Obamacare decision will be announced Thursday.

[M. Sage]

I for one can't wait to see if Stevens caved in to the pressure the Obama administration was apparently putting on him to switch his vote.My predictions: If the pressure didn't work, 5-4 striking down just the individual mandate, possibly a split decision with Stevens going alone but siding with the majority. Overall, a "barely" win. If the pressure worked, and as suddenly as Obama let it up, I'm worried that it did, 5-4 upholding the whole thing.What do y'all think?

 

[skinman]

I for one can't wait to see if Stevens caved in to the pressure the Obama administration was apparently putting on him to switch his vote.My predictions: If the pressure didn't work, 5-4 striking down just the individual mandate, possibly a split decision with Stevens going alone but siding with the majority. Overall, a "barely" win. If the pressure worked, and as suddenly as Obama let it up, I'm worried that it did, 5-4 upholding the whole thing.What do y'all think?

Obamacare? You have already demonstrated your bias because that is the derogatory political name the Republicans tagged it with...why not refer to it by its right name, the Affordable Healthcare Act...

Now, I will withhold my thoughts on this issue until after Thursday...

 

[J. Fred]

So,if you like it you aren't biased ?

I guess I'm biased.

 

[srstaff]

If there was even the remotest resemblance to affordability having anything to do with that piece of ... legislation, then maybe. Don't fool yourself, its not about affordable healthcare or they would have attacked the things that are actually causing healthcare to be so expensive. What it is, is about getting more people dependent on the nanny state by getting more 'other' people to pay the expensive, and getting more expensive, cost of health insurance to the point where employers cannot afford it any more for their employees and drop it, resulting in the private insurance industry crashing and everyone dependent on the new and wonderful public option in the end.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I think it doesn't matter. It sucks and the system is broken either way.

The whole thing needs to be repealed legislatively. Not repealed and replaced - just repealed.

Then they need to figure out an exit strategy for Medi-x and phase it out, along with all the deductions from paychecks and leave it to each state to handle.

 

[Tejano Scott]

As a healthcare law attorney(currently unemployed partially b/c my ultra conservative boss is convinced that PPACA is the end of modern medicine), I am very eager to see what becomes of this. Call it PPACA, Affordable Healthcare Act, Obamacare, or whatever there are numerous fundamental flaws in this plan. Do we need to do something about health insurance(and the lack thereof) for Americans? I think we do. Is the PPACA feasible? No, it was a patched together sell out by numerous individual politicians who just wanted something on paper, and be damned the results. I confess, I have a strong bias toward healthcare providers. Having defended and assisted them for 12 years, they get screwed at every turn from commercial insurance companies, HMOs, PPOs, medicare, medicaid, the VA, prisons/jail inmates, illegal aliens, no insurance patients, under insured patients, self funded ERISA plans, etc. etc. etc. I think you guys get the picture. Healthcare Providers spend 12 cents on average of every dollar just collecting that one dollar. And you wonder why an aspirin is $12.00?

 

[Tejano Scott]

I think it doesn't matter. It sucks and the system is broken either way.

The whole thing needs to be repealed legislatively. Not repealed and replaced - just repealed.

Then they need to figure out an exit strategy for Medi-x and phase it out, along with all the deductions from paychecks and leave it to each state to handle.

It may sound over simplistic, but this solution has a much better shot of success than PPACA. I agree with you MH. The private market was never given a fair chance to operate in healthcare before government placed so many regulations I can't even count them all.

 

[kurt]

What it is, is about getting more people dependent on the nanny state by getting more 'other' people to pay the expensive, and getting more expensive, cost of health insurance to the point where employers cannot afford it any more for their employees and drop it, resulting in the private insurance industry crashing and everyone dependent on the new and wonderful public option in the end.

This.

 

[FlashBang]

I readily admit I am biased, the entire system is broken. My wife is in management at a large hospital and tells me what goes on. Their emergency room is filled with non-citizens using it for anything and everything that is wrong with them. Cold, flu, scrapes, you name it, they fill the ER and the hospital is not allowed to turn them away. They have no insurance, give fake names with no ID and the Hospital ends up never being able to collect on a bill. In my opinion, if you ain't bleeding or dying you don't need to be using the ER.

 

[matefrio]

SCOTUS could kick it to after the election.

 

[M. Sage]

Guess I should have used a question mark, then. I hope they don't put it off, we've waited long enough.

Obamacare? You have already demonstrated your bias because that is the derogatory political name the Republicans tagged it with...why not refer to it by its right name, the Affordable Healthcare Act...Now, I will withhold my thoughts on this issue until after Thursday...

Oh, no. I'm biased against a law I've read and concluded actually is unconstitutional and corporatist. And I'm biased against a politician whose record and history I've scrutinized and continually evaluate.Wait a minute. That's not bias, that's an informed judgement, and I won't be ashamed of it. Guess I'm "biased" for disliking Romneycare, huh? Thanks for three hundred characters about nothing, though.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I'm biased.

