E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWith the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act expected Thursday, NBC's Tom Costello explains the benefits of the law and the costs to small business to insure their employees.
Doctors, patients, politicians and legal scholars are eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court's decision on President Barack Obama's health care program on Thursday. But there's one group that is really on pins and needles: accountants and other number crunchers.
If the court overturns the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, they're the ones who'll have to figure out what's going to happen to the $1 billion the federal government has already handed out to states and territories to establish state-regulated health care plans to help find public or private insurance for Americans eligible for federal subsidies.
The court has three main options — it can uphold the entire law, strike down the entire law or strike down parts of it.
|
Insurance exchange grants The federal government has already disbursed more than $1 billion to all but one state and three territories to start setting up health insurance exchanges:
Alabama: $9,709,451 Total: $1,015,465,913 * Planning grant only Source: Msnbc.com research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services |
Some justices appeared to signal during arguments in March that they were skeptical of the law, especially the so-called individual mandate, the provision requiring people to buy insurance or pay a fine. Because of the mandate, the Obama administration insisted on provisions directing the states to set up the insurance plans, called health insurance exchanges, to find discounted coverage for uninsured or hard-to-insure people.
Among them was Chief Justice John Roberts, who questioned whether the government can compel people to buy any product.
"Can the government require you to buy a cell phone because that would facilitate responding when you need emergency services?" he asked.
Justice Antonin Scalia drew a similar analogy.
"Everybody has to buy food sooner or later. So you define the market as food, therefore everybody is in the market," he said during the March arguments. "Therefore, you can make people buy broccoli."
Conservative justices expressed skepticism about the health care law during Supreme Court arguments. NBC News' Brian Mooar reports.
What's worrying for supporters of the law is that it appears likely that Roberts will personally craft the ruling, said Tom Goldstein, the publisher of SCOTUSblog— SCOTUS is shorthand for Supreme Court of the United States.
"John Roberts hasn't done anything, really, in major cases in March and April, at the end of the term, which means it's very likely that he assigned that decision to himself," Goldstein told NBC News.
If that part of the law is upheld, the insurance plans must be in operation by 2014. But what if it isn't?
No one really knows.
That includes the White House, which has consistently said it expects the law to be upheld and is moving ahead accordingly.
"Once that decision is rendered, we will make decisions about what to say about it," press secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday.
If the law is overturned, there's nothing to stop the federal government from trying to recoup the money it has already distributed for the exchanges — a total of $1.015 billion to 49 states and a multistate planning project, according to an msnbc.com analysis of state disbursement figures provided by the Department of Health and Human Services.
"If the whole thing really is unconstitutional, that has to mean that it is illegal to spend the money that way under current law," Joseph Antos, a health care analyst with the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington policy institute, told Kaiser Health News.
Kaiser adds:
Retrieving unspent funds might be possible, but collecting money that's already been spent could prove problematic, especially for cash-strapped states still dealing with a weak economy.
"My sense would be they would not recover the money. How do you recover the money? If it's spent, what do you do?" said Steven Lieberman, the president of Lieberman Consulting Inc. and the former deputy executive director for policy at the National Governors Association.
Nor is it clear what the states would do. Nineteen states have put their plans on hold pending the Supreme Court ruling, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities(.pdf), but others — among them New York, Massachusetts and California — have signaled that they'll try to implement exchanges anyway.
Another is Utah, where 30 percent of the people getting insurance under the exchange are doing so for the first time, said Patty Conner, director of the insurance exchange in Utah.
That makes the plan "a good value to the state," Conner said, as reported by the Deseret News of Salt Lake City.
And private insurers have indicated that they'll also go ahead with some of the law's provisions if it's struck down.
Three of the nation's largest carriers — United Healthcare, Aetna and Humana — said this month that they would continue to let parents keep their children on their policies up to age 26, one of the most popular provisions of the entire plan, and would continue offering preventive services without copayments.
United Healthcare and Humana (but not Aetna) also promised not to reinstate lifetime limits on coverage or cancel policies retroactively, two other provisions widely welcomed by analysts and patients' advocates.
Even so, the picture is complicated by the fact that there's nothing to stop lawmakers from trying again to reform the health-care system if the law falls.
"If this goes away, we still have to start dealing with the problem," Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., a member of the Ways and Means Committee, said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- In Montana, small changes spur nation's biggest jump in college graduates
- Company accused of deception turns GIBill.com over to Veterans Affairs
- Texas Rangers investigate shooting of teen lesbian couple
- Report: Stowaways in container on ship in New Jersey port
- Chicago police to partner with anti-violence group CeaseFire to curb shootings
- Video: Home from jail, alleged ‘soccer mom madam’ speaks
Leave a Comment:
State government shouldn't spend money given to them for programs unless they programs are ready to go. You don't buy a car unless you plan on driving. Make them give it all back. Eph Maobama and his political bullcrap tactics.
When this gets struck down by the SCOTUS, each State should take the money they received and send it back to the taxpayers. And by taxpayers, I mean people that actually paid taxes. Not the free loaders that are eating up all the tax money.
"Obamacare" isn't "free". I have it, it costs me $362 per month. You are clueless.
Answer: Congress will spend it plus a lot more on empty promises and tree ornaments. Kiss it good bye like every dollar they steal from Americans.
Republicans have no plan to replace health care at all.
Watch for them to stall.
Dems will put out some plans to get Republicans to vote against it for election fodder.
Insurance companies will be laughing all the way to the bank and raise your insurance rates.
Watch !!!
I have an opinion! My opinion is better than yours! You're a big stinky stupid head! I sniff felt markers until my brain hurts and I pass out!
Not to mention the hundreds of people hired in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to being implementing the law or the those hired by the IRS to being enforcement.
The real meaning of the law is; May congress , under the commerce clause, decide who is to receive , and what type of treatment a citizen is entitled to, may congress decide who's is to old, feeble, retarded, in firmed and deny life saving medical care, ; we fought a war against Nazi Germany, they decided certain persons did not deserve to live; this law is also Eugenics in disguise.
Obamacare" isn't "free". I have it, it costs me $362 per month. You are clueless.
liar ! The law has not taken effect yet and it won't until 2014 !
