Join AARP
Join for Just $16 A Year
- Discounts on travel and everyday savings
- Subscription to AARP The Magazine
- Free membership for your spouse or partner
Message Boards Directory
Welcome to the AARP Discussion Board. Here you can talk with peers about current events ranging from Social Security to caring for your parents to the latest on health care reform. It is also the perfect place to exchange healthy eating recipes and job hunting tips.
These forums are for you to engage and have fun meeting new people. Just remember the community code: Be nice!
Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
False
Government & Elections
Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
<font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="1">With elections coming up, there’s no shortage of dialogue here. Whether you're a red state Republican or a blue state Democrat, everyone is welcome — just remember to be civil.</font>
A victory for the President and even bigger one for the Middle Class, Poor, Disabled, and People with pre-existing medical conditions. A Republican judge sided with the President not because of
1
Cat:d51398b3-89f9-463d-bf1b-4b885f02c9eeForum:af978875-5bc6-4b07-a6fb-b18062132f95
Cat:d51398b3-89f9-463d-bf1b-4b885f02c9eeForum:af978875-5bc6-4b07-a6fb-b18062132f95Discussion:3d2edbe1-f4e1-4221-908f-a8e81291a381
Forums » Politics & Society » Government & Elections » Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
Forums
»
Politics & Society
»
Government & Elections
»
Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 5, 2012 9:11 PM EDT
|
Posts: 76
First: July 5, 2012 Last: May 15, 2013 |
The real reason is not what you can think of.
On 6/28, Supreme Court issued a pass for Obama's Health care policy. What surprised people was Chief Justice Roberts sided with four liberal justices in voting 5-4 to declare the law's "individual mandate" constitutional.
Why did John Roberts, a Bush appointee who generally votes with his conservative colleagues, suddenly change his opinion to vote with the liberal? Just three months ago, he still opposed that "individual mandate" law.
[Quote] Chief Justice Roberts: Can government require you to buy a cell phone?
Mar. 27, 2012 - Chief Justice Roberts asks the Solicitor General Verrilli if the government can require the purchase of cell phones for emergency services, just as the health-care law requires for health insurance.(The Washington Post)
[/quote]
There are different theories about this mysterious turnaround. Mostly were from disinformation office of the Feds to cover up their puppet Roberts. None could solve the puzzle. I know why - the Feds want that "individual mandate" provision. When the Feds want to put Kat Sung under surveillance, they forced the law makers passing through the Patriot Act. (Through OKC bombing and 911 bombing) When the Feds want to restrict Kat Sung in US, they activate the TSA search, (blocking leaving from air flight) blocking the entering of Canada and Mexico; (by "Operation Fast and Furious") see "697. TSA search, Canada and Mexico (12/11/2011)". Now when they want Kat Sung to have a health insurance, they activate their proxy- John Roberts.
Six years ago when Roberts was selected as Chief Justice, I have written already, "344. Roberts, a secret agent of D.O.J. (9/18/05)" http://katsung47.yuku.com/topic/4/The-dark-side-of-the-USA?page=4 This case proves I was very, very accurate at that judgement.
