Obamacare struck down!!!!

Fox News just reporting the Florida judge has ruled Obamacare unconstitutional. LMAO!

None of this matters yet...it's been upheld by some judges, declared unconstitutional by others, and most of the cases have been thrown out before they even got started...it'll have to work its way through all the various Appeals Courts containing the Districts where the cases have come to a conclusion, first.

After that, then it will end up in the Supreme Court...look for them to hear it next fall in that session, no way it will be ripe for them during this session.

Until they speak on it, the rest of this is just pre-season shucking and jiving.

Fish on...

Todd

I would actually prefer they take it there, sooner than later, and shut everybody up on both sides. Time to make a decision and move on.

Two things jump out. One it appears that the health care law did not have a severance clause so as one part is done in the whole thing is. Second the judge did not issue a court order to stop implementation.

This is a little different than the two in Michigan & Pennsylvania that said OK and the one in Virgina striking down in the fact that 29? states signed on with Florida.

In the end Supreme Court to be sure. It would be best for the nation if the justice pulled it past the appellate courts and took the issue head on now. Whatever the outcome if this does not fly then single payer or Medicare for all or just whatever as our health care system is broke and it needs to be fixed before it buries all of us in $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Todd, can the House stop the funding for it?

From time to time, but yes I get tired of all the partisan B.S.

Maybe...but the brighter on the right side of the aisle know that it will be perceived as an attack on Obama that has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual issue (they'd be right), so if cooler heads prevail, that won't happen.

It'll be with the Supremes next fall, why do something rash or tactically childish when it won't really matter in the end, anyway?

Fish on...

Todd

Yes I agree Todd but if they start giving this and that out then it makes it that much harder to take back. They need to send it up faster(I doubt it will happen though) or stop implementation until it is decided. Otherwise we will hear that we can not now stop the program as this groups need outweighs this or that. Not that it would be struck down anyway since the court seldom if ever sides against the feds increasing power.


Good old CC covers anything and everything.

And when the supremes strike it down, the libs will then complain that it's a conservative stacked court.

I think those on the right in Congress are rightly afraid that if it begins to implemented that it will prove to work...and they don't give a shiot about it working or not, they only care about beating Obama with it.

Fish on...

Todd

Yup, number one goal = beat Obama.
Health care is for the rich.

Todd

You and I might be on different sides of the health care thing but you know it has nothing to do with it working. Anyone who pays for themselves or staff know it did not bring down costs (as promised) but raised them on hard working americans. This was not about costs for everyone but coverage for everyone.

The problem with implementation is that we start to see these people being trucked out and get the sympathy card going. It wont be about if it is right or wrong, if it works or not, it will be about little Timmy having it taken away. No matter if he was covered under the old system for nothing or if he gets the exact same coverage he always had. We will have his mother (likely a life long Dem) all over the news talking about how dare they take this away from my son.

Truth does not matter only little Timmy. Let little Timmy be covered by the system as he always has been and find out if the SCOTUS upholds this or not before it becomes more of a political football than it already is. Let them decide and then the winners win and the rest of us will live with the decision.

It hasn't even been substantively implemented yet...hard to say how well it's working or not yet.

Fish on...

Todd

Reform hasn't started. Somewhere there was a CEO gathering with the insurance industry and they arrived at the term "Wellness Plan" which means employees pick up more of the tab. In other words you got a pay cut under the guise of increasing health care costs.

Part of the judge's ruling: “I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.

Sounds like the judge should be disbarred as that would have obsolutely nothing to do with the legal matter at hand. Any other foot notes about social security, et al?

With a House and Senate infested with lawyers one would think that one of them would be intelligent enough to figure this out before passing the damn legislation. Oh, wait a minute. I forgot that they don't care about the Constitution.

Or maybe they do, and did, and the judges that have found in favor of the legislation are the ones that are right?

Fish on...

Todd

How about this....they read the bill before passing it.

I think Congress would grind to a halt...I believe we'd all be appalled at the amount of voting our reps do without having any idea whatsoever is in the bills they are voting for...

Fish on...

Todd

Perfect.

No harm no foul

Actually, I had a state rep give me a call to ask about a few pieces of legislation, and he is a "D", so they aren't all bad.

Obamacare is ruled unconstitutional because a government cannot force insurance onto someone. WTF?!?!

Last time I checked, anyone with a mortgage needs homeowners insurance by law. Not only that, but ALL homeowners are forced by the state government to have insurance in many states whether or not they're paying on a mortgage. Furthermore, I don't seem to remember it being an option to NOT have car insurance (unless you're an illegal alien of course). When will these laws get struck down as an assault to your constitutional liberties?