This law is a good start but it needs to go farther and become a single tax payer plan. I have universal health care and I love it ! It is great !
I can choose my doctors, clinics, no waiting time for emmergencies, decisions are made with my doctors and NOT INSURANCE COMPANIES ! All the goverment does is pay the bills and is never envolved in your medical decisions !
American insurance companies are tyrannic ! they make the decisions ! So who is socialist there ??
barock1957,
Parts of the ACA have already taken effect. The parts that individuals like ("free" mammograms, "free" physicals, "free" birth control, coverage for children increased to age 27 and more) and have driven insurance costs higher have already been implemented. The funding mechanisms that people don't like (decreased Medicare coverage, increased taxes) were written into the law to take effect after the elections this fall.
Moral of your comment - Don't call people a liar when your response is also a lie.
barock1957 :
I do have "Obamacare"
Under the Affordable Care Act , there is a bridge program for people with pre-existing conditions to buy coverage. New York State has implemented the program, and I have purchased health insurance from GHI (Emblem Health) under the auspices of the program.
Here is the GHI website address :
""
Parts of the law which impact on premiums are already in effect, including allowing "children" to remain on family coverage policies until they are 26, up from 22. Premiums have already gone up because of this. I don't understand at all your comment about "no waiting times for emergencies". Medical facilities are required to treat patients having a medical emergency. No one currently waits longer than their triage ranking warrants. Go to an emergency room with a medical complaint that has low priority and you will wait a long time before you're treated. That won't change under the ACA. Also, patients and doctors make the medical decisions. All the insurance company does is determine whether or not the treatment is covered under the policy. A similar process will be in place under the ACA and I suspect older folks will have the most difficulty in getting what they need medically. President Obama already gave us a look at what's to come -- remember the question about the old lady in need of serious surgery and the President responded that she would be made comfortable and allowed to die. That's our future!!
For you guys that think that the states should pay it all back because it's not in effect yet, or for those who say that the program is free so-far...you all need to think instead of just spouting off. These stupid over-bloated programs cost a fortune to set up. They are so full of regamarole that it requires states and the federal government tons of money to get ready. It is true that the states should pay back some money, but they should also be able to keep their administration costs.
Yes but in a long run it will save you billions of dollars !!!
Funny how you people don't see farther than your own nose !
it's probably already been spent on contributions to Obama's campaign.
"free" mammograms, "free" physicals, "free" birth control
free... democrats favorite word
Wow, can't wait for when we'll have money to burn with all the savings we'll reap from the trillions of deficit dollars this president and congress are spending that will save us billions down the road. I'm thinking payback is a bit further than the end of our noses
my rates have never gone down, and have gone up significantly in the last several years.
trust me, they've been laughing at me for a very long time
great post John-277
wouldn't that make them a monopoly... which isn't a form of govt.
Washington: $151,791,012
Figures, Senator Murray applauded herself during her re-election campaign about "helping to write the Mandated Universal Health Care" legislation and we have a Democratic run State government.
Just what in the heck are these folks doing with $ 151,791,012 ? Paying down the State deficit ? NO !
Where are Flyeisty and the gang ? Oh, Eric is here with his usual Liberal rants.
I guess premiums never went up or only went up alongside the rate of inflation before ACA started to take affect right? Everyone knows this system is not perfect, but when one side of the isle refuses to add meaningful dialog and ideas to improve the legislation as opposed to try to weaken it.. of course it is going to have wholes in it. Republican hire-ups dont want to fix a system that makes them and their fellow 1% so much money.
If it is struck down, i say let the states keep the money if they are using it for infrastructure building this way the republicans cannot block another area of progress this country needs
Anybody hear that republicans this week tried to add the same personhood amendment from MO to a flood insurance bill? Yes, the same amendment that was defited in MO. Is this what we want a party that will fight to tax you more, the rich less, give you access to less health care, crumbling roads and bridges AND REGULATE YOUR BED ROOM! Regulate the kind of sex that does and does not produce babies is not what the founding fathers intended when they wrote the constitutiion or else they would have added it.
This personhood amendment makes it impossible to get contraception which means all kinds of unwanted babies the rest of us have to pay for. And you tell us you are all about personal responsibility?
LosMan123,
Only in the Democratic mind does not "free" = impossible to get
Was contraception impossible to get before ACA?
Ohio should be able to give a good portion of it back, since they are not working on the exchange and voted against the personal mandate.
The bigger picture is, how many of you knew how much had been already "given away?" Pretty much, this money will mostly be a loss, but certainly not the biggest amount of money our govt. has wasted. I totally agree with post #1, you don't hand out the money before the plan is ready. Too bad we can't have common sense like that in Washington.
I hope they strike it down, and then auto insurance and home owners insurance follows.
Obviously, if you buy a car via a bank loan - the BANK can require you to get insurance as part of the loan agreement.
But if you OWN your car or house, you shouldnt have to insure it - just because something MIGHT happen...or i MIGHT damage someone elses property. Sue me if i do...
Just like you cant force people to buy insurance because otherwise they MIGHT end up in the emergency room and cost all of us policy holders more money in the long run. you dont force people to buy things because SOMETHING MIGHT HAPPEN?
I wonder if insurance realizes if this falls, some other crap might fall too...and im hoping for unintended consequences.
Barock1957
Nice reversal in your posts. Call someone a liar and when your're wrong, say something else as a distraction. Anyway, what do you care? You live in fRANCE (which is a joke in itself). Stay there, shut up, and wait for the US to bail you out next time another country overuns you, PHUCKWAD!
Who said any thing about free armurray? I am talking about a proposal that would ban contraception not to give it away. But since you brought it up, i think it should be free when you look at the data of all these babies that are aborted or placed in foster care or right out abandoned. I know republicans dont like scientific facts or science for that matter... (Just ask the NC governor lol) These occurrences are more expensive than contraception to all of us taxpayers. You are pissed because someone who cant afford to live on McDee or Wal-Mart wages cant afford insurance? A true statement would be that only in a Democratic mind thinks health care should be a right regardless of your economic condition. We all want to live!
rightwing
And I have Medicare and the two supplements needed to make it even halfway worth having and it costs me almost $600.00 a month to cover myself and my spouse. Yet, this is the program they are stealing billions from to pay for yours.
