If the health care law is killed on Monday, how will it affect Obama's re-election chances?

[Kablooie]

I would expect Romney's numbers to swell if that happens.
It gives the GOP a huge publicity hammer to smash Obama with.

Of course if Romney wins we must accept an extreme right wing government for the rest of our lives since he will probably make one or two SCOTUS appointments that will lock in a far right court for decades to come.
Government by the corporations and for the corporations for ever and ever, amen.

I personally will be surprised if the health care law survives because i believe the court's Republican bias overrides consideration of true constitutionality.

I'm feeling kind of bleak at the moment.

[emulatorloo]

1. Word is Obama will run against the partisan Supreme Court

If the healthcare law is struck down, Obama will use it as a campaign issue.

From an article I read on DU.

Supreme Court is pretty unpopular with people these days.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

28. That's exactly what he'll do.

It would act as a wake up call.

[MrSlayer]

2. Beside their obvious political leanings I wonder on what basis they'd overturn.

The mandate that isn't really a mandate? That seems to be the sticking point. What else about the law would be unconstitutional?

[kentuck]

3. And wouldn't that be a vote against the big insurance companies..

that stand to make a lot of money off the HCA ? Would they vote against the insurance companies?

[pampango]

13. That's what right wing "friend of the court" briefs seem to want.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002475335


Merits Briefs for the Petitioners

Brief of the Department of Health and Human Services et al. regarding the Minimum Coverage Provision
Brief for the Department of Health and Human Services et al. regarding the Anti-Injunction Act
Reply Brief for the Petitioners on the Anti-Injunction Act

Amicus Briefs in Support of the Petitioners

Brief for AARP
Brief for American Nurses Association et al.
Brief for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts
Brief for Constitutional Law and Economics Professors
Brief for 104 Health Law Professors
Brief for Constitutional Law Scholars
Brief for Child Advocacy Organizations
Brief for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. et al.
Brief for the California Endowment
Brief for the National Women’s Law Center et al.
Brief for Prescription Policy Choices et al.
Brief for the Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action et al.
Brief for Health Care For All et al.
Brief for California Public Employees Retirement System
Brief for Law Professors Barry Friedman et al.
Brief for Lambda Legal Defense Fund, et al,
Brief for David R. Riemer and Community Advocates
Brief for Department of Health and Human Services et al.
Brief for the Governor of Washington Christine Gregoire
Brief for Health Care Policy History Scholars
Brief for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid et al.
Brief for Small Business Majority Foundation, INC and the Main Street Alliance
Brief for State Legislators
Brief for the States of Maryland et al.
Brief for Service Employees International Union and Change to Win
Brief for Economic Scholars
Brief for the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations

Merits Briefs for the Respondents

Brief for the State Respondents on the Anit-Injunction Act
Brief for Private Respondents on the Anti-Injunction Act
Brief for the State Respondents on the Minimum Coverage Provision
Brief for Private Respondents on the Minimum Coverage Provision
Reply Brief for State Respondents on the Anti-Injunction Act

Amicus Briefs Supporting the Respondents

Brief for Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom
Brief for the Cato Institute et al.
Brief for Association of American Physicians And Surgeons, inc., and Individual Physicians
Brief for Judicial Watch, Inc.
Brief for American Catholic Lawyers Association, Inc.
Brief for the American Center for Law and Justice et al.
Brief for the American Legislative Exchange Council
Brief for American College of Pediatricians et al.
Brief for the American Civil Rights Union et al.
Brief for the Cato Institute
Brief for Gary Lawson et al.
Brief for the Catholic Vote and Steven J. Willis
Brief for Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence et al.
Brief for Citizens and Legislators in the Fourteen Health Care Freedom States
Brief for Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom
Brief for the Commonwealth of Virginia Ex Rel. Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli
Brief for Docs4patientcare et al.
Brief for Employer Solutions Staffing Group
Brief for Egon Mittelmann, Esq.
Brief for Former U.S. Department Officials
Brief for the Foundation for Moral Law
Brief for HSA Coalition, Inc. and the Constitution Defense Fund
Brief for John Boehner
Brief for the Landmark Legal Foundation
Brief for Liberty Legal Foundation
Brief for Members of the United States Senate
Brief for the Mountain States Legal Foundation
Brief for Oklahoma
Brief for Partnership for America
Brief for the Rutherford Institute
Brief for Senator Rand Paul
Brief for Stephen M. Trattner
Brief for the Thomas More Law Center et al.
Brief for Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall et al.
Brief for the Washington Legal Foundation and Constitutional Law Scholars
Brief for Authors of Origins of The Necessary and Proper Clause and the Independence Institute
Brief for Economists
Brief for the Independent Women’s Forum
Brief for the Tax Foundation
Brief for the Missouri Attorney General
Brief for Montana Shooting Sports Association
Brief for the American Life League
Brief for the Caesar Rodney Institute
Brief for Liberty University, Inc. et al.
Brief for Project Liberty

Amicus Briefs Supporting Neither Party

Brief for the Health Foundation of Greater Cincinnati regarding minimum coverage

Merits Briefs for Court-Appointed Amicus regarding the Anti-Injunction Act

Brief supporting vacatur

Amicus Briefs Supporting the Court- Appointed Amicus

Brief for Tax Law Professors
Brief for Mortimer Caplin and Sheldon Cohen

Amicus Briefs Supporting the Respondent regarding the Anti-Injunction Act

Brief for the Liberty University, Inc. et al.
Brief for the Cato Institute
Brief for the American Center for Law & Justice
Brief for Center for the Fair Administration of Taxes

[Warren DeMontague]

10. because the commerce clause that is broad enough to arrest cancer patients for growing their own pot

can't handle a health insurance mandate.