This is bullschit. Fvck T-bagging activist judges. Fvck the hypocrisy of the Faux Newz crowd.

The Judge used Obummers own words against him.

In ruling against President Obama‘s health care law, federal Judge Roger Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s own position from the 2008 campaign against him, arguing that there are other ways to tackle health care short of requiring every American to purchase insurance.

“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.

Obummer would fck up a wet dream.

McMahon - "Last time I checked, anyone with a mortgage needs homeowners insurance by law."
This is not the case in Washington State. It's a lenders requirement not a law. Lenders only require fire insurance to protect the collaterol for the loan. If you own a rental, it's all you need as the contents aren't the owners.

Suck it McMoron. :>)

States can place requirements on you the federal government can't. Car insurance is an example, as we are required to purchase it to drive on public roads in Washington, but it is a state requirement not federal. The feds have gotten around this for years by requiring the states to do XXX or loose federal funding for XXX. ( 55 speed limit a good example or loose highway funds ) Had the health care bit required states to do XXX or loose federal Medicaid / Medicare funding it would have moved on down the road. It is the Federal government requiring you to purchase insurance that it ran amuck as they can not require you to purchase a product. If they had done single pay ( tax ) as in Soc Sec ( tax ) ect all a go but the key is they tax you and then provide the service. Also the lack of the little clause that says if one part is unconstitutional the rest stands alone ( usually done ) is missing, otherwise the judge would have only struck the mandatory purchase bit.

I assume ........... hell I don't know why the D's didn't put it in except they would not have had the votes. Don't know.

Link to a reasonable read on the thing with a little history

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...ections_opinion

oh well

Well, it's been two days, and I'm still waiting for the right wingers here to spaz out about that "activist" judge subverting the will of the people...the majority of the people want it, the majority of the House voted for it, and a super majority of the Senate voted for it.

Where's that righteous indignation that you usually have for those activist judges, legislating from the bench, in situations like these?

Yeah, that's what I thought...next time you want to say it about a ruling you don't like...shut the fukk up.

Fish on...

Todd

If it was so great, why did the Dems abandon this during the mid terms? Because the polls showed the public was against this at the rate of 60-70%..prolly just a Fox Poll though.

“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.
_________________________

Interesting comment, but in now way related to the U.S. Constitution. Pure activist judge.

Discuss away...just don't call the judge an "activist judge who legislates from the bench" when you don't agree, and shout the ruling from the rooftops when you do agree, when the only difference between what the two judges did...is nothing, except you agree with one, and not with the other.

Where are all those "activist judge" haters? Come on, don't make me search for all of you in the archives...man up and admit that you are one of them!

Fish on...

Todd

Chuck be glad yours is 490 my went from 700 to 900 so we now have about the same coverage as you, for around 500..

So, what you're saying Chuck...is that he's not an activist judge legislating from the bench...because you agree with him.

Right?

That's my point...if it was something you supported (along with the majority of Americans, the House, and the Senate), you'd be screaming your head off at that "activist judge legislating from the bench"...

Not really expecting any consistency, just taking a moment to point out the inconsistency so, like I said...the next time something comes down the pike that you don't agree with, and you want to yell "activist judge!"...you can STFU.

Fish on...

Todd

I"m with ya Chuck but I want to know how you really feel?

The point some seem to miss is, it really doesn't matter what a judge thinks about the legislation, whether it raises or lowers your cost, whether it’s good or bad, what someone may have said about it, or any other considerations other than the constitutionality of the legislation.

They should throw it to the SCOTUS ASAP and see where the chips land and go from there. Does it have to go to the CA first?

Yes, it will have to make it through the Courts of Appeals first...don't be surprised that this is getting decided just as the 2012 Presidential race is really starting to heat up...Justice Kennedy should be thinking hard, he'll be the one casting the fifth vote to either uphold or strike it down...

Fish on...

Todd

The people in government that are trying to do something for the people are overwhelmed by those polished politicians gathering favors from the corporations, powerful and politically connected to be used later to sell us to the highest bidder!

Course I may just be a tad pessimistic.

Fishy

FYI my health insurance company after implementing the new changes required by the Obama plan now charges me about $500 more per month.

Nearly $43,000 per year in health care premiums alone!

That's about 4.5 times what I pay for a year of malpractice insurance.

Thanks, but keep the change.

Whoa guy. The portions of kids on to 26, pre existing conditions and some odds and ends kicked. My insurance went up right with it around 100 a month. The amount will vary as to the increase depending if your a union or private but plans will pass the cost on. You don't increase scope and scale without someone paying.