I live in RI.. Why would RI get so much more money.. that must be wrong..
LosMan123,
I was wrong, the proposed amendment had nothing to do with contraception as your post suggested.
Shaking my head-2479300
I too have Medicare thru a Medicare Provider and I do not pay anything extra for my policy after the $96.50 a month that Medicare charges. I also do not NEED supplements. I love my policy and hope to never have to get rid of it. Basic Medicare directly from the Government is a ripoff. Check into GHP, Coventry, etc and see if you can save some money.
If the law is struck down completely, a Federal Marshall will be knocking on your grandma's doors to get back the $250.00 Medicare part D rebate.
All the senior citizens in Florida will be forced to cough up the $250, right before the election. And in most cases, the SS Administration will send a nice letter which will state that because of the ruling by the Republican/corporation controlled SCOTUS, the money each senior has already spent will be taken out of this month's SS check, along with interest at 8.35% (just like student loan rates)... have a nice day.
r1ghtwing - I wish I could pay only $362 for my health insurance. I started with this company 8 years ago and the premium was considerably less than that. One of the reasons I chose that company is that they said their premiums had not gone up in 6 years. Apparently, they decided to make up for that, because it has almost doubled in that 8 year period. It has gone up 10-15% per year. Unfortunately, my income has not kept pace.
barock1957,
How exactly will this bloated program save me money? Even the CBO has come out and said it will cost double what was originally projected. My family had to change our health insurance to an HMO 2 years ago because our premiums on our existing PPO were going to go up $400/month. That was because the company decided to implement the requirements of Obamacare early. We just recently were told our HMO costs will be going up about $200/month more than before.
Also, 2 friends of mine each work for companies that will no longer offer health insurance next year because of the costs, the employees of that company will join the government exchange. The companies will pay a fine, but that will be less than the costs of continuing under Obamacare.
That is exactly what is going to happen to millions of people and it is exactly what Obama and the Democrats want...More people relying on the government for more and more things. We have been creeping down the socialist path for many years and if Obamacare is not found unconstitutional and remains, it will mark the begining of the end of freedom and prosperity in this country.
LosMan123,
You were obviously not paying attention when Obamacare was being passed. The Democrats had a majority in the House and Senate and did not want, nor accept any meaningful input from the Republicans, nor did the Democrats publish the plan prior to passing the legislation. Remember Nancy Pelosi saying "we have to pass it to find out what's in it"?
There is no doubt that our health care system and costs need to be looked at and improved, but giving control of it to the government is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Our Federal (and most State) Government is incapable of running anything efficiently or cost effectively! Please, name me a single government program that is run efficiently or cost effectively!
Lower Taxes + Smaller Government = More Freedom + Prosperity for ALL!
I suppose you might have a point...if it were true...and if the Insurance Companies hadn't been doing that for years. Obviously you are ether too young (or perhaps too old) to remember the controversy regarding health care limits when HMO first appeared.
During Obama's question and answer period of his House GOP retreat visit on January 29, Obama stated some of the GOP ideas on health care reform that are included in the Senate bill, such as: "Creating a high-risk pool for uninsured folks with preexisting conditions"; "Allowing insurance companies to sell coverage across state lines"; "creating pools where self-employed and small businesses could buy insurance"; "letting kids remain covered on their parents' insurance until they're 25 or 26"; "incentivizing wellness"; and "creating an affordable catastrophic insurance option for young people":
Sound familiar...a little like RomneyCare? It should, it very nearly is his plan. As to Democrats not compromising; not only did we NOT get a Single-Payer plan...we didn't even get a Public Option!
Give me a break!
Jessica @1.25 -
Apples and oranges. See if you can follow along.
The bank can make you take out mortgage and home-owners' insurance if they issue you a loan. They do this to protect themselves from loss. But YOU DON"T HAVE TO TAKE OUT THE LOAN!
A bank can make you take full coverage on your car during the life of the car loan. They do this to protect themselves against the loss of your vehicle and your default. But YOU DON"T HAVE TO TAKE OUT A CAR LOAN!
The state can make you carry liablility, or post a significant cash bond, to assure that other drivers are protected against your possible negligence. This is because diving is considered a privelege. But YOU DON"T HAVE TO DRIVE!
If you own your house free and clear, YOU DON"T HAVE TO CARRY HOME-OWNERS' INSURANCE, If you wish to accept the risk of total loss to your house anf property, and liabilty for other's injuries, you may do so.
I hope for unintended intelligence to enter your head.
@ JeffersonWasRight
You are 100% correct on that call. It's a no brainer on the part of the company.
Sorta off topic, but not really...here in
Smallville Ohio, pop. of bout 5500...city employees just got their
new medical plans just today...to the tune of $26,000 plus a year,
which we taxpayers pay for 100% .... wow...2 grand a month...PLUS..
I see all the idiots that never bothered to read the ACA and instead just listen to what the conservative politicians who want to repeal it say about it even though they keep telling lies about it. And it was fully available to read before voting on it since I know of many others who did read it all, only about 1/4 dealt with medical care and the rest dealt with how to deliver that care. #1 Yes there is an Individual Mandate in the ACA and the penalty for not getting insurance is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, the Democrats made sure that there will be no fines levied and no jail time for people who refuse to get it. Sorry, no IRS agents nor Federal Marshals will be showing up at your door, the only penalty for those that refuse to get insurance will be that they will be held responsible for 100% of the medical bills. #2 Everyone can opt to stay with their current plans or shop around for a plan tailored to their needs whatever those needs are. And with an estimated 30-40 million people getting insurance premiums will start to decrease. Everyone has been blaming Obama for the rise in premiums over the past 20yrs even though ACA doesn't take effect for all the complainers until 2014, yeah, should have read the bill before crying about it. #3 From "death panels" to "rationed health care" there are so many complaints from those that don't care to know what ACA will do. As with all countries/states that have Universal Health Care the system will initially be swamped as everyone goes to the doctor for everything, but it will eventually calm down just like it has everywhere else and there won't be any delays, won't be any rationing, won't be a panel deciding who gets lifesaving care and who does not, those are all just lies to scare the uninformed. #4 Medicare isn't being cut by any amount, the yearly rise is being slowed down by the expected savings that the ACA will deliver. Medicare's budget will be a lot more 10 years from now than it is today, but will be $600 million less than it could have been if savings aren't introduced. And the "doughnut hole" is going to be closed permanently with the ACA, though if you insist on the brand name instead of the generic you may be charged a little extra depending on the drug. #5 How public sector employee's plans will be affected I have no clue, as with company plans it'll be left to the ones in charge of offering it to the workers, same for the military, though I believe that everyone in Congress should be forced onto it as well since most are millionaires to begin with......... #6 My guess is that (and I hope I'm wrong) the entire bill will be struck down and insurance premiums will continue to skyrocket like they have for the past 20 years until 300 million Americans are uninsured instead of 30 million Americans. REMEMBER, Justice Clarence Thomas is ruling on it as well even though he's received a minimum of $1.5 million in personal compensation from the lobbyists who want the entire bill struck down.
