Not the "poorest" - they're already covered by Medicaid. Everyone earning up to 80% of federal poverty level, and all kids up to 133% of poverty level.

That won't change. What the Supreme Court did was remove "automatic" coverage for adults between 80% and 133% of federal poverty level. That's left up to the states now - they have to decide whether to take the 100% federal money to cover those people or not.

How many states do you think will turn down the money for that coverage? And if they do, how long will it be before their citizens demand they change their tune?

Dumb headline - people need to do their homework.

How many states will pocket the money or use it for "office supplies" etc.

This bill is a disaster in the making.

God I hope a conservative gets back in charge soon.

I suppose Obama can just issue a policy or an Executive Order to implement or ignore parts of this law, like he ignores Immigration Law. We're going to end up with a VA type hospital system soon. Having dealt with the VA, I can tell you first hand, that's something to surely avoid.

You are wrong, RealAmericansFirst. Not all poor Americans are covered. In my state, if you are poor, you are covered ONLY if you also have children. I make less than federal poverty level at the moment, my wife has a permanent disability, and we have NO health care coverage, not from the state, and not from the federal government. Both have refused, consistently, to cover her, so she goes untreated, since her treatment costs over $20,000 per year.

Move.

It might seem like a no brainer but should the benefit of a law designed to protect all citizens be dependent on what a state "might" do? I mean, that is kind of the text book definition of an over reaching federal government making assumptions based on an outcome they can't guarantee.

....And Republicans would do what differently? They have no vested interest in the poor. They have not, nor will they draft their bill for health care.

If Republican states back out of the expansion then they will have to deal with their constituents about that. The backlash will be unreal.

Romney is vowing to overturn ACA the first day, but he won't be able to he doesn't have that power.

Romney continuing to campaign on repeal is a waste of time.

If a state refuses to follow the path to protect the neediest, then the state itself is guilty of causing that misery. Selfishness is not a virtue, and earns a state no protection against its culpability.

@ Walt, I thought that was the part the supremes found "un-Constitutional". They decided that requiring all states to expand medicaid or lose all funding was blackmail. So wouldn't saying that any state that doesn't expand medicaid an enemy of the people and "republican" just as bad?

If not helping everyone poorer than you is selfish, than no one is selfless. Not giving money to poor people isn't selfish by any means, and it certainly doesn't cause misery. That would be like saying if you don't give all your money to Africa, you are helping to cause the deaths of many children.

Actually, the state always makes sure the neediest are protected. What this bill suggests is that we give handouts. All it does is promote poor lifestyles and wastes money we don't have in the first place. If you are unable to work, it's one thing. But, if you are under 24, pregnant, have no partner or job, it's another. I'm fine with a small welfare system, but if we ever want the poor to become better, we can't give them a decent life for nothing. You know what would stop poverty and stop the rich from becoming richer? Socialism, and that's exactly what we can see in the distance.

I told my wife three years ago that this country would not be a decent place to live in five. Two years and counting. What is the motivation to do well for yourself when those that don't have the motivation will get it for free. We spent a trillion dollars last year for for welfare and healthcare for welfare. Stating that they will be hurt is a crying game that holds no tears other than those caused by laughter.

Are you really that ignorant or are you just illiterate? States can 'opt out of the expansion to cover the poor'. That means if you live in a state full of redneck ignorant hilljacks like I do, if your poor, your screwed.

I don't believe any health insurance companies charges are that low.

If health insurance cost only $50 to $60 per month. More people would have insurance today.

A insurance company through my sister work. Was charging over $200 per month. That was the cheapest you could get.

This sounds good but is impossible to implement in real life.

Truly misleading that POTUS came on tv talking like it's a victory for healthcare for all.

The statement that it is indeed a tax says it all.

Cindy. Go to the PBS website in Idaho and you can listen to the interview. Radio.boisestate.edu

are you kidding me? Insurance carriers never charge only $50 or $60 a month for poor people. Their premiums are subsidized for the difference. We have all been paying for the poor with larger premiums and taxes. Come on you people get a grip. This will be way better and once we improve it and get the greedy profit out of healthcare we will all win... (well maybe not the investors and Corporate piggies)

Well the GOP got everything it wanted, they get to look like hero's for opposing something they created at the Heartland Institute, they get to make President Obama look like a corporate lap dog, their insurance buddies get millions of new customers, and they get to screw the poor yet again. I knew it would pass 5 to 4 with one conservative throwing himself under the bus for the insurance companies.