I'll talk about why the Feds want that "individual mandate" provision. |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 7:33 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 471
First: December 21, 2011 Last: May 20, 2013 |
Wrong!!! Simpson-Bowles was never presented to Congress to be voted on. Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: In Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : GUESS WHO has been designated to do with LESS ? It's not the members of congress who want their healthcare and fine 6 figure pensions......but they don't want the rest of us to have any of it.... cause they want a free-lunch for themselves. Extending the age of retirement is another idea coming from those who sit on their duffs for work....ignoring the ones who do the dirty jobs---hard labor that is who now can work til they drop.....do they care ? NAW. . This country can afford ANYTHING is choses to afford and prioritize and it certainly has prioritized making the wealthy more wealthy, encouraging growth in population without enough good jobs to support it.....and still sending $$ overseas to countries that hate us. Not to mention sacrificing our young for freedom that the middle east never asked for......they like their imprisonment to islam. Posted by JANMB |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 12:14 PM EDT
|
Posts: 1923
First: November 27, 2011 Last: May 18, 2013 |
In Response to Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: A victory for the President and even bigger one for the Middle Class, Poor, Disabled, and People with pre-existing medical conditions. A Republican judge sided with the President not because of Politics but because "IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO". Isn't that what justice is all about? The Right Thing to Do? Posted by creppelrm Obama appointee, Justice Elena Kagan and Clinton appointee, Justice Breyer, joined with Thomas, Alito, Roberts, Kennedy & Scalia in the 7 to 2 opinion on the Medicaid Expansion rule - supporting states rights and preventing the coercion from the Obamacare law on this Medicaid expansion I have to believe that these (9) people work hard in their evaluations of the Constitution. A tax is always better than a mandate. However, this is a new tax methodology for our code. Seems up to this point, we have always used tax incentives (credits) for promotion of an action - perhaps the push to get people to go green in the purchase of a certain type car or an energy efficient appliance should be changed from incentive to punitive. |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 12:59 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 585
First: May 28, 2012 Last: May 15, 2013 |
If you are against the coercion of Obamacare and it sure sounds like it, then how are you going to justify supporting Romney, who instituted the same exact healthcare program in Massachusetts. Of course Romney says he will repeal Obamacare. I smell hypocrisy at the highest level. It's also amazing at how much money the Private Health Industry has spent to try and destroy Obamacare and the over 300 million dollars they have donated to influence our Congress. I'm sure Greed and Profits have nothing to do with it. These Private Health Insurance Organizations, which are driven by profit and profit only, are only concerned about Affordable Healthcare for all of us. Call it like it is, Private Healthcare Insurance Companies hate Obamacare because President Obama's plan wont let these companies deny our coverage or raise our rates through the roof. Private Healthcare Insurance Companies dont want President Obama's Affordable Care Act around, because then they cant call all the shots and bully us around..n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: In Response to Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : Obama appointee, Justice Elena Kagan and Clinton appointee, Justice Breyer, joined with Thomas, Alito, Roberts, Kennedy & Scalia in the 7 to 2 opinion on the Medicaid Expansion rule - supporting states rights and preventing the coercion from the Obamacare law on this Medicaid expansion I have to believe that these (9) people work hard in their evaluations of the Constitution. A tax is always better than a mandate. However, this is a new tax methodology for our code. Seems up to this point, we have always used tax incentives (credits) for promotion of an action - perhaps the push to get people to go green in the purchase of a certain type car or an energy efficient appliance should be changed from incentive to punitive.
Posted by GailL1 |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 2:13 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 585
First: May 28, 2012 Last: May 15, 2013 |
With all due respect my friend, The Bowles - Simpson plan was defeated in the Republican Majority House of Representatives on 3/28/12 and only 16 Republicans voted in favor of it. n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: Wrong!!! Simpson-Bowles was never presented to Congress to be voted on. Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : Posted by Labrat64 |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 2:45 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1923
