The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare overhaul law requiring that most Americans get insurance by 2014 or pay a financial penalty, a historic ruling that gave the White House a big win ahead of Obama’s re-election bid in November.
“The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court’s majority.
“Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness,” he concluded. The conservative Roberts joined the four most liberal justices to uphold the law’s key provision…
The upholding of the insurance purchase requirement, known as the “individual mandate,” was a victory for Obama on the law that aims to extend coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans…
The court’s ruling could figure prominently in the run-up to the November 6 election. Obama is being challenged by Republican Mitt Romney, who had called for scrapping the law and replacing it with other measures even though he championed a similar approach at the state level as Massachusetts governor…
Overdue.
If I was in the RIAA/MPAA I’d be pushing for an Internet tax right now for people who aren’t on some sort of pay-for-your-content plan.
Since those people are cheats and a burden on the rest of us.
Have the death panel positions been posted on Craig’s List yet? I’m volunteering my time at no cost to taxpayers and promise to be fairly brutal and efficient.
What this country needs is less healthcare. We spend a fortune to let every retarded kid with multiple birth defects live long enough to hopefully pass on his genes to the next generation. Nature used to take care of these things, but now we just sidestep it all. It’s not good for the species.
And people lacking the capacity to think past next week seriously wish we could end all disease, when desease is one of the few things that has the power to keep human overpopulation in check.
Healthcare reform and population control or purity of species are different topics. The foundation of your case argument won’t pass Sesame Street Court
Not standing for the Pedge of Allegiance because the government will supposedly penalize those who choose not to get health insurance WHILE your own tax burden will be reduced by the more efficient delivery of patient care?
Holy Cow Liberty Loser: thats some kind of Dogma you are carrying around, or is it simply brain rot, or more likely only rhetorical BS? Always hard to tell with a LIEberTARD like yourself.
…and yet there is a whole Puke Party supported by the kind of stupidity you put on display.
HEY LOSER: have you identified yet EXACTLY how YOUR LIFE will be made worse by Obama care? NOT to your vaunted philosophy (sic, as it is really brain rot and not a philosoply) — you know==your actual “life?”
Try to think about it and get back to this blog to let us all know EXACTLY the terrible impact this is having on you.
What a frickin’ dolt.
Two more posts from you and we can officially rename this board Trolls Uncensored.
Republicans should respond with a tax on people who do not have children within marriage. Needed to boost funding for Social Security and Medicare, as a shared responsibility payment.
The logic of this decision says a tax on people who don’t have health insurance that meets the governments requirements is OK. Therefore this too is acceptable.
Reading the decision, there are 4 votes to throw out the law, plus one vote that says it is only valid because the mandate is actually a tax AND the tax is low enough that it wouldn’t accomplish its goal.
So if ObamaCare does what it tries to do, then it is unconstitutional. They say it is only valid because the tax level is low enough that people won’t actually buy insurance as a result. According to the government this would cause the whole plan to fall apart.
Great, now insurance has been moved from the employers paying for it, to now the tax payer will have to pay not only for it’s own citizens but every other piece of trash illegal alien that comes over here to take an American Job.
Whatever…………………………………………………………………………
Traaxx
LibertyLover demonstrating the TARD in LIEberTARD says:
6/30/2012 at 7:54 pm
Two more posts from you and we can officially rename this board Trolls Uncensored. /// Still on the troll meme huh? 100% uniform failure to respond to any counter point/challenge made to your mindless childish yapping regarding your “I got mine, screw you” Darwinian social policy dressed in Drag as Libertarianism?
I guess the positive aspect of this is that you don’t like it? Ha, ha. That is a good thing. Not free as you wish to be to run around with no pants on. Grow Up Loser. Learn to argue by direct response rather than repetition of your position already made.
How you gonna get any smarter if you don’t engage the opposition? – – – and that is exactly the mechanism by which you have found this nadir point in political thought==never having to defend it.
I’ll say it again Loser – – I’m not responding to YOU, I’m responding to YOUR ARGUMENT. Its only consistent you can’t understand the world/this blog/ in any other manner except as an extension of your own malignant interests.
But no other LIEberTARD takes up your position either. Seems you all can only “debate” with one another by crowing as the sun rises?
Ha, ha. Poor little child. Just wants everything his own way. Whaa, whaa, whaaaaaa. Now, where’s my cappuccino?
Just one more!
Say Loser: where do you find trolls? …… Thats right, underneath bridges.
why do you choose to live under a bridge Loser?
I’m just passing thru, a crumb here, a crumb there. Oh!—Look===a retard howling at the moon. Lets give him a double helping of crumbs.
“No – you are!”
Ha, ha. Stoopid Human.
Mike N: “They say it is only valid because the tax level is low enough that people won’t actually buy insurance as a result.” /// That doesn’t sound like legal analysis to me. Got a link?
You would do well to separate actual legal/court/decision language from third party commentary regarding it. Two different worlds.
Follow this simple rule and you won’t find yourself saying: “So if ObamaCare does what it tries to do, then it is unconstitutional.” /// Hmmmm===no, what ObamaCare does is legal and constitutional. Obama made two, count them: two arguments before the court: its legal under the Commerce Clause, and its legal under the taxing authority of Congress. Court accepted argument number two making the law legal and Constitutional.
It is in fact a conservative NON activist opinion of the Court–the power to tax is very broad and SET BY THE PEOPLE thru their representatives in Congress. Do you want the USA ruled by Congress or by the Court?
Lets aim at just a smidgen of consistency?
Read the opinion. It uses the fact that the CBO decided 4 million people would not buy health insurance and pay the tax. Another 15-20 million are estimated to not buy health insurance but not be required to pay the tax.
Read the opinion? 199 pages.
Why don’t you cite the page, or copy paste so most here have an indicating you aren’t BS’s?
Poser.
Something Wicked This Way Comes