade stupid to follow"Lux Interior
"When all the trees have been cut down, when all the animals have been hunted,
when all the waters are polluted, when all the air is unsafe to breathe, only then
will you discover you cannot eat money."
~ Cree Prophecy

Quote
Gutenberg
I am compelled by law to buy homeowner's insurance.

Really? What laws, in which states? I have it for obvious reasons, but never understood it to be a legal requirement.

I can see it being a requirement of a mortgage agreement to protect the bank's investment, but that's not a law, and once the loan is paid off it's not a requirement.

Cool! Belty wants single-payer! It's good to have a righty on board the train.

The fact is that the private insurance mandate is a bad idea foisted upon us in lieu of public financing or a public option by the republicans, who then all ran away and are pretending that they didn't cause it to be this way. I think it is pretty likely that they planned it this way, forcing the dems into a compromise that would provide them with a supreme court challenge.

I think another fact is that what we have is far better than the alternative so I'm grudgingly hoping that the supreme court tells the obstructionists to blow it out their ear. I don't know if it would have been possible to get single payer or public option plans through the congress due to the antics of the repubs and the pandering blue dogs.

---

"So be proud to be a decent American instead of just a w'anker whipping up fear!" - Michael D. Higgins, President of Ireland



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 04:47PM by davester.

Quote
Gutenberg
Cool! Belty wants single-payer! It's good to have a righty on board the train.

So did Nixon !

Nixon would never be able to run as a Republican today.

---

Quote
davester
The fact is that the private insurance mandate is a bad idea foisted upon us in lieu of public financing or a public option by the republicans, who then all ran away and are pretending that they didn't cause it to be this way. I think it is pretty likely that they planned it this way, forcing the dems into a compromise that would provide them with a supreme court challenge.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Yep, he was to the left of Obama's politics.

---

"So be proud to be a decent American instead of just a w'anker whipping up fear!" - Michael D. Higgins, President of Ireland

"""The fact is that the private insurance mandate is a bad idea foisted upon us in lieu of public financing or a public option by the republicans, who then all ran away and are pretending that they didn't cause it to be this way. I think it is pretty likely that they planned it this way, forcing the dems into a compromise that would provide them with a supreme court challenge."""

In my narrow minded opinion tax payers are part of the problem and part of the equation. We as tax payers need to make a few mandates to our government. We need more of our taxes directed towards USA tax payers and into Health Care and infrastructure like Mass Transit.

We need to stop paying the bills for Big Oil, Pharmaceuticals and
And Health Insurance including HMO's. Government needs to regulate
and break up our own Big Oil Cartels, Insurance Cartels and Pharmaceutical Cartels. The Pharmaceutical companies are currently sending bonuses to employees right now for last years profits.

We need to stop paying blackmail money to N Korea, Pakistan and
Iraq and others. We need to direct American funds to Americans, all Americans.

Yes there are details, but the crux of the issue is reigning in Big Business and defining who is in charge and who's money is going to be spent and how. ymmv

All tax payers need to get involved and stop pointing to the left and right at each other.
Find some common denominators, discuss the possibilities together, discover whats the next right thing to do together, simple stuff . . . maybe to simple

Our government is running this country like @#$%& why not demand more from all of them across the board Democrats and Republicans.

We need somebody to fire the Bozos

"I am the only person that can prevent the Bozo explosion" SJ

Rudie

---

“Stay Hungry Stay Foolish"
"There are only two mantras yummm and yuk "
"There is a fine line between a rut and a groove"
"The quality of Congress is not strained. It droppeth like a fetid cow patty from a bovine cloaca." cbelt
"I got to that part and I knew there was going to be some weapons grade stupid to follow"Lux Interior
"When all the trees have been cut down, when all the animals have been hunted,
when all the waters are polluted, when all the air is unsafe to breathe, only then
will you discover you cannot eat money."
~ Cree Prophecy




Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 05:21PM by haikuman.

Accept that everyone will need health care at some point in their lives, and everyone will need some care when it is not expected. (The healthiest 20-something can break a leg, develop a tumor, etc.)

Currently, public hospitals are required to treat people. Therefore you can go without health insurance and rely on publicly mandated care without paying the cost.

So, there is a "free rider" problem or, in the lingo people seem to prefer now, a "moral hazard."

To eliminate the moral hazard, some form of mandated payment is necessary. (You can always opt to eliminate the burden on public hospitals, but I don't think people want to see accident victims denied treatment outside the local emergency room).

So there must be some form of taxpayer supported insurance, and it must be universal. The legislature has determined that a requirement to purchase from private insurance plans is the best. There is no alternative to this plan: if the current plan is scrapped, it will not be replaced by a better plan, but by nothing. Therefore the people who argue against the current system appear to be arguing on behalf of retaining the moral hazard.

The dichotomy of the right wing insistence on intrusive government legislation with regard to women's health care and opposition to government intervention for overall health care is at best mind boggling.

The one thing that doesn't seem to exist in this discussion - nationally or even locally - is the sheer hypocrisy of the rhetoric from those who would impose political mandates on women and their doctors but oppose similar mandates when imposed upon themselves.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2012 12:33AM by RgrF.

RgrF- Agreed.

Quote
J Marston
the people who argue against the current system appear to be arguing on behalf of retaining the moral hazard.

Well, no. Pointing out the side effects of the prescription doesn't mean you're in favor of the disease.

Under our Constitution, Congress simply doesn't have the power to require purchase of something. States do. So Congress will have to do something like Medicare-for-all to provide a national solution.