Get the greedy profit out of healthcare? Ok, so this new, affordable, 'tax pretending to be healthcare' solves that problem how? No insurance companies will see any losses, however, the taxpayer sure will. This wonderful new healthcare program just gave billions to insurance companies. Ditto the pharmaceutical companies and, it places new taxes on items like necessary prosthetics, it wipes out care for the severely handicapped, it places a bureaucrat in charge of your healthcare.

Obama was lying through his teeth from day one, remember no taxes? Remember how not one single person making less than $250,000 per annum would see a tax incease? Not only are there billions of new taxes (oops, excuse me, I meant healthcare premiums) but guess who your new tax collector helping the IRS will be? Those wicked insurance companies.

This is NOT socialized medicine ala Europe, this is an oligarchic tax generator benefiting those insurance companies. Single payer? Nope. Government provided healthcare? Nope. IRS thuggery? Yup. Now you know why Obama hired soooo many new IRS agents back when, he knew he would need an army of tax collectors to scoop up the money. Think all the taxes will go to pay off healthcare? Really?

As to premium costs. If anyone could buy health insurance for $60.00 month, think this debacle would have happened? Best I can get as a self-employed person is $350. and guess what the deductible and co-pay are?

I wouldn't believe a thing bluecross said.........or any of the insurance cos for that matter...1 thing you have to remember about Idaho as well is that the local news coverage is always highly slanted toward the right to pander to the crowd that live there.

AtticusRules

Betty Sturgeon - judging by your statement, you are the queen of "redneck ignorant hilljacks (sic)". A third grader knows when to use "you're" and "your", but you clearly don't. People like you and John Sixty don't have the common sense and intelligence to know that your statements make you look more ignorant that the people you are attempting to ridicule. The truth hurts, doesn't it?

Perhaps before you come on Newsvine and throw insults around you might want to check your own grammer first. We all make mistakes, I just noticed an extra apostrophe in my last post, I suppose you have something rude to say to me too.

felesroo

Move.

That is your answer to post 1.4. Do you realize it cost money to move to a different state and we all know that there is an over abundance of jobs out there. This health care law is not a free ride for everyone or anyone, someone is going to pay and it's most likely going to be the working class.

JohnSixty,

You disgust me.

Signed an educated Southerner.

Just remember liberals and Democrats, you asked for this against the American taxpayers, they will remember for a long time.

U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011

"By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.

Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.

CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.

As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.

Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.

As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.

CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3

P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.

Well the GOP got everything it wanted, they get to look like hero's for opposing something they created

BodyDouble - Maybe you should practice what you preach. That should be "heroes", not the possessive "hero's", Einstein.

You should look up the definition of "insult" if you truly can't recognize that JohnSixty and Betty Sturgeon are insulting entire regions of the country. There is a difference between a typographical error that spell-check doesn't catch and an ignorant individual like Betty Sturgeon who doesn't know the correct use of "you're" and "your". Not only is she too uneducated to know the difference, she used the incorrect word twice in one sentence. It's rather ironic that she is calling other people in her state "redneck ignorant hilljacks (sic)" when she doesn't have a clue.

The dissenting Justices said it best. It is the first time in our nations history that our Supreme Court has ruled that a Legal Tax and a Penalty are the same thing.

I read that as: If I buy a pack of gum, it is legal to be expected to pay a sales tax. It is illegal for the government to tell me to buy a pack of gum and then fine me a penalty if I say no.

Only now the Supreme Court says, it is legal for the government to tax me for buying a product and to penalize me if I don't.

That is no longer liberty or the regulation of commerce, it is being told what to do by the government and lawfully enforced by the Government. I think any state that bravely thumbs their nose at that kind of intrusion should be celebrated.

All this discussion is based on logic and reason. Logic and reason has left our politics for quite a while now. What will happen is many grandstanding demagogue Governors will refuse "Obamacare" to show what great Conservatives they are.

Politics have taken over logic and reason at all levels of our dysfunctional government. To just assume they will do the right and sensible thing is pure folly.

So what will the government do with the people that function solely in the underground economy. Drive around any major city and you'll see people that choose not to work (legally) and/or pay taxes. They will simply choose not to pay the "tax" and still show up to the emerency room for health care. I'm predicting the estimated cost savings will never materialize. Just the opposite will happen.

There is no budgetary logic and reason left in politics either. We are running $1.3 trillion deficits a year, we are teetering on depression, and we just gave the go ahead to the largest tax hike in history for a program that is already hundreds of billions more than it was sold at.

26 states challenged this law, are they all republican? That's good news for Nov.!

What is the motivation to do well for yourself when those that don't have the motivation will get it for free.