I know for a fact that the State of Texas could come up with a better system that's more fair to everyone and provides better health care. They already started to with the tort reform. Now if they could get the Feds off our backs we could actually do something productive that made sense.

 

[RetArmySgt]

Take it from someone that has used Government run health care (VA) no matter how much the media wants you to think its a good thing its not. I am paying to keep my Tricare insurance so that i can use non VA health care centers and still pay out of pocket because the VA sucks. They take forever and a day to get you to a doctor that will do more than take your vitals and refill your prescriptions and when you do get to see a specialist you get maybe 10 mins in their office and then they schedule your tests for a year later. My mother has to use HCHD (county hospital) that is paid for by the government, she has 24 gallstones and was told by the ER 4 months that she needed her gallbladder out ASAP. The county scheduled her surgery for 6 months later and just rescheduled it for a year from now.

If we want are Government to to help with health care, food, housing, etc. then why dont we just make them reroute all of the billions we send overseas every year to foreign countries for the same programs. If we used that money here at home instead of sending our tax money to help foreign nations with problems that we need to take care of in our own country first.

 

[country_boy]

Im worried.. I wish they would come out and say whats the decision. If they up hold it we are screwed! You saw what he did to Arizona right after they made the ruling.

 

[winchster]

I think it doesn't matter. It sucks and the system is broken either way.

The whole thing needs to be repealed legislatively. Not repealed and replaced - just repealed.

Then they need to figure out an exit strategy for Medi-x and phase it out, along with all the deductions from paychecks and leave it to each state to handle.

Sarcasm on full blast-

What, and go back to the way it was intended? Seriously, you've lost your mind.

Sarcasm off.

I'm with ya man. Our forefathers would have already been shooting.

 

[TrailDust]

If the Supreme Court issues another one of its wimpy decisions that leaves whole swaths of Obmacare open to interpretation we're screwed for sure. That the Supreme Court will be split over this Constitutional issue clearly shows how messed up the government is.

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

That the Supreme Court will be split over this Constitutional issue clearly shows how messed up the government is.

+1,000,000,000,000

I predict 5-4 striking down the mandate and then we get to deal with the aftermath of how you pay for this budget disaster.

 

[M. Sage]

I'm biased.

I know for a fact that the State of Texas could come up with a better system that's more fair to everyone and provides better health care. They already started to with the tort reform. Now if they could get the Feds off our backs we could actually do something productive that made sense.

Nah, that doesn't make insurance companies richer. All we could hope to do is cut costs on providers and buyers alike.

I don't bother carrying insurance beyond emergency stuff, for regular care I go to a doctor that doesn't deal with insurance, and just bills you directly. I'm getting better care than I ever got when I was on an insurance plan, faster and it's still costing me less money! IMO, we tend to carry more insurance than we need, and that's what's driving costs so high. Well, that and the social medicine systems in Canada and Europe. We get to pay all the R&D on the world's drugs. I love that little fact.

If the Supreme Court issues another one of its wimpy decisions that leaves whole swaths of Obmacare open to interpretation we're screwed for sure. That the Supreme Court will be split over this Constitutional issue clearly shows how messed up the government is.

Oh, we know how messed up it is by the split on simple questions like District of Columbia v Heller. Every time one of these cases come up, I curse Andrew Jackson's name.

 

[macshooter]

Obamacare? You have already demonstrated your bias because that is the derogatory political name the Republicans tagged it with...why not refer to it by its right name, the Affordable Healthcare Act...

Now, I will withhold my thoughts on this issue until after Thursday...

This is the 3000 page incomprehensible POS that no one even with a law degree can make heads or tails of, because it is so huge and convoluted, and unnecessarily complicated (unless the purpose is to HIDE it's meaning). And it basically gives the sec of HHS the power to make the rules up as she goes along, and gives the govt the power to regulate nearly any aspect of your life, since nearly everything you do affects your heath. This is the bill that the speaker of the house said we would have to pass it before we could find out all the good things that are in it! This is the POS they had to pass without anyone having had time to read it. And we should all respect it's name?

Do you understand that if the govt can force you to buy healthcare insurance, then there is no limit to what the govt can force you to buy under the commerce clause? This throws the door open for the govt to mandate that we buy anything it wants us to. And you are ready to give up your liberty for a few cheap trinkets like insurance companies not being able to turn away patients with existing illnesses, and coverage for 26yr old children. That could surely be accomplished other ways. But for that, you'll hand the govt the power to force you buy anything it wants to. And your sig talks about not giving up essential liberty... (restraining the urge to make unnecessary comments here)

How does all that square with freedom and liberty?

 

[macshooter]