Be glad when they throw the thing out in court then can it be redone right with a public option or single payer. That the D's did not put a severance clause is beyond belief anyway.

Edit thing. My plan is a union by the way so I suffer less than Doc.

No reason to ask me...I don't call judges "activist judges"...you'll have to ask those who throw that term out every time one makes a ruling they don't like.

Fish on...

Todd

Gee, you're all getting f.ucked by your insurance companies, and it's because of the health care reform, the majority of which hasn't even been implemented, huh?

Holy sh!t..................could you guys BE any more naive?

Your insurance companies are f'ing you because they can, and now they have an excuse for doing so...................and you're buying it.

OK, I did a search on "activist judges". Looks to me like virtually every thread with a reference to "activist judges" was started by Todd or his friends, and Todd seems to be the primary commenter about activist judges. I can't seem to find a thread started by a so-called rwwj that is railing against activist judges.

No te preoccupe, se felicite!

Word.

When a judge makes a ruling that legitimately favors a certain group for political gain, he's an activist judge. Appeasing right wingers, insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies is activism. Appeasing Defenders of Wildlife and granolas in San Francisco is activism.

When a judge makes a ruling based on emotion and personal opinion, he's an activist judge.

Many judges do this -- it's nothing new. Some are fighting for the left, some are fighting for the right. All you have to do is look at their track record to see. Judge Molloy in Montana is a good example of this. Almost all of his rulings have favored environmental groups' emotions, not facts brought forward by researchers in cases from logging to wolves.

Must be insurance companies screwing some of you over. My health plan is with Group Health, and so far no premium or coverage changes that I can see, other than the recent notification that children up to age 26 are covered. But my kids flew from the nest a while back, so they're on their own.

I'm thinking there are two reasons why NHC is flawed. First, Congress isn't highly competent. Second, insurance companies are extremely competent, and excelled at protecting their profit interest in the NHC.

Sg

WTF? $3,600 per month for health insurance? A $500 monthly increase because of legislation that hasn't even been enacted yet?

I'm done bitchin' about my recent increase (and my insurance company, for that matter).

I was speaking as an employer.

My plan covers me and three employees.

I also pay the premium on a fourth employee that is covered under gov't subsidized TriCare. I can buy an entire year of TriCare for her whole family for less than what it costs for a single month of our regular plan for one employee.

And as for those who don't/can't understand how these changes could possibly happen BEFORE the legislation is officially enacted, you need to understand that businesses must contract with these insurance companies a year in advance. The insurance companies were already anticipating the cost of PROACTIVELY implementing all of the new changes required by ObamaCare for 2011.

The plans/premiums offered to the business community HAD TO reflect the increased cost of covering all of the ObamaCare mandates.

Ah, yes. You must forgive my ignorance as regards all aspects of small business enterprise management. Thankfully, as a slave to The Man, I have only had the pleasure of paying my own premiums. That said, I still find your figures alarming. My Dad's a doc, and I know they hit you folks especially hard and low when it comes to insurance.

Thanks for the insight into how our recent increases have been related to Obamacare. Makes a lot of sense, even if it sucks. Something tells me that if Obamacare never sees the light of day as implemented policy, we won't be getting any refunds. Bass turds.

Despite many opportunities to downgrade coverage, increase co-pays and deductibles, and raise out-of-pocket maximums along the way, my staff still enjoys a primo Regence plan which I have faithfully maintained at ZERO cost to them.

Just got my renewal quote for my office staff's health insurance for 2012. I about had a coronary!

58,000+ for the year!

Like I said before, keep the change.

I want to work where you do... mine increased $90/month and the family plan now has a $100 surcharge if the spouse can be covered by another plan... some family plan that is...

basically i'm paying $45/week more than last year and last year they raised it $100/month...

can you imagine the recovery to the economy if you could put even half of that $790/month i'm paying for health care back into my pocket - plus every other working stiff out there... thats alot of recovery

Mine has gone up dramatically every year for the past dozen or so. Damn Obamacare hurt me even before it was a gleam in Obama's eye.

A recent report by The Kaiser Foundation found that Obamacare did increase premiums by approximatly 1 1/5 percent. But policies have been going up more every year by 5-7 percent.

My cost doubled in two years as it is a union retirement plan and the trust has to past cost on preloading as Doc pointed out. When changes are government mandated somebody pays and it ain't Santa!

Up from what?

According to the following average health insurance cost were up 131% in the ten years up to 2009. I told you Obama did that . . . . somehow.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-09-16/news/17204841_1_health-insurance-health-coverage-premiums

Sounds like you either need a new insurance company, or the insurance system needs to stop raping America.