I hate to break it to you but the mandate is about forcing us to pay for our own healthcare insurance not forcing us to take free health care insurance.

Atticus...

It's sad when an English major thinks a discussion on events that concern everybody should be restricted to his fellow librarians.

Maybe what many people fail to see is that our states are hard up already. Now all of these questions will be tossed around the state houses and everything will be butchered as usual.

We could have a very simple system when it comes to healthcare. We could pass a law a that creates a single buying window for health insurance for all Americans. Every American citizen, local government, small business, etc., could step up to this virtual window and find every insurance company on the other side displaying their prices openly and trying to sell to us. Then each of us buys our insurance, or our company goes to the window and buys it for us. How do you take care of the poor in this system? Well the government would probably figure out who to assist by looking at how much they make. If you are poor they gov could then give you a voucher to go buy health insurance at the "window." Or they could be covered under a plan purchased for them by the government. The government could buy in bulk from the window.....and call it Medicare.

That is it. That is how everyone gets covered and nobody can be turned down from buying at the window.

NONE of this is the government's job in the first place!

The government's job is to protect our liberty! Not supply our health insurance!!

The heath insurance mandate came from the Republicans and was in one of their health care bills in '93 or '94. The reason we don't have a public options it because of all the complaints of Republicans that the government can't run health care. So we have a system with private insurance companies running the show.

Honestly, seeing how big of babies the conservatives are acting like, I wouldn't put it past them to refuse the funds despite what it does to the poor - just out of spite. We're about to find out how big of A-holes they really are.

ChicagoDavid...pretty silly statement considering the bill was passed on party lines with NO input or consideration to what any Republican suggested.

During the reign of the great robber Barrons, the poor always, came out on the bottom. With citizens-united it's the same. Now that the corporations have taken over our country, having bought our congress, why should it be any different with poor Americans of today. Here is a thought about the poor:

George Carlin(May 12, 1937 - June 22, 2008)

"The American Dream"There's a reason why education sucks and its the same reason it will never ever ever be fixed. Its never gonna get any better, don't look for it, be happy with what you got. Because the OWNERS of this country dont want that. Im talking about the real owners now. the REAL owners. The big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You dont. You have no choice. You have owners. They OWN you. They own everything. They own all the important land, they own and control the corporations theyve long since bought and paid for the Senate the Congress the State Houses the City Halls they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies so they control just about all the news and information you get to hear. THEY GOT YOU BY THE BALLS! They spend BILLIONS of dollars every year lobbying, lobbying to get what they want. Well we KNOW what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else. But I'll tell you what they DONT want. They dont want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They dont want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. Theyre not interested in that. That doesnt help them. Thats against their interests. They dont want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly theyre getting f***ed by a system that threw them overboard thirty f***ing years ago, they dont want that. You know what they want? They want obedient workers. Obedient workers. People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork, and just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly sh***ier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime, and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And NOW theyre comin' for your social security money. They want your f***ing retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it! Theyll get it all from you sooner or later because they OWN this f***ing place. Its a big club... and YOU AINT IN IT. You and I are not in the big club. By the way, its the same big club they use to beat you over the head all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head in their media telling you what to believe what to think and what to buy. The table is tilted, folks. The game is rigged. And nobody seems to notice.. nobody seems to care... Good honest hard-working people. White-collar, blue-collar, it doesnt matter what color shirt you have on, good honest hard-working people continue - these people of modest means - continue to elect these rich c**k suckers who dont give a F*** about them. They dont give a F*** about you, they dont GIVE a F*** about you. They dont CARE about you. At ALL, at ALL, at ALL! Man...You know? And nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care... Thats what the owners count on - the fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red white and blue d**k thats being jammed up their a**holes everyday because the owners of this country know the truth... Its called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.

Good job Nancy and B.O.: Maybe you should let someone read the 2,600 pages of the Bill before you forced it to a vote. Screw ups like this don't surprise me. AND I'm sure there are more to come.

jpeg - More likely than not, the Republicans in both houses of congress had something to say about this bill before it became law. There is a long history of DEMS and REPUBS wanting to do "something" about health care, going back as far as President Johnson.

I notice that Willard Romney is saying the very first thing he will do when he is elected POTUS is repeal the U.S. Supreme Court decision. I'm not really sure how a POTUS would go about doing something like that. However, just by Willard saying something stupid like that, should serve as a BIG warning about his marginal thinking and impaired reasoning.

Willard has never, ever, had to worry about how to pay a doctor bill. Willard has never had to skimp on food, in order to make the choice of: Do I pay the rent, or pay the doctor? Do I pay the rent or do I buy food? Willard has never been there, done that, because Willard comes from a very wealthy family - one without any financial worry or wants or needs.

