Affordable Care Act / ObamaCare

[HSKR]

 

I gotta say it was pretty entertaining listening to KFAB yesterday with Glenn Beck having a total meltdown.

[knapplc]

Where was the uproar over the legal requirements to have car insurance? Why is this piece of legislation any more of an infringement on personal rights than requiring insurance for your vehicle?

 

I'd like to believe the level of upset over this isn't simply based on party lines. But I'm having a hard time not seeing it that way.

I guess we all still have the right to pick and choose exactly what we want to complain about.

 

However, I view the ACA mandate to purchase health insurance a little differently than your example of auto insurance. Anyone who drives a car has a very real possibility of inficting direct damage on another persons body or property. If that person has no insurance and no other resources, the harmed person may not be fairly compensated for their loss. That is not the case with personal health insurance. If a person does not have health insurance, it harms no one other themself. Of course I am disregarding the cost shifting problem but, that problem is really caused by the notion that care must provided to those who cannot afford it and not by the ability to choose whether or not you purchase health insurance.

 

If you're telling me it's not a 1:1 analogy, I'll agree. But it's close enough to make the point.

 

Yes, you have the right to choose which issues to get upset about. But it's pretty easy to tune out people who only gripe about one side of the aisle when both are frequently at fault.

[JJ Husker]

I've never claimed both sides aren't at fault. In fact, the repubs suck almost as bad as the dems. However, my tendency is a bit right of center, fairly conservative, and some what libertarian. It only makes sense that I would complain much more about the liberal left, liberty trampling, and the democrats in general than I would about republicans or conservatives. Tuning out that side of the equation is no different than only complaining about it. Either way simply shows a bias to our own preferences. When the right side of the aisle does something I don't agree with, rest assured I will complain about them too. What I really long for is for one of the sides to do something I agree with. That ain't happened in awhile.

[knapplc]

I've never claimed both sides aren't at fault. In fact, the repubs suck almost as bad as the dems. However, my tendency is a bit right of center, fairly conservative, and some what libertarian. It only makes sense that I would complain much more about the liberal left, liberty trampling, and the democrats in general than I would about republicans or conservatives. Tuning out that side of the equation is no different than only complaining about it. Either way simply shows a bias to our own preferences. When the right side of the aisle does something I don't agree with, rest assured I will complain about them too. What I really long for is for one of the sides to do something I agree with. That ain't happened in awhile.

 

Hear, hear. That's why I'm Independent.

[JJ Husker]

What I really long for is for one of the sides to do something I agree with. That ain't happened in awhile.

 

Hear, hear. That's why I'm Independent.

 

I may still be officially a registered republican but I think I operate and vote in an independent manner. I like to have the option to vote in primaries so I guess that is why I am still registered repub. I also like my vote to count so that is why most times I will vote for what I would call my 2nd choice or more realistic candidate. I may prefer the positions of an independent candidate but if they are projected to only get 10% of the vote, I feel that would be a waste of a trip to the polls. So, often times I will vote republican if for no better reason than I almost always dislike the dem candidate more. I don't view that as being necessarily one-sided partisan, but I'm sure it may appear that way to others. I just wish we would get the option to vote for somebody we really liked. Once. Sometime. Anytime. Please.

[Comish]

From a local perspective, I find it telling that, after three consecutive days earlier this week of Ben Nelson wailing to his local sycophant Don Walton in the Lincoln paper about the evil “activist court” going to strike down Obamacare………..when the ruling came down the (honorable ?) senator was pleased that Roberts "reached across the isle".

 

I guess that it’s only an activist court when the conservative side wins. When the liberal wing wins, it is reaching across the isle.

 

When the chief justice twists the government’s own case (commerce clause) into a “constitutional” tax to “save” the ACA, that must not be construed as activist.

 

What has been not mentioned much in this ruling is the halting of the federal blackmail threat of withholding all federal funds if the state medicare changes do not fit the feds desires. THAT is a win for all the states.

[knapplc]

What I really long for is for one of the sides to do something I agree with. That ain't happened in awhile.

 

Hear, hear. That's why I'm Independent.

 

I may still be officially a registered republican but I think I operate and vote in an independent manner. I like to have the option to vote in primaries so I guess that is why I am still registered repub. I also like my vote to count so that is why most times I will vote for what I would call my 2nd choice or more realistic candidate. I may prefer the positions of an independent candidate but if they are projected to only get 10% of the vote, I feel that would be a waste of a trip to the polls. So, often times I will vote republican if for no better reason than I almost always dislike the dem candidate more. I don't view that as being necessarily one-sided partisan, but I'm sure it may appear that way to others. I just wish we would get the option to vote for somebody we really liked. Once. Sometime. Anytime. Please.

 

If I had to register with a party affiliation I'd register Republican, but I'm so middle-of-the-road that registering for either party would be a total sham.

[knapplc]

I guess that it’s only an activist court when the conservative side wins. When the liberal wing wins, it is reaching across the isle.

 

 

You're right, but let's not kid ourselves - if this had gone the other way, that griping would be flipped.

 

Same gripe, different party.

[Yossarian]

I guess that it’s only an activist court when the conservative side wins. When the liberal wing wins, it is reaching across the isle.

 

 

You're right, but let's not kid ourselves - if this had gone the other way, that griping would be flipped.

 

Same gripe, different party.

 

You are correct, of course, but that still doesn't change the fact that the Federal government taking over a large part of our economy. And we know how that usually turns out.

[HSKR]

I'm not a fan of Obamacare but I really don't have that much of a problem with the ruling, in fact if it is going to get repealed, I'd much rather see it done by the ballot box. The polls have been anywhere from 50-60% against Obamacare. If America doesn't want it, then vote for the Presidential candidate, Senator or Representative that will get rid of it. Quit laying the blame for this on the courts because if you don't want it, then it should have never got there in the first place. It's kind of crazy to think that if Nelson aka Mr 60th would have been defeated the last election, none of this would have ever happened in the first place.

[Comish]

One analysis of how and why Roberts ruled the way he did.........

 

http://www.commentar...sible-decision/

[carlfense]

One analysis of how and why Roberts ruled the way he did.........

 

http://www.commentar...sible-decision/

 

The following doesn't quite mean what he thinks it means:

For example, his dramatically narrowed reading of the Commerce Clause is now binding precedent.

[Comish]

One analysis of how and why Roberts ruled the way he did.........

 

http://www.commentar...sible-decision/

 

The following doesn't quite mean what he thinks it means:

For example, his dramatically narrowed reading of the Commerce Clause is now binding precedent.

I would argue that it does in the sense that there is now precedent suggesting limits on an unfettered and open-ended reading of the commerce clause....

[carlfense]

I would argue that it does in the sense that there is now precedent suggesting limits on an unfettered and open-ended reading of the commerce clause....

There were limits to the commerce clause prior to this case.

[knapplc]

Romney will get rid of Obamacare like Obama closed Gitmo. This is based on Romney's signature piece of legislation as governor of Massachusetts. If you think he's going to repeal Obamacare, I have a bridge to sell you.