This is just like the professional negligence insurance problem...i.e. "malpractice" insurance...it's not the fault of those who get injured that it's so expensive, or their attorneys...it's the fault of the insurance companies that most seem to let charge whatever they want without complaining to those who are doing the overcharging...the insurance companies.

Fish on...

Todd

Francis, when your insurance rates went up during Dumbya's reign, who did you blame it on then? Lawyers?

Fish on...

Todd

Bring your own salt....the pepper will be supplied! Gladly.

We just changed to a higher deductible and a higher out of pocket max, that change will cost me $2000 a year more if I max both.

Pretty funny thread. Throwing up the activist judge redd herring ploy is so meaningful, since it has always been a reflection of a ruling that made law from the bench. ie: Roe v Wade.


I dont have health insurance. I want to be the first to be perp walked to the fn jail. This will be just like Hawaii who abandoned their own child health care plan several years back, due to costs. Congress had to delay the digital switch over of TV stations, for a lack of converter boxes. With all the State and union wavers, its only a matter of time, before the rest of them revolt.

I work for a democrat and he doesnt buy insurance for anyone but him and the wife and 30 yr old kid, who cant afford it, because he is a lazy worthless sack. He doesnt pay his employees more in lieu of health coverage.

With high unemployment, its either going to be billed to those who have it or put them all in jail for not buying it. Just like auto insurance, landline phones and electricity.

This seems to be most popular with the bottom 1% who WANT someone else to pay for their health care insurance and everything else they can get for free. It also fits people who spend too much on other [censored] and dont want to grow up.

Lets classify an acitivist judge as someone directly involved in the legislation, supporting its passage, but has yet to recuse herself. So, to level the playing field, the opponents fire back, looking for any excuse to demand another judge, (who is conservative) recuse himself from the vote.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/t...OPIO_story.html

Incidently, some 25 democrats in the house or senate are now quietly supporting the reversal of the obamacare. Just an unconfirmed rumor.

And yet you work FOR him.



I like it when some dipsh!t clowns himself and doesn't even know it.


What happens if you get in a car wreck today and they have to cart you off to the trauma center, Mr. Uninsured? Everyone pays FOR you because you don;t want to grow up, and you expect someone else to pick up the tab...................because YOU spent too much on other sh!t?

Do you even read the crap you post?

Dumbfk, I dont work for the son, who cant afford his own car, his own insurance. His daddy buys it. Learn how to read dumbass.

Dumbfk, I dont expect anyone to pay for my medical expenses. I already pay them. They must work on you, it doesnt mean they dont try and collect. I pay my own way. When I die, any claims will get settled. You're a fking knowitall. Go fk yourself.

Awwww.

Would a tissue help, Sally?

How about a nuk?

LE
Your penultimate post was one of your all-time goofiest. Even if we ignore the rambling and the lack of cogent thought process or logic we are left wondering how you could honestly believe you can pay for a major medical expense. You can yak all you want about how you pay your way, but no one with a job like you describe yours can afford to ever pay for a catastrophic illness or accident. I have seen medical bills exceed $1,00,000 for a major head trauma. Where would you get that sort of money? Of course you wouldn’t be able to, so all of the rest of us would have to pay it. We already have socialized medicine, but it's just a very inefficient form of it.
I try not to be a name caller or to be unnecessarily cruel, but I honestly believe you would do your image a kindness by posting less or at least thinking before hitting the submit button.

I hear all about how health care has gotten out of control and I just shake my head. This did not just start, it has been going on for years. You guys that are working and paying more and more just wait til you retire and have to pay more out of pocket AND your income has dropped!
I have been subsidizing and helping pay for my parents health care for years and it is not one party's over the others problem, they both are in bed with the insurance companies,pharmaceutical, medical equipment, testing labs, etc,etc,etc and guess who gets to pick up the tab.

DV is right, we already have subsidized health care, it's just not very good and the costs are driven up by all those listed above.


Fishy

You forgot to mention CEO pay. I'm sure these guys deserve every penny of their multi million dollar compensation,(sarcasm alert) How about spending a quarter million dollars to keep 80 year old cancer patients alive for a another couple of months,good idea? There are so many things wrong with our system it's overwhelming to contemplate. Obamacare also known as Romneycare is a scheme to make people think they are getting some progress,they did fix some of the worst like denial of coverage for preexisting conditions but mainly it was nothing but tinkering around the edges and protecting profits of the big insurance and pharmaceutical corps. Too many Americans seem to have a knack for swallowing BS and defending systems that screw them.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/col...17a4a78c22.html

Incarcerated people get their medical expenses covered, even if they committed the most heinous crimes imaginable. It's kinda hard to say everyone else shouldn't be covered too.