[Gman]

4. It won't change any minds of anyone not intending to vote for Obama

or of those intending to vote for Obama. Most people in general expect it to be a conservative partisan decision. People undecided already expect it to be a partisan decision and they won't make their decision solely on this decision. So it'll have little impact on the election except to give Democrats tons of ammo for use against the partisan SCOTUS.

[still_one]

14. I agree with your first part, but not for independents. The media will give the repugs a free reign

to punce on this administration. I suspect what they will say is that the Obama administration wasted two years on something that was not Constitutional, and people lost jobs because of it, or something to that effect

Unfortunately this won't just be a one shot deal, the corporate media will be bashing this 24/7, similar to what they did with the swift boaters, except the repukes will be getting even more free propaganda from the MSM

However, if some miracle happens that they uphold it, it will take a lot of the ammunition and free propaganda away from the repukes that would be given by the networks.

In my view the court has already decided. They are milking this for all the drama they can get, and because they are doing it this way, and not just reporting the decision earlier, I suspect it will be ruled against, and the next months will have the airwaves filled with even more "Obama bashing" from the MSM

Hope I am wrong

[Gman]

23. And at the same time

Dems will be hammering on what people have lost including the seniors now saving millions on prescription drugs and kids on insurance plans till 26. Very popular things.

We'll see what happens.

[still_one]

29. The problem is a lot of Dems ran away from it in 2010, so if the Dems actually have a spin and

fight for it I will be amazed

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. The president wants you to have health care. The supreme court wants you to die quickly.

If this president doesn't name their replacements, then Mitt Romney will.

It's as simple as that.

[leftstreet]

7. Wrong. The politicians want us to buy health insurance n/t

[HuckleB]

11. Much like many states in Europe.

It's not perfect, but it is not uncommon either.

[BOG PERSON]

15. it's ~european~??

how fancy!

[HuckleB]

17. Sure.

Teddy K wouldn't compromise on a plan that was ten times better 30 years ago. Are we going to keep going backwards because the thing isn't perfect?

Too many people will get hurt.

[area51]

26. "Much like many states in Europe"

What? States in Europe demand that people buy for-profit, lightly -- at best -- regulated insurance that only pays parts of your medical bills, delays payments to providers as long as possible, and seeks to enrich shareholders by denying claims for treatment, leading to disability and deaths among their users?

I don't think so.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

18. x2

[lumberjack_jeff]

22. Absent health insurance, you won't have care.

Period.

[nevergiveup]

6. The media will be all over this like maggots on spoiled meat.

If the entire law is struck down it isn't a question about whether it will hurt Obama, the question is how much will it hurt Obama and will the ruling become chronic toxicity for his campaign. Personally I think only the mandate will be killed.

[GoCubsGo]

19. To be expected, since most of them are maggots.

Actually, to call them maggots insults maggots. That being said, I agree that if anything gets killed, it will be the mandate. However, I'm not convinced that five of them will be willing to give up the big windfall for their corporate buddies in the health insurance industry. Fat Tony might. And, if he does, his shadow, Clarence, will, as he votes with Scalia. I'm not so sure about the other three, however.

[annabanana]

8. Every unemployed and under employed kid between the ages

of 18 and 26 will lose their coverage. That's a sizable number of votes.

[still_one]

16. and how many of those people will be voting /nt

[annabanana]

9. Everyone with "pre-existing conditions" will lose coverage.

Which is damn near everyone.

[still_one]

21. Not exactly. If you are currently insured, and have a pre-existing condition, you cannot be

discriminated against that preexisting condition. However, if you do not have insurance, and have a pre-existing condition, you have to wait 6 months before you can get insurance. This is of course before the actual law takes effect in 2014, where they cannot discriminate for those with pre-existing conditions and no insurance. If the law never takes effect, then those who don't have coverage still won't

[HuckleB]

12. I dunno.

But if it goes down, and Obama goes down in November, well, for the first time in our lives, we will begin to see about living elsewhere. We have kids now, and I have to think about them as well as the good fight. I know. I know. There are no good endings, but...

[AnotherMcIntosh]

20. It will not affect him. Voters will still recognize that Rmoney is the worst of the 2 candidates.

[WingDinger]

24. Fox news has admitted that it wont do, to just get rid of it.

They know health care is broken. Sure their fixes are crap. They talk about shifting all or most obligation to the individual. They want it to be paid with pretaxed dollars. They mentioned a doc somewhere, that charges 5 bucks per office visit. They opine that this could be the rule. They are back to the chicken payment. They know that it will create chaos, if struck down.


Dumbass Stossel says, disallowing pre existing conditions is necessary. It is a faulty business model to spread risk. What an IDIOT. THAT IS WHAT INSURANCE IS. For crap sakes.

[dionysus]

25. you're very, very concerned.

[KatChatter]

27. The Ins Comps want to PROFIT off the healthy and dump the sick and poor on the Tax Payers

President Obama needs to repeat that over and over again it should be the mantra of the Democrats .

That is what the entire health care debate has been about.

[jeff47]

30. No, it returns us to a very unpopular state

The provisions of the ACA are very popular. Striking down the law gets rid of those popular provisions.

The Republicans will celebrate, and Obama will be able to point to them as the source of the pain. And point out that despite their promises, they don't have any plan to fix it.

Net result: Slight improvement for Obama.

[Starry Messenger]

31. I am not a fan at all of the health care law.

But if it is struck down, there are going to be rocky roads ahead for Obama. The right wing would love something of that magnitude to make Obama look like a loser.