United Healthcare, Aetna and Humana are not the major insurers in the country. Most insured Americans receive their insurance from their employers. Most large employers are self insured. They use United Healthcare, Aetna and/or Humana to manage their plans. The employers determine who and what will be covered. Only individual policies purchased directly from the Big 3 will be able to keep children to the age of 26 on their policies; limited or unlimited lifetime benefits; etc.
Some states have already started their plans to build an insurance exchange. It isn't fair to those states to pay back federal money when they were in compliance with the spirit of the law.
Jeffersonwasright
First of all this is not Obamacare, It is republicancare. No public option. Law is not in effect until 2014 so stop whining. Private insurance companies still going to be involved in this. You really don't even know how this bill works, look at massachussets, what romney implemented and it same thing. You say government is not capable of running anything? what about insurance companies? they once who got greedy and caused this on them anyway. you talk republican talking points as much as you want, but they meaningless.
The real problem the republicans have with this health care issue is that they did not come up with it. And for Romney to be against it is nuts considering he did the same thing when he was governor. If anything or anyone should be in contempt it should be the republicans for not doing whgat they were elected to do..for that matter..all of congress should be that way. It is strange to me..that the republicans can cause to lose a credit rating for many on here,,,nearly shut down the government and country..and that is ok too..but of course..it is all Obama's fault...even though the republicans have done NOTHING at all for this country for almost 4 years.
ivan, NC,
The real problem the republicans have with the ACA is that it does nothing to address health care costs, only the price to insurance.
Republican proposals addressed how to curb the costs associated with healthcare, such as tort reform, but none of their concerns were addressed because of the way the vote came down. The Senate had to approve the Pelosi version passed in the house with no changes...
Give the hardworking, taxpaying citizens our money back!! OBAMA = purchased votes!!
Why even ask this question until the court decides?
Have to be an idiot to say anything as of now about it!
If Obama is stupid enough (and apparently that is inarguable) to write a law that spends a @!$%#load of money before acquiring a @!$%#load of money to spend, and then gets slapped by the court and has just screwed the people over for a few more billion, he should have his income garnished into his 10th level descendents.
Wow, one billion dollars? Hell,the Defense Dept spends that much before lunch, every day, 365 days a year.
I think Obama wanted the bill written that way because he thought it would manipulate SCOTUS into going along.
I doubt SCOTUS is fooled by this low-level scam.
@LosMan
Regulate the kind of sex that does and does not produce babies is not what the founding fathers intended when they wrote the constitutiion or else they would have added it.
Um, I'm pretty sure biology had that all sorted out. That is until liberals decided biology was sexist. Besides, back during the framers were around, there were'nt a whole lot of safe commercial contraceptives and abortion services. So I can't help but wonder, how do people have a natural right to something that hasn't always existed. I guess you could say from the pro-choice perspective that since safe abortion wasn't available back then the women had a right to kill the child she didn't want after birth. After all, the child would grow up "unwanted", and they didn't have baby formula either, so the child would have to breast feed, and that could be a violation of her rights, because the baby would then be using the woman's breasts, and its her body and her property and no one can tell her what to do with her body.
Give it the Veterans, they earned it, and will need it to pay for TRICARE Obama dumped on them.
Justice Antonin Scalia drew a similar analogy.
"Everybody has to buy food sooner or later. So you define the market as food, therefore everybody is in the market," he said during the March arguments. "Therefore, you can make people buy broccoli."
Failed analysis, Tony. The food market isn't REQUIRED to give you food, if you show up hungry..... Unlike the hospitals, that are REQUIRED to treat you, in the emergency room!
This guy is a Supreme Court justice?
People read between the line, you will pay for it in the end...
Everybody needs health care sooner or later,
...what would "Jesus" do?; we all have to buy car insurance, nobody calls this "Obama Insurance Care" !, you pay for license Tags on your car nobody calls this "Obama Car Tag Care"
We all pay taxes at the store, or on your salary....etc,etc,
Pass The Law let us help those that need it, and get on with your life...
Be the Best Country in the World,
...I read somewhere bring your tired, poor etc,etc, etc...This Country has been blessed, Do not lose your blessing
"Peace and Love"
I say recoup it form the ones that pushed it through. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Obama! Take it out their own accounts that have been filled with our money to begin with!
as the old saying goes. look before you leap.
It would be a great thing for our country if we had 311,000,000 people refusing to play the health insurance lottery. It would be a great thing if people simply told the medical scammers, the doctors, hospitals, drug dealers, etc no to their excessive charges for ordinary medical care. It would be a great thing if the government would withdraw their mandating monopoly via licensing of the medical scammers. Bust up the pharmaceutical cartels. Let us buy whatever we need from whomever has the best price, wherever that might be.
10 Things You Would Miss About Obamacare
1) Access to health insurance for 30 million Americans and lower premiums. More than 30 million uninsured Americans will find coverage under the law. Middle-class families who buy health care coverage through the exchanges will be eligible for refundable and advanceable premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to ensure that the coverage they have is affordable.
2) The ability of businesses and individuals to purchase comprehensive coverage from a regulated marketplace. The law creates new marketplaces for individuals and small businesses to compare and purchase comprehensive coverage. Insurers will have to meet quality measures to ensure that Americans can access comprehensive coverage when they need it.