In short, Willard has no real idea of what life has been, or is like, for the average family. Willard does not grasp the significance and importance of average people needing some form of health insurance.

I am a moderately conservative Republican, but, I realize how important it is for people to have health insurance.

Everyone needs some form of health insurance.

Therefore, all U.S. citizens who do not have access to a health insurance plan should have access to the exact same health and dental coverage plans as the members of Congress. What is good enough for the members of the U.S. Congress should be good enough for anyone else.

With 30 to 50 million more subscribers, the costs should be much lower, and therefore, more manageable for all, including members of Congress.

I am retired. Between Medicare and private insurance, I pay about $950 per month for health and dental insurance. It would be great if "ObamaCare" could help lower that cost.

Willard need to wake up and smell the coffee. Oh, wait! Willard is a Mormon, and more likely than not, he does not drink coffee.

WhistleBerries....there is a big difference between wanting to do something about health care and completely destroying it. Republicans called for reform...Democrats called for complete control. It was done behind closed doors with absolutely zero input from the Republicans....You can say as you wish or even try blaming Romney, but history is history..you cannot change that.

WhistleBerries: Do you have any support for your statements @ 1.41. If you do tell us. BTW: The "Globe" is not an acceptable source.

LouK2k12

@ Walt, I thought that was the part the supremes found "un-Constitutional". They decided that requiring all states to expand medicaid or lose all funding was blackmail. So wouldn't saying that any state that doesn't expand medicaid an enemy of the people and "republican" just as bad?

SCOTUS found that forcing states to do the right thing was unconstitutional. SCOTUS did not find that doing the right thing was unconstitutional.

So wouldn't saying that any state that doesn't expand medicaid an enemy of the people and "republican" just as bad?

No. Stop trying to excuse selfish Republican behavior.

Rhazes

I beg to differ.

The law states that anyone who earns below 133% of the poverty line will receive medicaid.

35% of US households make $35,000 a year or less.

A family with four kids that makes $35,000 annually is at the 133% threshold.

I guarantee that that if they were to make $36,000 they will make sure they only make 35 so they receive benefits on the taxpayer dime. People are not that stupid.

I, again, state that their is no motivation to do well for yourself when you can have everyone else pay your way.

I had the misfortune of listening on NPR to a representative of the American Health Insurance Providers talking about many of the negatives of the healthcare bill passing. Some I was aware of, some not. I went to the AHIP website and read more. The ACA is going to be one hugely expensive mess.

Go here and read for yourself some of the details under "To learn more about specific ACA provisions..":

http://www.ahip.org/Issues/Affordable-Care-Act/

"Those people are still living in your state, They're still poor. They're going to come to your emergency room. They're going to be operated on, and they're going to have diseases that get worse, and you're going to have to pay for that. That will come from the state — free care pools and charity in the state," Berwick said in an interview on MSNBC-TV.

So we are still in the same boat, so much for Hope and Change!

Hurry up November!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

According to the ACA, you cannot be denied coverage on existing conditions. So many will simply wait until they need coverage to purchase it. This forces the insurance company to act like an actuary instead of insurer. How do they cover their cost? Simple. Increase premiums for those who do have insurance.

Also, small businesses will be forced to purchase more coverage than they normally do increasing their cost. Simple solution. Fire an employee or two to make up for the cost and/or increase the price of the product or service provided.

people say
"don't breed'em if you cant feed'em" but it looks like all the poor who took your advise are being left out in the cold. so it looks like the solution is to have kids anyway, then we can get medicaid god knows if my state opts out thats what im going to do

Interesting this ruling gives the federal, or should I say feral, government the right to impose a punitive tax on anyone who doesn't behave the way it desires. In fact, I suppose it sets a precedent that any legitimate taxing authority, state or local, can use to control its subjects (formerly citizens) behavior.

The flood gates have been opened. There will be no way to control the deluge.

Maybe now Obama can impose a punitive tax on Republicans who don't vote the way he wants them to on bills.

Real American

No they poor are at actually at a greater risk. I know people who looked to get on Medicaid to help pay for treatments and care for their special needs child. What they found out was that the Medicaid prescribed care was inferior to what should be done for their kid. They elected to find a way to pay the money for their kids needs.

This is what is so Aborrent about the ACA. It take peoples who worked hard to get better insurance and better care and forces them to give it whether they have to give up their better insurance or must pay more because of new taxes on medical devices or penalties for achieving a premium plan.

