Health Care Reform Overruled

Today Federal District Court Judge Roger Vinson, a Reagan appointee, ruled that the entire health care reform law passed by Democrats last year is unconstitutional.  The ruling is the strongest judicial setback yet for the Affordable Care Act passed by Congress last March and signed into law by the President.  Two other federal district court judges have ruled for the constitutionality of the law, and one other judge has ruled against one part of the law.  Judge Vinson is the first to rule the entire act unconstitutional.  The Obama administration will surely appeal the decision.  Most legal analysts believe the United States Supreme Court will make the final ruling on the Affordable Care Act.

The heart of the lawsuit concerned the individual mandate, which forces all Americans to purchase private health insurance or face a tax penalty.  The plaintiffs in the case argued that the individual mandate does not fall within the power relegated to the federal government under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.  The federal government argued that the mandate falls within the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, or the "Commerce Clause" as it is known.  The federal government also argued that the "Necessary and Proper Clause" justifies the use of the individual mandate.

In support of the argument the federal government argued that health care makes up over one-seventh of the United States economy, and as such it represents commercial activity which can be regulated.  The federal government also argued that health care is unique field, and that it is essentially impossible to expand health care coverage without something akin to a an individual mandate.

The defendants countered by arguing that the federal government has never used the commerce clause to regulate inactivity, such as the decision of citizens not to purchase health insurance.  Judge Vinson essentially agreed with the plaintiffs, saying that the individual mandate was "unprecedented" in scope and that he did not believe it to be within the powers granted to the federal government.  Judge Vinson also dismissed the "Necessary and Proper Clause" argument by saying that if the government cannot regulate something under the Commerce Clause it also cannot do so under the Necessary Proper Clause.

Finally, at the end Judge Vinson concludes that since the individual mandate is such an integral part of the law there is no way it can be severed from the rest of the Affordable Care Act.  Therefore, since the individual mandate is unconstitutional the entire law was declared "void" by Vinson.  And with that decision, one judge was able to, at least temporarily, undo a law passed by democratically-elected Congress.  The Obama administration will ask for a stay on the ruling, and as stated above the lawsuit still has many appeals to go through before we know the ultimate fate of the Affordable Care Act.

Source

This doesn't bode well for me, since I'm in limbo on insurance at present. ._.

I think a lot of us are in limbo with healthcare, honestly.  I wonder why America can't just look at the rest of the world and realize "Hey, they offer some form of health coverage to their citizens just for being citizens, why can't we do the same?"  orz

Its not America, its Republicans.

I'll be happy when this health care law is no longer law. Putting more expenses on health insurance companies just gives them incentive to raise premiums in order to maintain a sustainable business model. Mandating that every citizen buy health insurance is a burden to the American people. The person ought to be in control of his own health care, not bureaucrats and large corporations. It's an expensive, massive bill full of garbage. But, you do sound like a good person when you say you want to make sure everyone has affordable health care!

Mandating that every citizen buy health insurance is a burden to the American people.

I agree, it should be socialized.

The problem with socializing it is, taxes will have to increase. Any thing that is socialized depends on taxes, and people complain too much about taxes anyway.

The problem with socializing it is, taxes will have to increase. Any thing that is socialized depends on taxes, and people complain too much about taxes anyway.

bawww taxes.
plenty of places have higher taxes than us and I don't see revolts in the streets.

Mandating that every citizen buy health insurance is a burden to the American people.

I agree, it should be socialized.

Okay, let's switch to socialized health care, like the UK. They have a higher life expectancy by one and a half year. Their health care must be great, right? Well, we're 1.3x more obese, 2.8x as likely to die in a fatal traffic collision and 4x as likely to be murdered. Their deficit is larger than ours, their taxes are higher and they wait longer for care.

I want as many people to have the best care possible, I want people to keep the money they earned so they can spend it tailored to their own needs, and I want our country to not go bankrupt. Socialized medicine isn't the solution.

If you want to move to another country where you think you'll be happier, please, go ahead. The United States government has been expanding a great deal for a while, and look at the giant piece of shit it is now. I'm tired of it becoming more powerful and tyrannical every day while this country becomes worse and worse.

I live on and off in Finland, and they have health/dental/etc for their citizens.  Of course there are higher taxes, but honestly, I'd rather pay a little bit more of taxes and know I'm taken care of than the alternative.  That country really does it well.  The only bums you see are illegal romanians, city is clean and safe.  People still let their young kids roam around by themselves, haha.  But honestly, I think a major part of why that works so well there is that it's a fairly small populated country.  Still, other countries can do it, so there's no excuse why America can't as well. 

The last thing we need is more taxes. I don't have a archetypal 'Oh i'm a democrat taxes are bad argh' view on it all, from my research on the economic problem, taxation needs to be cut like a brick to get an under edge on our current debt, which is reaching the ceiling.

What we need to do is stop building new stadiums for our sports teams every 5 years.

For the cost of a few months of military expenditure, america could cover all of its citizens.

America spends more on military activity than the rest of the world, combined. It is the only industrialized country on the planet that still does not have universal healthcare.

I agree with Roph and Holk.

In addition:

I want as many people to have the best care possible, I want people to keep the money they earned so they can spend it tailored to their own needs, and I want our country to not go bankrupt. Socialized medicine isn't the solution.