3) Insurers’ inability to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. Beginning in 2014, insurers can no longer deny insurance to families or individuals with pre-existing conditions. Insurers are also prohibited from placing lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage and rescinding insurers except in cases of fraud. Insurers are already prohibited from discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions.
4) Tax credits for small businesses that offer insurance. Small employers that purchase health insurance for employees are already receiving tax credits to encourage them to continue providing coverage.
5) Assistance for businesses that provide health benefits to early retirees.The law created a temporary reinsurance program for employers providing health insurance coverage to retirees over age 55 who are not eligible for Medicare, reimbursing employers or insurers for 80% of retiree claims. The program has offered at least $4.73 billion in reinsurance payments to more than 2,800 employers and other sponsors of retiree plans, with an average cumulative reimbursement per plan sponsor of approximately $189,700.
6) Affordable health care for lower-income Americans. Obamacare extends Medicaid to individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty line, guaranteeing that the nation’ most vulnerable population has access to affordable, comprehensive coverage.
7) Investments in women’s health. Obamacare prohibits insurers from charging women substantially more than men and requires insurers to offer preventive services — including contraception — at no additional cost.
8) Young adults’ ability to stay on their parents’ health care plans. More than 3.1 million young people have already benefited from dependent coverage, which allows children up to age 26 to remain insured on their parents’ plans.
9) Discounts for seniors on brand-name drugs. Pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to provide a 50% discount on prescriptions filled in the Medicare Part D coverage gap. Seniors have already saved $3.5 billion on prescription drug costs thanks to the Affordable Care Act provision.
10) Temporary coverage for the sickest Americans. The law established temporary national high-risk pools that are providing health coverage to individuals with pre-existing medical conditions who cannot find insurance on the individual market. In 2014, they will be able to enroll in insurance through the exchanges. 67,482 individuals have already benefited from the program.
source: think progress
This just in: ObamaCare unconstitutional on all counts.
Big states like Texas will soak up the Health Care money with their monthly natural disasters and complain that they have to pay for it. Arizona is another. Think of all those people without insurance going to the emergency rooms from tornado's, floods,shootings, and fire. Move somewhere else, where it's safer, if you don't like it. That's what you tell everyone else. It's about time that everyone pays.
hahahahhahaha That money is gone.
It went mostly to prevention programs.
Regardless, if its struck down there are 3 million children now covered that won't be.
What a tragedy.
What children are those? Adults between 21 and 27?
There are about 17 million children in the U.S. aged 0-17 years who have pre-existing conditions and would be unable to get any health insurance. In addition, 2.5 million kids and young adults up to the age of 26 are able to piggyback off their parents' insurance.
http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2012/YoungAdultsbyGroup/ib.shtml
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/politics-raising-children/2012/may/7/if-obamacare-overruled-millions-children-risk-losi/
Clotho,
So they could have passed that as a law by itself. Illinois did it before the ACA was written.
You say 17 million children in the US wouldn't be able to get any health insurance. Hopefully your information does not include Illinois since it already has "AllKids" in the books to cover all children under 19 years of age living in Illinois.
poverty up among CHILDREN up 22% since Obama took office (guess who this impacts most?)
spare me the demotard as a savior speech
James in Seattle
You probably are one of those "pretend" Seattleites that live in Bellevue and only want to claim to be from Seattle when it comes to paying for your highway reconstruction.You arent anyone from seattle that I know. We arent self serving, errogant and full of hot air like you are. Half of what you have said is total bullocks!
OUCH elaine....dead wrong. JamesInSeattle is typical of the Pacific NW folks I hang with. Get a job.
Romney has a long term plan alright...and that plan is not to have a plan, and to not talk about his plan of not having a plan, because every plan that Romney planned, was not the plan, that he previously had planned. The plans he did have were also the plans he did not have before he said they are his plans. The plans he didn't have were the plans he said he had when he needed to have plans because he had no plans.
Prresident Obama/Biden 2012....you can plan on that!
Many of them are students. Why shouldn't they live at home? And if they are lucky enough to find a job, it's at minimum wage with no benefits...$1000/month take home isn't much to live on. Would you rather they get food stamps?
But lets give it up for the benevolence of Big Healthcare. They've graciously agreed to continue covering the young adults on their parents' plan. These are the people who are the most profitable for health care providers because as a group, they don't consume as much care. What a coup!
Child poverty is up because child employment is down. (The Obama Administration counts anyone under 26 as a child.) 45% of black children are unemployed. Over 20% of white teens have no job. Hispanic illegal aliens have taken the jobs that our young people used to do. Obama has instructed ICE to refuse to enforce the law. He has gone to court to prevent law enforcement at the state level from enforcing the law either. Our children suffer as a result.
And how many of those children are the children of illegals, who should not be here in the first place?...Quite a few...just go into any emergency room in a major city and see who's sitting in them, cuz they aren't American's. American children qualify for medi-cal/medi-caid or for low cost insurance, which is practically free in California (as I'm sure it is the same in most states) for those children of working parents who don't qualify for welfare medical and can't get or can't afford insurance through their jobs.
It disgust me we include anything for people sucking our resources they don't pay for in the first place, and don't bother with you 'they pay taxes' crap, they take WAY more than they ever pay...google it, if you don't believe me.
We need to get rid of the illegals are we will go bankrupt.
I think the GOP is going to be sorry they ever attacked Obamacare when the Supreme Court rules. The American Public may say they don't like it.... but just watch what happens when the things that they do want start getting eliminated... like donut hole etc... And now Mitt and the boys will have to figure out what the heck "repeal and replace means"... and if they assume that simply means giving the BIG INSURANCE companies more money so they can raise rates... the American Public will scream. The GOP has sold the idea that the rate increases are due to Obamacare and nothing could be further from the true. What this actually will probably cause to happen is a single payer plan which is what should have been done in the first place.
Yeah---I'll be real upset. I really like the 2.3% tax on medical devices, lower FSA contributions, and the increase from 7.5% to 10% AGI for medical deductions. I'm sure everyone was looking forward to those provisions.
And decreases in Medicare coverage, a new 4% tax on home sales...