When there is no incentive to move ahead, we fall behind.

RealAmericansFirst - The federal government is only going to cover the cost of increased Medicaid coverage for the first couple years. After that the state have to pick up the full bill. It was designed that way to give the states time to increase their taxes to cover the cost. Sounds like your the one who needs to their homework.

Whistleberries

The first thing he will do is send a request to Congress

The second thing he will do is tell them, I will sign nothing unless this is being done. 2/3's votes to override vetoes aren't a walk in the park

Third thing, He will remove all budget items involving the ACA from the 2014 Fiscal budget (starts October 2013).

Seeing the Republicans need only say vote Democrat = ACA - the biggest tax increase in history that taxes EVERYONE. The Republicans should increase their hold on the house and take over the Senate. The only barrier is the 60 cloture vote in the Senate. As of yesterday the Senate will be 49 R, 48 D, 3 Independent. One of those Independents is Murkowski (should seat with Republicans) The New independent may be King in Maine who may side with democrats.

BTW: I have an individual Plan. I will have it until my insurer goes out of business. My Insurer by how the law is written should go bankrupt by 2017. Then I will have to go to the exchanges to buy health insurance and purchase from someone else. Being my insurer is pretty strong I don't think there will be many left at that point.

Just so we're clear on the negative consequence of this for the poor...

Contrary to popular belief, the working poor will bear the financial brunt of this as companies who don't currently provide insurance will lower wages to make up for the added insurance cost and to remain in business. The average full-time hourly worker who does not have health insurance today will get insurance to be sure, however they will make roughly $2.75 an hour less in wages to cover the cost...$12.50 an hour drops to $9.75 an hour. This takes food out of the working poor's already bare pantries.

The poor are also much more likely to be negatively influenced by inflated prices caused by this. They are more likely to buy at businesses who keep costs down by hiring minimum wage workers and not providing employee health insurance. The prices of goods sold at those stores will necessarily have to increase to account for the new insurance costs since wages can't go down. As noted it is the poor that buy their necessities at these businesses, so it is the poor who will bear the brunt of inflation here. This again means the poor will have a harder time filling their already bare pantries.

Add to that the fact that the poor are generally young and as a whole have very little need for the health insurance they will be forced to buy.

The working poor will suffer the most from this financially while the well off will likely bear very little of the cost, unlike how it is being portrayed by the Obama administration and the rest of the Dems. They are just keeping you all on their plantation with your hands out, all the while getting screwed over by them. No, this is not good for the working poor at all.

What else this ruling says is this...

Suppose in the future the Republicans (or Dems) gain either a super majority in Congress or just gain control of both the Legislative and Executive branches of government (as has been the case in 9 of the past 11 years), the Republicans (or Dems) could pass a law forcing everybody to give money to the RNC, Crossroads, etc. (or the DNC, Media Matters, Think Progress in the Dems case) whether the people agreed with the organizations' political leanings or not. In essence the parties could build huge pools of campaign cash from the people whether or not the people were for or opposed to the party who passed the law. As long as it is structured like this forced health insurance mandate with triggered fines, that law would be perfectly legal and constitutional. So says Chief "Justice" Roberts. After all, Congress does have the right to "tax", correct "Justice" Roberts? This is a very, very slippery slope and a horrible decision by SCOTUS.

BTW, what was purposefully and knowingly left out of scoring of this bill because it would explode the estimated cost of it is the Obama administration's plan to essentially grant amnesty to illegal aliens. Not being citizens they were not included in the calculations of the bill and they are by far the largest group of uninsured. The Dems knew that once they are granted citizenship they will be included, but because of their financial demographics this would cause a huge expansion of the cost of this.

They used a bunch of fantasy numbers to begin with. We know this because realistic scenarios by the auditors of Medicare are much different and very grim. The cost of this will likely be devastating to our economy and much more so once illegals are granted citizenship.

Cry me a river.

RealAmericansFirst "That won't change. What the Supreme Court did was remove "automatic" coverage for adults between 80% and 133% of federal poverty level. That's left up to the states now - they have to decide whether to take the 100% federal money to cover those people or not."

I think the problem is that if the actual cost to the states is perhaps 50% higher than the '100%' reimbursement from the Federal Government, they may well choose to turn it down and force the 'working poor' to fend for themselves. The states have already complained about the 'reimbursement' under Obamacare covering only a fraction of their actual cost - leaving it up to the states to pick up the balance, which most states cannot afford at this time.

Obamacare tried to FORCE the states to take their 'partial reimbursememt' or lose Medicaid, but the Supreme Court nixed that 'stick', and said that states will now be entitled to a 'block grant' of their entire Medicaid allocation, which they can spend as they see fit.