First: November 27, 2011 Last: May 18, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: If you are against the coercion of Obamacare and it sure sounds like it, then how are you going to justify supporting Romney, who instituted the same exact healthcare program in Massachusetts. Of course Romney says he will repeal Obamacare. I smell hypoccrisy at the highest level. It's also amazing at how much money the Private Health Industry has spent to try and destroy Obamacare and the over 300 million dollars they have donated to influence our Congress. I'm sure Greed and Profits have nothing to do with it. These Private Health Insurance Organizations, which are driven by profit and profit only, are only concerned about Affordable Healthcare for all of us. Call it like it is, Private Healthcare Insurance Companies hate Obamacare because President Obama's plan wont let these companies deny our coverage or raise our rates through the roof. Private Healthcare Insurance Companies dont want President Obama's Affordable Care Act around, because then they cant call all the shots and bully us around..n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : Posted by mandm84 I think states are in a better position to manage this healthcare "insurance" and healthcare problem than the Federal government. I guess time will only tell how premiums will go under the watchful eye of HHS. If healthcare cost go up, premiums will rise. It would be no different if it were some other way. I don't think we have found a way to control healthcare cost - not in the US, not in Mass and not even in other countries of the world. Seems you are off track from your initial post. I only pointed out that the tide goes both ways on SCOTUS rulings. |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 3:16 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1923
First: November 27, 2011 Last: May 18, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: With all due respect my friend, The Bowles - Simpson plan was defeated in the Republican Majority House of Representatives on 3/28/12 and only 16 Republicans voted in favor of it. n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : Posted by mandm84 It was not exactly Simpson-Bowles - it was a budget amendment, among many, The Cooper-LaTourette amendment and it seems was voted down 38 / 382. Here's The Roll Call - and as you can see neither party really had any "Ayes" to crow about - even those that signed in support of the amendment (BOTH PARTIES) fell into party lines when the tough got going. BUT, I see this all start to turn soon - when this economy fails to pick up its pulse rate closer to the election, when these looming tax consequences start getting closer to instigation & expiration on 12/31/2012 - the sequestration, the Bush Tax cuts and the Obama tax cuts - you will start to see action, I hope. The Simpson-Bowles recommendation or in some similar fashion, will be kindest and gentlest to either party than what might be the alternative, i.e extending the Bush Tax cuts. |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 4:04 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 585
First: May 28, 2012 Last: May 15, 2013 |
I mean no disrespect to you and Sorry if I went off track , but fair healthcare for all should be available in our country. Our seniors, children's and disabled's life and death healthcare decisions shoud NOT be based on bottom line profit margins. If we can afford to give the corporations and wealthiest Americans more tax breaks, well you better be able to provide adequate and Affordable healthcare for those Americans struggling to make ends meet. Part of being a compassionate and civil society. n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: In Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : I think states are in a better position to manage this healthcare "insurance" and healthcare problem than the Federal government. I guess time will only tell how premiums will go under the watchful eye of HHS. If healthcare cost go up, premiums will rise. It would be no different if it were some other way. I don't think we have found a way to control healthcare cost - not in the US, not in Mass and not even in other countries of the world. Seems you are off track from your initial post. I only pointed out that the tide goes both ways on SCOTUS rulings. Posted by GailL1 |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 7:15 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1923
First: November 27, 2011 Last: May 18, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: I mean no disrespect to you and Sorry if I went off track , but fair healthcare for all should be available in our country. Our seniors, children's and disabled's life and death healthcare decisions shoud NOT be based on bottom line profit margins. If we can afford to give the corporations and wealthiest Americans more tax breaks, well you better be able to provide adequate and Affordable healthcare for those Americans struggling to make ends meet. Part of being a compassionate and civil society. n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : Posted by mandm84 So What is "Fair" healthcare? Seniors and many of the disabled already are on the Medicare rolls, those with lower incomes and assets also get Medicaid extra help to pay their premiums or Medicaid to pay for their longterm care. Children in many income bracket families already have CHIP. - So there is no profit margins to absorb with these folks. Same with the VA system. We have to be competitive with our corporate tax rates in the world economy because they can set up business just about anywhere. States are competing right now for companies to move to their location from another state to supply jobs for their citizens and are giving lots of tax perks to accomplish this task. Right or wrong, taxes are what we use to bargain and compete. I think Americans pay their share in taxes no matter their income - at least the ones that pay anything. We can take away some of the tax expenditures - like the child care credit, the home mortgage interest deduction, charitable contributions, retirement account credits, medical & health care & insurance deductions - but who is that gonna hurt the most - middle