Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama might have a Supreme Court majority on the health care law (238 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  you have that right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    docrocktex

    with a mandate.  There's a fine that's significantly less than the costs of various premiums.  

    What you think your right is as a consumer isn't necessarily a "constitutional" right, and it's pretty significantly less compelling a right than the right of other consumers to finally be able to afford health insurance by expanding the risk pool by targeting those who would try to "boycott" for economic, not principled reasons.  It's also not a compelling right to shift costs onto others in the spirit of your boycott, but the bill leaves you that right.  

    I'm concerned there are too many moving parts and there's not really a fail safe mechanism if the exchanges don't lower costs.  This is not an objection of constitutional significance.

    "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

    by Loge on Thu Sep 29, 2011 at 12:02:49 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well I support HCR and I supported the bill... (0+ / 0-)

      but I don't see how any of these points show how the courts declaring the individual mandate alone unconstitutional is a worse outcome than the courts declaring the whole bill unconstitutional.

      I don't think it's even remotely possible that the current health care reform bill MINUS the individual mandate isn't a huge card in the deck for Progressives.  

      •  then why did you support the bill? (0+ / 0-)

        and to your second paragraph, its because without an individual mandate. the effects of community rating and the ban on discrimination against preexisting conditions would make prices go up!  That's why the insurance companies discriminated against preexisting conditions to begin with!

        "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

        by Loge on Thu Sep 29, 2011 at 08:32:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  ?? so the insurance companies are the good guys ?? (0+ / 0-)

          I think you have gotten half of what I'm saying and are you not getting the second half of what I am saying which is what is necessary for the first half to make sense.  

          What I am saying is, if the insurance companies lose the individual mandate but are forced not to discriminate, they will lobby congress like mad to fix it and in so doing we get bipartisan support to take another step in reform.

          So either congress tries to repeal the whole thing (taking us back exactly where we would be if the supreme court declared the entire bill unconstitutional) or they add a public option to make the individual mandate constitutional again.

          •  If it's the commerce clause (0+ / 0-)

            a public option with mandate would still be unconstitutional to the same extent.

            Ins cos are the bad guys, as should be clear.  A public option without mandate might also just leave the taxpayers subsidizing the costs of the otherwise uninsurable while the ins cos pick the best.  Not an optimum outcome.

            "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

            by Loge on Sat Oct 01, 2011 at 09:33:34 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think that a public option without a mandate (0+ / 0-)

              doesn't mean what you say, because in the scenario I described the insurance companies are still required not to discriminate.  

              •  A public option without a mandate (0+ / 0-)

                doesn't present the Constitutional question posed by a mandate, no, but it does leave the adverse selection problem.  So, to the extent it requires an individual mandate to be functional, the question of whether the mandate falls within the commerce clause can't be ducked.

                "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

                by Loge on Mon Oct 03, 2011 at 08:56:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site