My guess is that a huge number of states will 'opt-out' of Obamacare and design their own plans because it gives them much more flexibility with fewer 'strings attached'.

A small town rarely builds an elementary school 'on budget'. The biggest mystery about this healthcare 'reform' mess is what it will indeed end up costing us.

We recently have seen the battle in Wisconsin over the cost of government union employees and just this week, we see the news that Stockton, California is filing for bankruptcy protestion...in large part because of the costs of fluuffing the pillows of government employees.

Is there a section in this 'reform' plan that discusses the total number of state, federal, and IRS employees that will need to be added to deal with what's inside this 3000 page monstrosity ??? How many new office buildings will be needed ??? And most importantly...will all these new costs ever be shown to be expenses incurred purely to deal with the new law ??? Or will all these new employee and administrative costs simply be folded into normal government operating costs...so nobody notices what the real bill for "reform" actually is.

As is being seen all over the US, the operating costs of a bloated and inefficient government way of doing things is crushing us. And here comes even more of it.

Mike in SA "Suppose in the future the Republicans (or Dems) gain either a super majority in Congress or just gain control of both the Legislative and Executive branches of government (as has been the case in 9 of the past 11 years), the Republicans (or Dems) could pass a law forcing everybody to give money to the RNC"

Actually, something like that already happens - for example, the Democrats have passed laws that require workers in many jobs to belong to the union in order to work there, and then they require that those employees contribute to the union political fund, which virtually all goes to Democrats.

That's been going on for generations, which is why Democrats have historically out-raised the Republicans in large donations by more than 3 to 1 (100 largest donators over last 20 years).

Well, at this point all I can hope for is that, once this mess finally blows up and crashes in a ball of fire. Maybe we will finally get the socialized universal health care we were promised.

The fact that the mandate clause stood and the medicaid clause got thrown out, is all the evidence we need to see that big money owns our government. Every branch. It was a big win for moneygrubbing insurance companies. Liberals who think this is a victory, make me feel embarrassed for them.

The poverty guidelines for a single person the 48 contiguous states and DC is $11,170. According the the Kaiser Family Foundation, the average annual cost of health insurance for a single person is $5,429. For a family, it can go up to 3/4ths of their income, as one can see from using the same links. So, does the gov't expect poor people to pay over half of their income on health insurance? This law is so poorly thought out it's jaw-dropping.

OK, so then they don't get health insurance, but then they pay a "tax," which is really a fine. (Let's not get caught up in semantics, though.) People who support this crap legislation should be ashamed of themselves for insisting on victimizing the poorest. Although, I'm betting it's out of ignorance, not that they really want to put the poor under their thumb?

Democracy demands an educated and informed electorate -Thomas Jefferson

Even a slave rapist knew you gotta know what's going on.

Roy, yes I understood that. I just wanted to make clear (to our liberal friends) what the downstream ramifications of this ruling are.

You'll note that I primarily based it on if the Republicans had the majority to amplify their understanding of the slipperiness of this slope. I'm sure that they would be up in arms if their personal liberties were taken away by being forced to give money to Crossroads. You can bet they would howl up a storm about personal liberty then.

Wait...what am I saying? This ruling proves we have no more personal liberty to lose.

RealAmericansFirst is a good example of how ignorant many people are about the current healthcare system. Just being poor is NOT enough to qualify for Medicaid generally. Federal medicaid law does NOT require states to cover poor adults without children UNLESS they become disabled. That usually means a Social Security determination which typically takes up to 3 years to get--and to rub salt into the wound the person cannot AFFORD the medical treatment and supervision to base a Social Security claim on. In many cases their condition worsens and they may DIE in the meantime. States have medical review boards that can expedite MA eligibility while waiting for SSA determination but basically this is a system that is hard for people to access, especially the people who need it most.

I'm hearing that states aren't likely to stick it to their own citizens, but knowing my own state's history denying sCHIPS coverage to kids over 140% poverty some surely will.

I'm hearing that states aren't likely to stick it to their own citizens, but knowing my own state's history denying sCHIPS coverage to kids over 140% poverty some surely will.

And that will make the immorality of the leaders of those states that much clearer, in sharp contrast to the truly moral states. The reason why greed prevails so often is that there is no penalty for avarice. Stop the rationalizations. Stop allowing selfish people to claim that they're being moral and righteous. Shine a bright light on the injustice they inflict on the less fortunate in their own stated, injustice they inflict for no reason better than that they can thereby afford that extra HDTV in the kitchen.