For Flippy Floppy Romney, replace merely means changing the name to Romneycare? Obromney care? Robomneycare?
Not all home sales... and not even first homes..
Karen - ssshhh. We're not supposed to know about that stuff until AFTER we decide whether we want to vote for obama or not.
How about "Obominablecare?"
Mr. Buffet can repay the money to his good friend Obama by just cutting a check. After all, isnt it Buffet the one who thought he should be paying more taxes. Problem solved.
BTW, I confirmed that David Axelrod is using the screen name of Feisty Redhead on MSNBC.
afl-cio The Real World has confirmed that you are an I D I O T!!!!! get a life Loser
Wow. You sound so intelligent.
Did spell "loser" correctly though.
The GOP also spent millions to defeat this ruling. They also don't want their taxes raised to help pay for The Affordable Health care Act. I'm sure they will dig deep in their other pockets, off shore, to repeal it. The money spent trying to repeal it could have been used as their tax. No money for jobs, my a__
The money will go where money goes now - military, big business subsidy, the infrastructure that supports the powers that be. The only question is how the shell game will play out trying to convince the citizenry otherwise.
What happens to the money? Obama will (a) confiscate it and blow it on another Solyndra project (b) give it to the SEIU (c) use it to bail Holder out of jail or (d) pay his country club dues after Romney puts an ass whuppin' on him in November. (and it won't be Augusta National) Nyuck nyuck
Buster....Solyndra.....the Subsidies started by Bush and his friend investors...?
Eric Holder not going to jail...Maybe you didn't read the news today...there was NO gun running by ATF agents under fast and Furious.....Issa knows that and is caught lying....Arizona laws allowed strawmen to buy guns and cannot be prosecuted because of prosecuters protecting the right to sell guns in Arizona.......Issa caught with his pants on the ground. Issa trying to ram through contempt of court knowing there is NO GUN running operation under Fast and Furious. NRA conspiracy exposed...!
We're forced to buy auto insurance...isn't that the same idea? Just kill it then - SINGLE PAYER
True, but we aren't forced to buy a car to begin with.
Only if you operate the car on public roads. You can buy a car (in cash) and not insure it if it's only operated on private property.
Not true in all states; an automobile, on private property must be properly licensed and insured (at least in states I have lived in).
BUT, regardless of public roads or not. the govt should NOT be able to force us to buy insurance if this gets thrown out. If being FORCED to buy car insurance "for the public good" then same thing applies to health insurance. Uninsured use "public" hospitals dont they? What is the difference?
There is a big difference between auto and health insurance.
For auto insurance, I'm only required to buy insurance for damage/injuries that I may cause to others. I am not required to buy insurance to insure my property or injuries to myself.
I thought the same thing myself, If i Drive, or even own a car without buying insurance from a private company, I could be treated almost the same as if i was driving drunk. The punishment is crazy and will cost you a fortune if you dont have insurance in Illinois. License suspended, sr-22 insurance that costs more than regular insurance, and fines. In the end may cost around $2000.00 added up in the long run. I never heard anyone complaine that it was unconstitutional. And if your poor and have lots of medical bills destroying your credit, you pay more for insurance, alot more. For the longest time it cost me over 200 a month for insurance so i could drive. Unaffordable to some on minimum wage.
Part of the auto insurance most people pay isn't required by the state but by the lien holder of the vehicle. They are trying to protect their investment irrespective of your health and well being. If yu don't have adequate collision insurance they won't lend on the vehicle.
In the grand scheme of things, I don't think this argument is valid as there's a lot of things the government forces us to do -- Healthcare would be and is probably the least of it. My biggest problem is them forcing me to pay my taxes to help support illegal aliens. That's the one that angers me!
I love it when people try to compare being "forced" to buy auto insurance (liability only) to the forced healthcare mandates. It's comparing apples and oranges.
1: the required auto insurance policy is STATE mandated, not federal, and is to protect the victim of a wreck, not the person who caused it.
2: You are only required to purchase auto insurance if you intend to drive and own a vehicle. You can STILL own a vehicle without having insurance, but you can not drive the vehicle. This compares to the federal mandate for health insurance that since I am ALIVE, I must have insurance. The only way I am not required to buy something i may or may not need (my choice!) is if I'm, well, DEAD.
Many people go without buying auto insurance, since its more efficient and economical for them to use mass transit (not feasible where I live).
Point is, you are NOT forced to buy auto insurance for the simple fact of being alive and being a citizen, and auto insurance is NOT federally mandated; it is state mandated.
The federal mandate oversteps the federal government's authority by forcing a non-buyer to participate in a market, something the commerce clause explicitly states it can not. It is authorized to REGULATE interstate commerce, not force interstate commerce.
Wes- IF I want to drive my car legally, I am FORCED to buy insurance. Whether the state or fed, NEITHER has the right to make me do BUY a product I dont want. As to protecting others, health insurance for everyone protects EVERYONE from higher rates so it IS the same. The States are stepping over the line by forcing commerce to the insurance companies.
Also most states will allow you to post a cash bond in lieu of auto liability insurance - a sort of self-insurance plan. (Few of us have that kind of money).
Again, it is apples and oranges!
So you don't want to be forced to buy health insurance, but do you still want to recieve emergency treatment if you are in a car crash? And then what happens? Who pays the bill you can't afford? The hospital, who in turn must charge others more, including insurance companies, who in turn raise rates.
Everyone buying health insurance helps everyone. Costs will go down, rates will go down, insurance companies will make more money. Who loses here?
Also, why doesn't anyone talk about the exchanges? A single website where I can compare multiple insurance companies, even ones from out of state, at a glance sounds pretty cool to me.