Neither is our current solution, nobody gets the 'best care' possible, they get shit care just like we get shit from every other service we pay out the ass for.  Doctors routinely neglect examinations that would be costly and take time and prescribe pills for symptoms without curing the cause.  I'd rather wait a bit longer for actual healthcare than the bullshit we get in this country.

If you want to move to another country where you think you'll be happier, please, go ahead.

If you don't like it, leave.
That is the most dismissive, rude, and invalid argument in the history of debate.

The United States government has been expanding a great deal for a while, and look at the giant piece of shit it is now. I'm tired of it becoming more powerful and tyrannical every day while this country becomes worse and worse.

> implying that we're any more corrupt than anywhere else
Every government is corrupt, lead by people who just want money and power, leaving won't do anything.  We have the right to protest, we have the right to voice our dissent, "if you don't like it, leave" is the most un-American retort you could possibly make.

It's like if I were to say "if you don't like it, go to some other nation." when healthcare reform was passed.  It's dismissive bullshit that has no place in any discussion.

For the cost of a few months of military expenditure, america could cover all of its citizens.

America spends more on military activity than the rest of the world, combined. It is the only industrialized country on the planet that still does not have universal healthcare.

Our unnecessary military spending is contributing to the deficit. I'd be happy if we could stop spending so much on occupation, intervention, killing of civilians and killing of enemies our stupid foreign affairs created. However, even if that were to somehow happen, we shouldn't replace it with anything. We need to get rid of those expenses completely. You have less military spending, yet you're still going bankrupt and your life expectancy is barely above ours.

Neither is our current solution, nobody gets the 'best care' possible, they get shit care just like we get shit from every other service we pay out the ass for.  Doctors routinely neglect examinations that would be costly and take time and prescribe pills for symptoms without curing the cause.  I'd rather wait a bit longer for actual healthcare than the bullshit we get in this country.

Again, the UK's life expectancy is only 1.5 years more than ours, despite many non-healthcare factors working against our numbers. I know a lot of people who have had their lives saved under the United State's health care system. One of those people is my mom, who received imperative medical attention quickly and no longer has to take any drugs or worry about her previous condition. If she had to wait, things probably wouldn't have turned out so well. Our system isn't perfect, but I feel it's the better alternative. I don't want it to be changed to something you can already get in other countries; I want it to be improved.

If you don't like it, leave.
That is the most dismissive, rude, and invalid argument in the history of debate.

It's not an argument, it's a suggestion. There are other countries with socialized medicine, which you seem to like. Why live in a country while complaining about the health care when you can go to someplace where your ideal health care already exists? Why try to replicate something you can get elsewhere? There are people who come to the United States for medical purposes because of our health care system, and you want to put the government in charge, like in many other countries. I think it's best that there be options and alternatives.

> implying that we're any more corrupt than anywhere else
Every government is corrupt, lead by people who just want money and power, leaving won't do anything.  We have the right to protest, we have the right to voice our dissent, "if you don't like it, leave" is the most un-American retort you could possibly make.

More corrupt? I don't know if we are more corrupt or not, but the United States is a big country with a massive military and a large population. There's a lot more damage corruption in this country can do. Speaking out and voting against corruption is how we can fight the corruption, not giving the largely corrupt federal government more control over our lives. The United States is supposed to be a nation of liberty and a small, limited federal government, with several, less limited states that govern themselves. Unfortunately, that vision has been eroding for a while.

It's like if I were to say "if you don't like it, go to some other nation." when healthcare reform was passed.  It's dismissive bullshit that has no place in any discussion.

Except, there's not really a developed nation to go to where you'll receive acceptable non-socialized care. Granted, our federal government unfortunately already controls a large part of health care as it is.

Why live here? Perhaps I like it here, or don't have much choice.  Telling people who disagree with you to ignore the issue or leave is pure dismissal, and is extremely rude.

Also I think you're exaggerating regarding socialized healthcare.  Don't forget that around here we like to pick and choose figures that make us look good, rather than record accuracy, for example: how inaccurate our current unemployment rate is.

Why live here? Perhaps I like it here, or don't have much choice.  Telling people who disagree with you to ignore the issue or leave is pure dismissal, and is extremely rude.

The fact of the matter is, you have a much greater chance of getting socialized health care if you go to a country that has socialized health care. Not only that, but the people who don't want socialized health care would be able to not have it. No sense in making every system unsustainable and slow. I'm not forcing you to move or anything- I just think it would be a better option for both the people who want socialized health care and the people who don't. You're just getting upset for the sake of getting upset. Hell, an even better option is to try to get your state to have socialized health care. That doesn't even violate the US constitution, and it's much easier to change states than it is to change countries.

Also I think you're exaggerating regarding socialized healthcare.

I don't think I am.

Don't forget that around here we like to pick and choose figures that make us look good, rather than record accuracy, for example: how inaccurate our current unemployment rate is.

Do you have any evidence that our life expectancy is actually lower than what's reported? Unemployment is a simple one to point out, because we know what they consider "unemployed" only covers people who have gone out of their way to look for a job in the past 2 (I think) weeks. You also must keep in mind, other countries measure unemployment in such ways. I could also say "But what if they're lying about their life expectancy to make their country look good? Look at how they measure unemployment!" but it's a silly argument to make.