The first step in getting people to start behaving better is to make it clear that their current behavior, today, is unacceptable.

From Mike in SA

Contrary to popular belief, the working poor will bear the financial brunt of this as companies who don't currently provide insurance will lower wages to make up for the added insurance cost and to remain in business. The average full-time hourly worker who does not have health insurance today will get insurance to be sure, however they will make roughly $2.75 an hour less in wages to cover the cost...$12.50 an hour drops to $9.75 an hour. This takes food out of the working poor's already bare pantries.

This is the best example of fear-mongering that I've seen. Nice portrayal of made up numbers we've seen yet, Mike. Seriously, you think employers are going to delude your wages 2.75/hr for health coverage. Averaging $220 dollars a check $440 a month. Seriously, you think so? I bet the tax per month would be less then 3% of a monthly wage. I could be wrong but I think Mike in SA is completely wacked with his presumptions and figures.

Only a republican could make up BS numbers to eloquently.

Only if your state opts out. So insurance companies in states that drop out could see their premiums rise to offset the lack of young healthy people in the pool.

Make sure your state reps know that if they opt out they will be challenged in every election. Vote for people who will keep your state in otherwise your premiums will go up!

Look for Republicans to call this "the biggest tax hike on the middle class in history"....which is false. You only pay the penalty (tax) if you don't buy insurance. Politifact has already called bull@!$%# on this false claims by Limbaugh and others.

I've always been told to begin at the beginning. I'm no expert and I don't have facts and figures but why can't we start with one of the culprits...food. Would anyone not agree that with obesity at all time highs and the ailments that it causes wouldn't addressing food and the American diet with the same vengence that this reform act has had save a bucket load of bucks? Not everyone is ill because of what they eat or don't eat but why not do the simple things? Tax people on what they don't eat, like veggies or more on what they do eat, like high fat, low nutritional value foods. May seem simplistic but it's a start. I think if you talk with the people that deal with health matters, i.e., doctors or health care providers they might agree. Even the food stamp idea enables people to buy nutritionally unsound foods. And what about excercise? Not everyone can, but if it comes to being taxed if I don't excercise, gee, my butt would be finding something to do. I guess enforcing my ideas would be harder than enforcing this legislation...or would it?

And there will be the question of how the IRS (who will be responsible for the tax credit) will administer it. If, for example, it is an automatic credit to those who are under the income requirements without proof that they are buying the insurance, then I know what will happen. They will take the cash and never buy the insurance. So, effectively, they will still be uninsured, use the emergency room for colds and sniffles as they do now, even if they 'should' be covered by the medical insurance.

This is an example of the unfortunate circumstance with our laws. We never really know what we are getting until the bureaucrats write the regulations.

Act your age, Billie Mazza, and quit the Name Calling.

Eric, you are forgetting about the 40% tax on "Cadillac plans" that cover such "nonessentials" as periodontal care, hearing aids, eyeglasses, speech therapy, mental health care, weight management services, etc.

Ho, ho little democrats, you just got screwed and aren't smart enough to understand how.

This law violates one of the very rules that we as Americans hold truly near and dear......

EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST

Health care ruling could leave poorest Americans at greatest risk.

Quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of hearing about how everything this country does or doesn't do affects the poor. It's time for someone to worry about how the middle class who pays the taxes that support the poor are doing. The poor are going to be up a creek without a paddle when the middle class is taxed dry and has nothing left for Uncle Sam to grab to give to the poor unfortunates who are too lazy to get off their butts and work for a living.

Sorry, it is the largest tax hike in history. It's not just the direct tax, it's all the indirect taxes, and stealth taxes the bill is riddled with. If liberals are such simpletons they can't figure that out, they get what they deserve, at least until Nov.

Honestly, seeing how big of babies the conservatives are acting like, I wouldn't put it past them to refuse the funds despite what it does to the poor - just out of spite. We're about to find out how big of A-holes they really are.

Health care ruling could leave poorest Americans at greatest risk.

The very Poor will be no worse off than they are now, so I think getting to 95% coverage is a great step forward for now. Lets let the law settle in and fix some of the parts of it that will have unintended consequences before we beat our selves up to get 100% covered.

And to all my fellow Middle Class tax paying citizens whining about how much they are paying, realize you are paying the lowest rates to the federal government that we have been paying in a quarter century.

Eric...so there will be little increase in taxes on the middle class. However, insurers have already said they will have to increase premiums to cover additional cost. Small businesses will be forced to carry more expensive insurance, the cost of which will be passed on to the middle class.