Diolki, In an ideal world you would be correct BUT in our corrupt, greedy, miserable society, once again, WE the people, will be the biggest losers as usual. Costs will NOT go down, rates will NEVER go down, only up WAY higher than inflation, I can can GUARANTEE that! We will pay and pay and pay and get less and less coverage much like we already do. Insurance companies will make huge profits on our backs and then give a nice chunk to the politicians that helped them screw us. THAT is the way it will work. Anything less than Single Payer Insurance will be a failure for the American People. Why the Fu*k should any private company be enriched thru legislation?
thats the key point. this problem started when hospitals were mandated to provide emergency care to anyone even if they cant pay. now, if you want to compare this to car insurance, what would happen to your premiums if body shops were mandated to fix any car whether they could pay or not? exactly. now retard roberts should consider striking down that mandate, but i dont think most people would like all the dead and dying bodies lying around. when the founding fathers wrote the constitution doctors werent really capable of doing much- barbers did minor surgery and doctors mainly killed mothers by contaminating them with childbirth fever. maybe today "to ensure domestic tranquility" would include some type of health care as well as a navy. maybe we need a constitutional amendment. i cant believe the wing nuts posting on here. the fact is americans pay more for health care than any other country and receive inferior care. if youre such a rich independent as*hole, no one is stopping you from getting better care at your own expense. if you dont want a death panel, get coverage that covers total hips on a 90 year old with terminal renal failure (course youre still gonna die from old age), or just pull that $300,000 outta your pocket like mitty. but for the rest of us average 99%ers, some type of reasonable universal health plan seems just as important and doable as being able to attack and kill every man, woman, and child on the planet at a moments notice. same for social security. you dont have to privatize it, you can build up as much of an estate as you want, do any super retirement plan you want. but again, for us average losers, we dont want the 80% of retirees who live on social security starving to death on the street without any minimum safety net, so we want a mandatory program there that they contribute to as they go. i think the CEOs that make 300 times what their workers make should be able to put up with that. and you wing nuts complaining that you dont want to do anything you dont like, i feel sorry for you having to breathe the same air we do whether you want to or not. hey! maybe if you held your breath long enough, you wouldnt be bothered anymore.
All of the states where I've lived allow you to post a bond instead of participating in the auto insurance lottery. The State's only interest is that you show responsibility for any negligent damages you may cause to others. Personal responsibility, what a novel concept in this day when the ruling meme is to spend OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY to cover your own responsibilities.
Well we all know the right thing to do would be to establish a reparations program.
We are forced to buy car insurance, so why not health insurance?
The states should use the money to set up their own healthcare system for the uninsured..like a healthcare clinic.....wow that idea was way to simple for Obama. Obama's whole plan of running our lives and controlling our behaviors...( what we eat, what we drink....what we smoke......how we exercise....when we die...when we are born)...is going to be shot down. Which means Obama wasted the first 2 years of his term....oh no he didn't he did get in 50 licks of golf.
Rubbish
There are no simple solutions. Anyone who thinks there is a simple answer to any complex problem doesn't know anything about the problem.
beanne,
I am not even sure why am I replying to your post, because it is obvious that
you are complete idiot voting against your own interest. On other hand, you are
giving me the opportunity to make couple of points. Do you know that we are the
richest country in the world and the only one without state sponsored health
care? Do you know why is that? Well, in other countries the health care is
serving people; in our country it is to squeeze as much money as possible from
you, the sick person. I am retired and live now in a country where health care
is far from perfect, but it is adequate. I did pay $7K for stay in hospital for
7 days, pacemaker installation and post surgery care; compare to USA the cost
is about 8 times less. Doctors visit costs me $1.25, simple blood test $1.30 CAT
scan $40.00 and so on. I left USA with taking 3 different medications, 2 years later,
none. I was taking on US doctor’s advice/prescription medication Flomax for
example, local doctor told me just drink a cup of water every 3 hours or so,
drop the medication; sure enough I have no problem and I do not have to pay for
medication I do not need. Why do you think that insurance companies lobby so
heavily against any changes in health care system? If you think that it is because they have your interest on mind, think again.
the oblamo mantra..
ready..fire..aim
greatpretender; what? Are you promoting presidents assassination? Don't be surprised if someone is going to knock on your door soon.
I have lost respect and confidence in this Supreme Court from they all gave us this albatross name Citizens United. Judge Scalia shocked me, I was made to believe these people are above politics, but now they are playing partisan politics. I wish one day soon these judges are only alllowed two terms , this forever stay is a hindrance to upward mobility for the nation. Congress should be allowed two terms too, too much bullyism from them after such along stay. These institutionnsn need fresh thinking from time to time.
Elections have consequences. The real goal of winning the WH is the ability to appoint judges. Too bad the majority of Obama's "base" weren't fired up years ago to vote so they must live with the consequences of past appointees.
The problem is that the Supreme Court is supposed to be above politics. You, karen, sadly, seem to be OK with admitting that the highest Court in the country is freely deciding Constitutional interpretations based on who the President is. That is the opposite of what the Constitution stands for, which is the rights and liberties of the people.
Since 2000, the Supreme Court has become a political tool. It's sickening.
Since 2000? How about Roosevelt trying to "pack" SCOTUS in 1936 ?
money we don't have
how about paying down the debt?
"How It's Playing: Editorial Boards Across The Country Slam Republicans For Protecting Taxpayer-Funded Giveaways To Big OIL Instead Of Using The Money To Pay Down The Deficit"
http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/05/16/how-its-playing-editorial-boards-across-the-country-slam-republicans-for-protecting-taxpayer-funded-giveaways-to-big-oil-instead-of-using-the-money-to-pay-down-the-deficit/
If this is struck down I will just go to the ER and get treated since I can't afford health insurance. People will still get service while other will pay for their insurance.
If this goes down then once again our congress couldn't get the job done. Is that surprising? Not really. It's becoming the norm. It also means that the Bush court scores big for the private sector. Is that surprising? Not really. Most of thier decisions have gone the way corporate America wants them to go. America is bought and paid for and that includes the Supreme Court. Little people bend over. It's time for you to get what they'll offer you. Bring the lubricant of your choice.
The ACA placed no restrictions on the insurance industry death panels. The insurance industry will just follow the plans that are already in place for them to ratchet up delay and denial of care. That is how they were planning on compensating for these requirements if the ACA is not overturned.
How about allowing hospitals to confiscate federal tax refunds for those who don't pay for their ER visits? Many states take refunds and use that money for back child support payments.
Maybe welfare should do the same. You get free healthcare, foodstamps, WIC,etc. so you will not starve nor die, but your "account" will be paid via your federal refund.
