What if the health reform mandate dies?

[JonLP24]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Is the new requirement that people buy health insurance unconstitutional?

That's the principal question before the Supreme Court this week as it takes up the 2010 health care reform law.

The Affordable Care Act is meant to help more people get affordable health insurance coverage -- including the 49 million uninsured today -- and bring health costs under control. But those goals could be harder to achieve if the court strikes down the "individual mandate."

<snip>

The individual mandate is intended to work in conjunction with two other new rules in the law: Insurers must offer everyone coverage regardless of health status, and insurers may not charge people with pre-existing conditions more than other policyholders in their geographic area who have the same plan.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/26/news/economy/health-reform-mandate/

[SammyWinstonJack]

1. rec

[Syrinx]

2. Bring on universal coverage

Eliminate the individual mandate. Bring on universal coverage. Like civilized countries.

[peacebird]

3. Works for me!

[Art_from_Ark]

5. Works for me, too

Literally, since I am living in a country that has universal coverage.

[DLevine]

8. Yes! A million x what you said. n/t

[JoePhilly]

9. If its overturned, Dems won't touch health care for ~50 years.

And GOP efforts to kill Medicare and Social Security will only intensive.

[still_one]

12. They didn't have the votes to do single payer when HCR was passed, and they sure don't have it now

What makes you think that the dynamics have changed that would allow universal coverage?

Most of Congress is paid off by the corporate lobby. The media and message is controlled by the special interests, and must of the populous, through ignorance, believes the gop garbage.

Social Security and Medicare are called "entitlements", and they propagate that distortion through the media every chance they get.

At the same time the wars and the military spending are never questioned through the MSM

Though I agree universal coverage is the way to go, until that happens, HCR at least will help 40 million people who don't have insurance in the meantime. It will help those who have pre-existing conditions, and helps those with children under 27 who cannot get insure.

It is still better than the system they have today.

In my view, if the court rules HCR unconstitutional, Obama loses the election, and the odds are that the house and senate both go into republican control, and the foreseeable future would mean HCR or single payer would be shelved for decades to come

[madrchsod]

4. all these questions could unravel medicare

remember medicare is not free...i have to pay for my medicare coverage and i have to pay a private insurance company if i want full coverage. i pay a larger percentage for my medicare than my wife pays for her insurance through her work.

[underpants]

6. 1. the mandate was an insurance co. demand 2. it will be upheld 6-3

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101620917

[Vinca]

7. Good point. They always put the wishes of the corporate overlords first.

[Cosmocat]

14. Interesting

this gives me hope, I sort of assumed the five lugnuts would go against it.

It is not perfect, it is not CLOSE to where we should be.

But, it is better than where we are, and MAYBE is a small step in the right direction.

I KNOW a universal system is infinitely more efficient, but people are absolutely living in a fantasy world if they think DC is going to transition from what we have directly to it. Just not going to happen, and all that would come from the SC striking this down would be a major hit on President Obama in his reelection year.

Nothing good comes from it getting struck down.

[AndyTiedye]

18. Except that the Mandate Goes Both Ways

They have to cover pre-existing conditions. They REALLY don't like that. They only want to insure healthy people, and they want to dump them when they get sick. The old system let them do that, since sick people usually can't work, and insurance is tied to work. Then when they could find other insurance, if they could afford it at all, it wouldn't cover what was actually wrong with them because it would be a pre-existing condition.

[fasttense]

10. A corporate monopoly codified into law (in violation of numerous anti-trust laws)

to be judged by unelected stooges for the corporations who like to call themselves Supremes.

I wonder which way they will vote?

There is NO rule of law. We live in a lawless country. We are ruled by the whims of unelected corporate CEOS and shareholders. That is why corporate crimes are rarely punished and frequently ignored. They write our laws.

[bluedigger]

11. Here is a cross link to more info.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101620920

[mmonk]

13. It's not unconstitutional but we have an ideological court.

Commerce Clause should cover it constitutionally. But the current majority was put on the court to change America and legal precedents.

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. Just how will they cover the tens of millions who won't be able to afford the

individual mandate?

I thought we had a debt crisis?



Will household/living expenses be figured into the mix, for eligibility for assistance wrt the mandate and being able to afford or not afford it?

That could throw many into a financial crisis, I would think.

[AndyTiedye]

16. It Would be Worse Than 1994

The insurance companies would celebrate with more and bigger rate increases, (and bigger donations to the GOP)
while all with those pre-existing conditions would be once again excluded.

Then the Repigs would use their new momentum to take down Medicare and Medicaid.

[Romulox]

17. Single payer. Like the majority of the world. nt

[SmileyRose]

19. I'd dance for joy.

I hope they kill it lock stock and barrel.

We absolutely must get to a point where the citizenry is so fed up with insurance that they demand actual access to medical care instead of "coverage".