Skip to main content

View Diary: More Than a Victory, the Decision Today Was a Mandate for Us to Act (67 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't have the legal mind to know (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bkamr, kerplunk

    if this is correct or not but ...

    according to a reporter on Al Jazeera, by stating that the Commerce Clause did not apply, the Supreme Court left open the door for states to opt out. If this assessment is true, and enough Republican-controlled states opt out, it seems to me that the pool could be shrunk down and the effectiveness of the ACA (flawed as it is) would be severely impaired.

    “The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just.” – Abraham Lincoln

    by Sagebrush Bob on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 06:48:59 PM PDT

    •  Except that the Fed Gov. fully funds the medicaid (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Irixsh, Eric Nelson, Floande

      portion of it for the first few years, and people are not going to be happy at all if their Rep. politicians don't tke the money so they can be covered.

      Plutocracy (noun) Greek ploutokratia, from ploutos wealth; 1) government by the wealthy; 2) 21st c. U.S.A.; 3) 22nd c. The World

      by bkamr on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 07:00:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, it'd be crazy for states to opt out (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WakeUpNeo, boudi08, bkamr

        of free money. But two facts make this dangerous:

        1) many states are currently run by crazy right wingers, and

        2) the people who will be most affected (and therefore most unhappy) are poor folks who already aren't doing too well in life, for whatever reason. They're already the people whose voices aren't heard or are summarily disregarded. Meaning: if the poor are unhappy, the right-wingers say "so what?"

        We have to keep reminding ourselves to keep fighting for them because it's easy for them to fall off the radar, anyway. We need to constantly berate state governments that (such as Arizona's) that try to deny health care to the very poor.

        We need to make the states know that this is unacceptable.

        Reality has a well-known liberal bias -- Stephen Colbert

        by ItsaMathJoke on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 08:22:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  States can opt out of the minimum requirements (0+ / 0-)

      but I think the people would be quite upset when they got the tax penalty because they can not opt out of paying the tax "penalty"...

      •  They only pay that penalty (0+ / 0-)

        if they end up needing health care & don't have insurance. My understanding is that the gov't won't go out looking for people to fine for non-compliance.

        (Check me if that's wrong.)

        Reality has a well-known liberal bias -- Stephen Colbert

        by ItsaMathJoke on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 08:08:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I thought it was all done at tax time, as it is (0+ / 0-)

          here in MA. You get a tax form from your insurer that basically allows you to check off that you were insured for that year. So if you file taxes and don't fall under the income limitations, I would think that is when they'd assess the penalty. The IRS would have no way of knowing when you needed care.

    •  Seems Though That The States Most Likely (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      doinaheckuvanutjob

      to opt out of ACA also have the highest unhealthy populations.

      And love voting Republicans into office.  

      So it might be a wash.

      I hate to write off fellow Americans but if they want to continue to vote against their interests by voting for crazy Republicans, elections have consequences.

      http://www.businessinsider.com/...

      The Republican Party is Simply a Coalition of Greed and Hate

      by kerplunk on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 07:52:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  except... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        doinaheckuvanutjob

        It won't only apply to those who voted for Republicans, it will apply to anyone who happens to live in a state where more people voted for a Republicans than voted for Democrats. Even by one. Denying them medical care seems pretty cruel.

        To keep our faces turned toward change, and behave as free spirits in the presence of fate--that is strength undefeatable. (Helen Keller)

        by kareylou on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 08:19:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is cruel. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kareylou

          However, I don't get the ruling, seeing as how there are many ways to 'force' states to do things, and that's been done for 200 years. I'd like to see what our lawyers at daily kos say about this.

          24/7, it's all 'Great news for Romney!'

          by doinaheckuvanutjob on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 01:10:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (137)
  • Community (59)
  • Elections (39)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Culture (32)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Law (27)
  • Economy (26)
  • Texas (26)
  • Baltimore (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (23)
  • Labor (23)
  • Hillary Clinton (22)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Health Care (18)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • International (17)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Freddie Gray (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site