That's great for those that "overpay" their taxes and receive refunds. How about all those that pay in their taxes at the end of the year? I underpay during the year and keep the difference in an account to collect the mere pittance f interest instead of giving the gov't an interest free loan. They don't know how to manage their finances anyway - no sense in contributing to their ignorance.
The uninsured will still get treated in california, so the repubs are against their own idea, which shows they are truly flexable and believe in state right for what they believe and no what the dems believe.
The money will go to good use in california!
Same thing in Illinois. Those are two good examples to follow, since California and Illinois both proved that Democratic ideas can't work in the long term...
arm,
At least dems got opinions more then just get mad at dems ideas and offer more then not my money! with their selfish asses!
Obamacare" isn't "free". I have it, it costs me $362 per month. You are clueless.
liar ! The law has not taken effect yet and it won't until 2014 !
This law is a good start but it needs to go farther and become a single tax payer plan. I have universal health care and I love it ! It is great !
I can choose my doctors, clinics, no waiting time for emmergencies, decisions are made with my doctors and NOT INSURANCE COMPANIES ! All the goverment does is pay the bills and is never envolved in your medical decisions !
American insurance companies are tyrannic ! they make the decisions ! So who is socialist there ??
With government insurance, you and doctors DECIDE, not the government !
Barock1957: what country do you live in?
ObamaCare dictates everything about your health care.
Use that $1,000,000,000.00 to pay down the debt. It's only 0.00007% of what we owe, but hey it's a start.
How to cut the deficit; cut the military spending by 1/2 (we would still be spending more than the next 20 countries combined). You can't cut the deficit by cutting small ticket items (yes, the healthcare act is small ticket compared to military spending).
@Ken Hmm.. cut the military in half...yeah, that's and idea. I always have struggled to understand why we need eleven aircraft carriers patroling the oceans.
But your fooling yourself if you think the military is the only thing that needs to be cut.
Right! Eliminate the Nazi Dept of Fatherland Security, get rid of the unconstitutional Dept of Education, Commerce, Labor, Agriculture, Interior, and all of the 3 letter agencies without number. Get rid of them all.
The federal government only has a small number of Constitutional responsibilities. Providing for the common defense is primary among them. The feds are also charged with settling disputes among the States. So a military and a judiciary are mandatory. But the hundreds of 3 letter agencies are not mandatory. In fact many Constitutional scholars say they are forbidden. Most of the cabinet level departments need to be abolished too. Tax less, spend less, meddle less.
Cut all the wasteful welfare spending. Obama is truly the Food Stamp President. He gives them to people who do not deserve them.
What I find refreshing is that many states have identified he value in having health care and even if struck down I expect many states will have programs just like (Mass). If stuck down I doubt that Republicans will ever do anything about it and the Dems may never again have the votes to pass it either until people smarten up and realize that without government involvement the CEOs of insurance companies will do what they want, decide who lives and does not and decide how much you pay (after all they need more houses, boats, vacations, etc.).
And how many trillions have you spend on your military industrial complex ??? How much does it cost you to pay the salaries of 1.3 million military personnel ???
A billion for health care is A DROP in the bucket, morons !
barock1957: you won't get very far with anyone posting here if you insult them..
barock
So we should insure all your illegal friends too?
commonsensedude,
if you actually read the law, it don't cover no illegals, but if you talking about emergency care, they can't kick people out whether they legal or not, that was like that even before ACA.
That is why they are closing hospital emergency rooms in the states where the illegals and their spawn have overrun taxpayers. Both parties have sold us out.
A billion here, a billion there; "just a drop in the bucket" - pretty soon you're talking real money... how many of you have a billion to throw away?
Repeal it in entirety as it shouldn't be forced on us all by the federal government. Come up with a better medical health plan solution that is affordable for all that can't afford private health insurance BUT Congress won't be able to do that as Medicare and Social Security are other government "protected" programs to be used to assist the American public and they raided the coffers for the 40+ years since the Ford administration until they are empty and we have no savings in Social Security anymore. I don't want to pay additional taxes for others and don't want the American government telling me what I have to and can't buy.
Stop and think about it all, Medicaid and Medicare are so fraud riddled and they want to make a new way for even more people to rip off taxpayers money. They need to fix what is there now and stop trying to find more ways to spend money. Just look at the State of Illinois, they want to file for bankruptcy yet they come up with a new spend bill every day there. Millions and millions for new job plans and lay off thousand to cut spending. How do they figure that will be better.....well I should say how can that be better for the people....you know it will be better for the politician or someone relative. That's the way it work in Chicago and Illinois. They run the State for Chicago any way. Just ask Rahm, the new King of Illinois!!
I like our health care system just the way it is.
hold on!
pelosi hasn't read the whole bill yet..
But she's got to read it so she'll know what's in it.......
LOL
John
Not to mention the hundreds of people hired in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to being implementing the law or the those hired by the IRS to being enforcement.
DO YOU RATHER PAY THE SALARIES OF 1.3 MILLION MILITARY PERSONNEL ??? Tell me, what has the military done for american people?? it is not even able to win wars against primitive donkey riders !!!
It will create jobs that will be useful to better the live of millions of americans !! This money won't be a waste as your military IS !!!
barock1957: what credentials do you possess that make you an expert on our military? and...what exactly do you mean by "primative donkey riders"?
well barock: It's rather hard to win a war with your hand tied behind your back, if the military actuall were allowed to fight a war without the idiots in washington playing at being soldiers something might get done. Rules of engagement do not belong in war. Many in the military have given their lives for the American people, what the he11 have you done?
Barock,
I understand what you mean, but 1.3 million military personal has nothing to do with budget, it wastefull military projects and hundred of bases we don't need should be cut.
Peggy/florida:
I am sorry do you know we do have what you call Geneva Convention laws that we agreed to? we have certain rules because we not tyrants, we don't go around and kill people for the hell of it. I do agree some rules do tie hands, but rules of engagement is for reason also .
Look at the imbalances between the states. A miniature state recieving 600% more money than a rather large state, and people believe this bill is not crooked?
University of Massachusetts Medical School: $35,591,333---Why is one school recievng any money at all, no less why is it in the top five most high;y funded entities?