class families. We can change the capital gains tax rate and then it will hurt a lot of seniors. You know, for me, when I hear that "work hard" senario from Obama - what comes to mind is maybe many of these people should have worked "smarter" rather than harder. What is "fair" healthcare? Can there be a dollar limit set on fair? What about a prognosis potential? What about a quality of life measure? What happens if an obese person does not lose weight? What about a smoker that refuses to stop? Same with a drug addict (including alcohol)? What about somebody with diabetes that doesn't do what is needed to control the disease? What about personal care (not medical) that a person cannot perform? Should that be in the mix too? What about dental? What about glasses? What about hearing? What about a woman having children that are not afforded in care or money? What about family violence - that's in the mix too. There is no insurance profit margin in any of these things. I just have a hard time understanding how people make decisions in their lives especially with all the advantages that we have in today's society. All I know is when I am with a group of very diverse individuals and we begin to discuss planning for future - I see a whole lot of really blank faces- are we just all living for today and not tomorrow. If I had more experience with people changing for the betterment of their lives, I could see some hope at the end of this tunnel. Yes very much off topic . . . . . . . but it is your topic so you can take it wherever.! |
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
posted at July 8, 2012 11:41 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 585
First: May 28, 2012 Last: May 15, 2013 |
What is fair is not cutting 200 billion from Medicare like Republican Paul Ryan wants to. The wealthiest top 1% has made the biggest gains in history with the lowest tax rates in history and If we are to remain a civil society to help our seniors and disabled we ALL need to pitch in. Some American workers pay enough taxes, but the Bush tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest cant continue with this economy. If Bush had'nt put us 4 trillion in the hole invading Iraq, then you probably could have kept your tax break. It boils down to fairness. What would Jesus do ? Give the rich more riches or help our seniors, working lower / middle class and disabled ? You did a nice job of throwing alot of welfare case scenarios in there, drug addicts and workers who arent smart enough for you, but I'm talking about our beloved seniors and disabled, who worked hard and now deserve to survive with dignity. Thats how the Republican Right Wing likes to confuse President Obama's Programs, by throwing the picture of able bodied people sitting around on welfare, but thats the last thing President Obama supports. n Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan: In Response to Re: Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan : So What is "Fair" healthcare? Seniors and many of the disabled already are on the Medicare rolls, those with lower incomes and assets also get Medicaid extra help to pay their premiums or Medicaid to pay for their longterm care. Children in many income bracket families already have CHIP. - So there is no profit margins to absorb with these folks. Same with the VA system. We have to be competitive with our corporate tax rates in the world economy because they can set up business just about anywhere. States are competing right now for companies to move to their location from another state to supply jobs for their citizens and are giving lots of tax perks to accomplish this task. Right or wrong, taxes are what we use to bargain and compete. I think Americans pay their share in taxes no matter their income - at least the ones that pay anything. We can take away some of the tax expenditures - like the child care credit, the home mortgage interest deduction, charitable contributions, retirement account credits, medical & health care & insurance deductions - but who is that gonna hurt the most - middle class families. We can change the capital gains tax rate and then it will hurt a lot of seniors. You know, for me, when I hear that "work hard" senario from Obama - what comes to mind is maybe many of these people should have worked "smarter" rather than harder. What is "fair" healthcare? Can there be a dollar limit set on fair? What about a prognosis potential? What about a quality of life measure? What happens if an obese person does not lose weight? What about a smoker that refuses to stop? Same with a drug addict (including alcohol)? What about somebody with diabetes that doesn't do what is needed to control the disease? What about personal care (not medical) that a person cannot perform? Should that be in the mix too? What about dental? What about glasses? What about hearing? What about a woman having children that are not afforded in care or money? What about family violence - that's in the mix too. There is no insurance profit margin in any of these things. I just have a hard time understanding how people make decisions in their lives especially with all the advantages that we have in today's society. All I know is when I am with a group of very diverse individuals and we begin to discuss planning for future - I see a whole lot of really blank faces- are we just all living for today and not tomorrow. If I had more experience with people changing for the betterment of their lives, I could see some hope at the end of this tunnel. Yes very much off topic . . . . . . . but it is your topic so you can take it wherever.!
Posted by GailL1 |
Forums » Politics & Society » Government & Elections » Supreme Court Decision on the Presidents Health Care Plan
