The rhetoric is heating up on both sides of the political aisle as the Supreme Court listens to arguments over the constitutionality of Obamacare. If the justices declare the insurance mandate portion of the health care law is unconstitutional, President Obama’s signature legislation might be thrown out or sent back to Congress for revamping.
26 states are challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare) which was signed into law in 2010. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on this case by the end of June. In the interim, I’m curious to where you stand on Obamacare. Should the justices uphold President Obama’s health care law? Should portions of the law be upheld and other sections revamped?
Ultimately, the Supreme Court will decide; however, I’m more intrigued by the Court of Public Opinion.
photo: AP
Yes, indeed, the Supreme Court should.
I believe that the morality of universal healthcare is a value judgment, and neither side is likely to convince the other. But I also believe that pragmatism is deeply important in any discussion of politics. From a pragmatic standpoint, Obamacare needs to come down. The costs have spiraled out of control (The Congressional Budget office reported last month that total costs will be $1.76 trillion from an initial estimate of $940 billion). In papers published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, economists estimate that tens of millions of the poor will still be without insurance. This is because subsidized… Read more »
I believe it should be struck down and resurrected in another form. The Australian version of universal health care is funded with a straight 1.5% income tax. That provides basic services with extras available via private insurance policies. If you want above what 1.5% buys get it yourself, if the government wants more to spread around and expand coverage, set up economic incentives that will increase wages or increase employment. Without a hard ceiling it will turn into another bottomless entitlement pit just like so many other programs our government mismanages. I’m all for the idea, I’m all against a… Read more »
That provides basic services with extras available via private insurance policies.
What basic services are provided?
Most of the opposition to the current healthcare law comes from people who don’t think it goes far enough, by the way….
Single-payer is clearly the best system, but the insurance-industry lobbyists wouldn’t even permit discussion of it.
Single payer is a MUCH MORE efficient system for distributing health care services. Hands down.
President Obama should have had the mendacity (…balls) to call it a universal tax increase from the start. The Supreme court doesn’t play footsie with threats of “Fines” against citizens who haven’t done anything wrong i.e “buying health care”.
“… nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws …”
It is obviously unconstitutional. The 14th amendment guarantees equal protection under the law. Obamacare provides protection to women only. Explicitly. The law contains provisions for 38 different varieties of “Office of Women”, explicitly states that these offices will be staffed by women’s experts, and places all health care decisions under the advisory control of these 38 offices. The law is the greatest act of discrimination in modern American history. It is the greatest shame of our time.
The question is should the Supreme Court uphold the law? If the law is Constitutional then yes they should uphold it. If the law violates the Constitutional then it needs to go. There should be no middle ground, and if Congress and the President failed to gather a wide enough consensus to make a good law, shame on them.
Please READ Obamacare before deciding. It takes 6 hours. Do not be afraid of the “907 pages” thing”, it is written in ridiculously huge font, with lots of white space. Six hours max: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/text How Obamacare works: 1) The bill mandates that everyone MUST buy “qualified” healthc are. 2) The bill creates a series of institutions to determine what “qualificated” means. 3) The bill puts all of these institons under the oversight of “women’s experts”. In other words, “women’s experts” will decide which proceedures are covered, who is covered, and how much we must pay. They got to work right… Read more »
And yet Ginsburg is a devout title 9er, but is there any doubt of how she will vote?
Strike it down. The power to regulate Interstate Commerce is not, and should not be regarded as an open ended grant of general police powers.
Universal healthcare doesn’t work? Wow.
I have yet to see an example of a country where – if the government is still operating well – a universal healthcare system isn’t working. Technically, we have universal health care here already, insofar as you cannot be turned down for life-saving procedures regardless of your financial situation. The difference seems to me merely how the bill is presented to the tax payer, either after the fact (now) or before the fact (in 2014, if the mandate is upheld).
When is the last time you’ve been to a medical center that caters to men’s health? I live in the Chicago area and I don’t know of any. Women’s health on the other hand …..
Universal health care doesn’t work and that’s where this is heading.
I suspect one answer could be “all health care is male by default” women’s health care (pregnancy, issues of the female repro system) is added onto the default.
Do you have anything to back up what you suspect? It kind of seems like unneeded misdirection and sniping. Maybe all health care is person centric by default with different specialties for specific needs of the patient such men, woman, children, etc. Back to Tom B’s question, I can’t say I recall hearing anywhere near the emphasis on men’s health concerns that I have on woman’s. Of course that is all anecdotal and pretty much based on my possible selective hearing and or memory. I did a quick Google search on “Chicago men’s health center” and before I completed typing… Read more »
I wasn’t sniping.
My answer/thought was to suggest there aren’t men’s health center because on average, the vast majority of health centers (which are called health centers/clinics) serve men. And women. And if they serve kids it says Family Clinic. in in the case of specialty medicine, there are speciality clinics-women’s health (reproductive issues), podiatry, mental health, ear/nose/throat etc….each of those other specialties serve men, women, kids etc.
I wasn’t snarking, I was offering a possibility for why “women” is an add on.
Here are some men’s health centers found on Google.
http://www.menshealthcenters.com/menshealthcenters.com/Home.html
http://www.menshealthcenter.com/
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/mens-health/MY00394 (online site)
http://www.baltimorehealth.org/mhc.html
http://my.clevelandclinic.org/urology/patients/minority_mens_health_center/default.aspx
http://www.cdc.gov/men/
http://www.floridamenshealth.com/
http://city.milwaukee.gov/Mens-Health-Center
There’s a men’s health clinic in Austin too.
And Chicago
http://projectbrotherhood.net/
http://www.uchospitals.edu/online-library/content=P00704
http://www.chicagofamilyhealth.org/programs-and-services/mens-health
And that demonstrates men’s health is the default how? I guess that is the part of your statement that gets to me.
There are Men’s and Woman’s Health Centers all over the place. Is there parity, I have no idea. I have my own bias but I really don’t know that it is correct and haven’t researched it much.
I do think I will take Anthony Zarat’s suggestion and read the health care bill. I think he makes a very persuasive argument if the fact support what he is saying.
No, those are examples of newer clinics arising to address men’s health specifically. I’m not CLAIMING it’s a default, but suggesting that perhaps that’s a dynamic. I wish you’d hear that. That in the past men’s health care needs were focused on (research on men’s bodies, focus on disease based on men’s bodies and metabolism etc) and now we are doing more speciality work in general. Teen clinics, children’s specialty centers, women’s specialty centers and also men’s. I imagine, though I don’t know if I could prove it, that 50-60 years ago there were very few speciality clinics, and mostly… Read more »
I don’t need the government telling me what to do or how to live my life.
Agreed.
Obamacare:
Health care for women is a RIGHT.
Health care for men is a PRIVILEGE.
Wrong, unconstitutional, sexist, and a repugnant violation of basic human rights.