How to Protect Yourself From Obamacare

[dbacks fan]

A CBO estimate is a lot like the estimate provided by a contractor.  About half way through the job, it's discovered that the project will cost more and take twice as long.

In both cases I simply double the cost.

But at least with a contractor, a smart person will lock the price of the job through a binding contract.

[heironymouspasparagus]

And now CBO is saying it will cost even less than originally anticipated...

Who could argue with this??  Some insurance plans that spend more than 20 percent of their customers' premiums on non-health-care related expenses such as marketing will be required to send customers cash rebates. This rule is meant to encourage insurance companies to keep premiums down by punishing them if they don't reduce their overhead.

What a unique idea!!  Make insurance companies actually offer insurance!!  How revolutionary!!


Quick overview
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obama-health-care-law-passed-two-years-ago-165930385.html


Kaiser Foundation did a study and analysis.
http://healthreform.kff.org/the-basics.aspx

[Conan71]

The CBO must be schizophrenic.

Even so, a recent Gallup poll found that Americans are evenly split on whether they think the health care law should be repealed. Only 1 in 7 respondents in another poll said they had experienced something positive from the law. A recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimated that 5 million people may lose their employer-based insurance between 2019 and 2022. The CBO also found that 2 million fewer uninsured Americans would gain coverage by 2016 than previously thought, and that the law would also be slightly cheaper than original estimates.

Well, there's another 7 million or so Americans we weren't advised were going to be treated adversely by Obamacare.

[Townsend]

This might be pointless after Wednesday.  Guess we wait and see.

[nathanm]

This might be pointless after Wednesday.  Guess we wait and see.

I suppose if Republicans want to go on record as worsening the long term deficit for no short term gain, that's their mistake to make.

Edited to add: Oh, duh, you were talking about the Supreme Court, not the Republicans' latest idiotic vote.

[Teatownclown]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=11-398-Monday

http://m.npr.org/news/U.S./149401430?page=0

I think the justices are in agreement that it isn't a tax. No Anti Tax Injunction Act rules apply?

What will SCOTUS do? writings on the wall....

[heironymouspasparagus]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=11-398-Monday

http://m.npr.org/news/U.S./149401430?page=0

I think the justices are in agreement that it isn't a tax. No Anti Tax Injunction Act rules apply?

What will SCOTUS do? writings on the wall....

It has been pre-determined.  5 to 4.

[Townsend]

Looks like it's breathing its last.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/03/27/scotus_health_care_hearings_conservative_justices_pose_hard_questions_about_mandate.html?wpisrc=twitter_socialflow

[Teatownclown]

They get rid of the individual mandate and BOOM! Insurance companies won't like the outcome of SINGLE PAYER....it's the only answer:

[nathanm]

It'll definitely be interesting to see which justices look to the historical record to divine the Constiution's meaning and which just make it up on the fly. This is one time I hope the folks making it up on the fly prevail. I don't like the individual mandate one bit, except insofar as it is marginally better than what we have now in that we won't be continuing to try our level best to bankrupt hospitals.

[erfalf]

It'll definitely be interesting to see which justices look to the historical record to divine the Constiution's meaning and which just make it up on the fly. This is one time I hope the folks making it up on the fly prevail. I don't like the individual mandate one bit, except insofar as it is marginally better than what we have now in that we won't be continuing to try our level best to bankrupt hospitals.

I hate to reply with a quote but:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

It is so true. Remember that America is the last best hope for freedom on this planet. The freedoms we are afforded have never been replicated successfully for any extended period of time as they have been here and now.

The fact that pretty much everyone on the forum wouldn't trust most politicians further than they can throw them and then say the things you just said are mind blowing. Please don't take it the wrong way nathan, because I know many people are extraordinarily passionate about this issue. But in this case the means in no way justify the ends. It would never end.

One more quote from Obama this time (paraphrased): you could no more solve the issue of the uninsured with an individual mandate than you could cure homelessness by ordering people to buy a home.

Brilliant, he IS smarter than I thought.

[nathanm]

The fact that pretty much everyone on the forum wouldn't trust most politicians further than they can throw them and then say the things you just said are mind blowing. Please don't take it the wrong way nathan, because I know many people are extraordinarily passionate about this issue. But in this case the means in no way justify the ends. It would never end.

I think you missed my point. I'm usually pretty unclear, so don't take it personally. As I see it, for the individual mandate to fall, the court would have to set aside mountains of precedent and pretty much ignore the clear intent of the framers of the Constitution, who set into motion not even a decade after our Constitution was ratified our first government-required health care. I'm probably coming at it from a different angle, though. I think Medicare-for-all (who choose it, anyway) would be a decent enough solution. They've got the lowest administrative overhead in the business, after all. (Even Medicare Advantage is around 11%, over three times higher)

One more quote from Obama this time (paraphrased): you could no more solve the issue of the uninsured with an individual mandate than you could cure homelessness by ordering people to buy a home.

That's what the subsidies and expansion of Medicaid are for, to get coverage for those who can't afford it on their own. The rest of us are along for the ride so that the pre-existing condition coverage doesn't bankrupt the insurance companies. Well, for most of us it won't make a difference in that respect because we already have health insurance.

[Gaspar]

The Supremes have to look at the mandate independently AND in the context of the entire legislative document.  Independently, it seems to fail, so it would follow, that when considered as part of a body of legislation that is so complex that it is, for all intents and purposes, incomprehensible, the mandate may offer precedent for powers that are beyond anything the commerce clause was ever intended to give government the power to regulate.

My personal opinion is:
1. Had this legislation been concise, and passed with ample understanding and consideration, this case would have never made it to the Supremes.
2. Had the bill been used less as a political tool, and presented realistic numbers instead of filled with obvious double-dips and misleading assumptions, we also would not be here now.

This bill failed when congress and the public requested time to review the legislation and Pelosi wagged her finger and told us that "we would have to pass the bill to see what's in it."

[nathanm]

The Supremes have to look at the mandate independently AND in the context of the entire legislative document.  Independently, it seems to fail, so it would follow, that when considered as part of a body of legislation that is so complex that it is, for all intents and purposes, incomprehensible, the mandate may offer precedent for powers that are beyond anything the commerce clause was ever intended to give government the power to regulate.

Remind me to not retain you as an attorney. You might read scotusblog if you're really interested in how the issues will likely be decided.

Also, it's not as if government mandated healthcare is anything new: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/01/17/congress-passes-socialized-medicine-and-mandates-health-insurance-in-1798/

[Gaspar]

It looks as if we have our answer.

How to Protect Yourself From Obamacare?  The Constitution of The United States of America