Posted on 02/04/2011 12:56:38 PM PST by Libloather
Health reform alive and well
By Jay MacDonald
Friday, February 4
Posted: 10 am ET
As expected, Florida U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled this week in favor of a Florida-led lawsuit filed by 26 states to block health care reform.
Vinson's ruling, like that of Virginia Judge and fellow Republican appointee Henry Hudson in December, found unconstitutional the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, that requires all Americans to obtain health insurance beginning in 2014. Unlike Hudson, Vinson ruled that the individual mandate was not severable, and therefore voided the entire act.
Two Democratically-appointed judges previously upheld the ACA, which seems to indicate that the court is evenly split on health care reform so far -- coincidentally or not, along party lines.
Legal eagles predict the fate of the ACA will ultimately come down to a 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court, with centrist Reagan nominee Justice Anthony Kennedy considered the swing vote.
But we're kidding ourselves if we think the fate of health care reform will rest on legal parsing alone, what with the nation in the throes of a tsunami of change.
Many of the reforms -- coverage for pre-existing conditions, eliminating lifetime limits, expanded coverage for young adults and early retirees, closing the Medicare prescription "doughnut hole" and free preventive care for seniors, just to name a few -- are already in place. States have received federal grants to help them build the infrastructure of their own health exchanges. Many of those states will introduce legislation this spring to provide funding next year to meet the Jan. 1, 2013, deadline to have their exchanges certified, up and running.
Bottom line? By the time the Supreme Court rules, which may not happen until 2012, much of the Affordable Care Act will be a fait accompli. Save of course for the individual mandate, which, as I find myself pointing out ad nauseam, is the one component of the act that all sides agree is essential in order to make health care reform economically feasible for the health insurance industry.
So what we're really fighting over at this point is ideology. Wednesday's pro forma defeat of repeal in the Senate pretty much ended the largely symbolic crusade in Congress to force a do-over. Now that that's done, perhaps we can move on to more constructive pursuits.
While the repeal and replace rabble-rousers will no doubt continue to rattle their Rolexes, health reform is already here, alive and kicking. To the everlasting relief of most Americans.
Do you really think the Supreme Court will vote to undo the monumental progress that has already been made as a result of health care reform and risk the potential fallout, especially in an election year?
I don't.
They better. It's their job.
The time for games is over. The Republicans in the House better stand and deliver. Or else.
Or else what?
Once the AGs get on the ball and file complaints, Obozocare will have to be pushed to the higher courts in order to continue enacting any of it.
Tea Party replaces the new Whigs.
For the sake of our freedom, this better be ruled unconstitutional or we’re slaves to the government.
Liberals want the power to decide if “you” live or die via their orders. Never Again is here and now. Anyone that doubts that is a fool, IMO.
The 2 judges pro zerocare need to be fired! They openly rule against the constitution they swore to protect!
This won’t do
Nation is doomed.
I am afraid the SC will do what they are doing on Zero's BC. They will punt because they are afraid of the consequences of stopping it at that point since it will be so far along. Hence the rush to implement as much as possible of this totalitarianism. This was part of the game plan of the Dems from the beginning.
I am of the opinion that we stop it in congress or we are SOL. The SC doesn't have the guts. Half of them are stinking commies who see the Constitution as an impediment to ruling from the bench.
Commodities Market:
Tar - Up
Feathers - Up
“The time for games is over. The Republicans in the House better stand and deliver. Or else.”
How exactly should the House Republicans deliver?
Here’s a newsflash sunshine, you could have 435 members of the house vote to repeal and it STILL has to pass that pesky old Senate and Bambi has to sign it into law. Suggest a civics course.
Cut the S&*t out of the funding for anything related to this unconstitutional monstrosity. Cut out the guts while it works through the courts.
Defund it. It’s that simple.
Here’s a newsflash for you: Not a dime can be spent without majority vote of the House. Nor can the debt ceiling be raised. The House either uses that power, or the Republican Party goes the way of the Whigs. And you can take that to the bank.
If SCOTUS doesnt strike down this montrosity, the combination of a Senate majority and a GOP president will.
We could easily pick up 4 senate seats in 2012, and hopefully will get the presidency too. If this happens I would predict repeal in 2013.
The legislation isn't even a year old and we're already over 700. It's wavermania at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. This proves that Obamacare is hollow attempt at health care reform.
What do you think that the courts will have to say about that...?
( *crickets chirping* )
From the Pelosi school of being in touch with voters.
They already did. I am saying they should defund any agency that attempts to enforce it. Thereby preventing it. They should shut down government or whatever it takes.
They control the money. Cut it off.
The Mandate gives the Federal government power to compel a citizen to purchase insurance from a government approved insurance company. Instead of compelling him to buy insurance could the government require him to jump off a cliff? What is the diff?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.