You don't have to call it a tax Eric, but the middle class is going to pay for this big time.

Eric

There is a tax on "medical devices" Per the FDA a toothbrush is a medical device. Everyone pays for this, worse yet most major devices are installed in the elderly. I.E. the elderly are paying for this.

My Dad has a Pacemaker - that is a medical device, is medicare going to pay for the tax seeing the ACA cuts $500 Billion out of Medicare and medicaid, I don't think so.

You break your arm, they put a pin in it, you pay for a splint. You pay for tax on two medical devices.

Veggiesforthought - I like your idea of starting at the beginning and if we ate better foods I think we would all be healthier. It's a great place to start as long as our government isn't the one doing the task. For the last 30 years they sold us on a low fat/high carb diet which is why we are all fat now. To make things with lower fat taste better food makers just added more sugar. I think there was a Seinfeld episode about low fat cookies and how you could eat more because they were low fat. Which is what we all did.

The USDA food pyramid did more to make us fat than any other factor including how sedentary we have become.

But I do like your idea (not sarcasm).

I don't think you have considered the level of animosity that some Republican leaders hold for the President and any thing that has his imprint. Did you not see that some states refused to accept TARP money that could have helped them to repair infrastructure and increase employment? I can see where, though many will benefit, this will be a problem for some.

Having a portion of the population not insured will in turn result in cost shifting to those that are insured (as it now is done) effectively resulting in an increase in both the cost of health care in those states and as a result higher insurance premiums for everyone in that state. Hopefully, this will lead to the election of a more rationale state government in those states.

I have to append my comment above...despite significant rhetoric from Republican Governors, every state accepted the money (http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/Community/STLPolitics/tabid/160/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/2184/Guess-How-Many-Governors-Refused-Their-States-Portion-Of-The-Socialist-Stimulus-Money.aspx). Hopefully that will be true with the money available from the Affordable Healthcare Act (ObamaCare(s)) to some.

Go ahead Republican red states deny the poor coverage and let's see what happens.

What you fail to realize is that Medicaid (or here in CA, Medical) is a disaster right now. Medicaid patients are the one's filling emergency rooms, as more and more doctors refuse them service due to horrifically low reimbursement rates.

Many small community hospitals are on the edge of solvency. If you flood them with millions of new Medical / Medicaid patients, you will bankrupt them. This is not my opinion, this is the opinion of doctors and hospital administrators around California (and I am sure many other states).

In 2007 Obama gave a speech (I know, amazing huh) to a union audience telling them the goal is 100% government healthcare, but it will take time. Their inside game is to destroy the current structure so that the government is our last resort. It appears Medicaid is exactly how they intend to do this.

Otherwise, why not just write a simple bill to insure the 50 million with a graduated scale of contribution based on their income? Probably wouldn't have taken 10 pages, and you could insure the systems solvency.

Actually, the headline is spot on. If you had taken the time to read the ruling, you would know the facts. The ruling states that the States do not have to take part and they will not lose their Medicaid funding. Here is part of what Roberts had to say, page 58:

Justice Roberts, "

We have no way of knowing how many States will accept the terms of the expansion, but we do not believe Congress would have wanted the whole Act to fall, simply because some may choose not to participate

Eric How much do you pay in insurance today? Can you afford a 5X increase?

We have the worst of both worlds now - high cost of a free market with the compulsion of socialism. If we are going to socialize medicine then let's do that. It means doctors, drug companies, hospitals etc get a much lower salary so that poor people can afford it. All this does is increase costs for everyone... Look on the PBS website for Idaho and you can listen to the interview yourself.. how is a 5x increase going to help anyone? Oh and the poor will still have deductibles.

Eric-913730

Go ahead Republican red states deny the poor coverage and let's see what happens.

I predict the following: The poor who like to live in red states will continue to do so, and will continue to go to emergency rooms when they need medical attention. (Nothing in the law prohibits them from doing so.) The poor who don't like living in red states will use this as an excuse to move to New York or California and bankrupt them sooner.

MSDNC at it's Finest, The Truth and Only the Truth, with a Little Hope and Change Sauce.

Just remember liberals and Democrats, you asked for this against the American taxpayers, they will remember for a long time.

U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011

"By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.

Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.

CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.

As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.

Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.

As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.

CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3

P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.

Go ahead Republican red states deny the poor coverage and let's see what happens.

Kinda funny Eric, considering it's mostly Blue states in financial crisis. It's pretty hard to even cover 10% when you are broke! And 10% is only the first year.

Why do you blame the messenger? I think now that affordable health care is now the law, we ought to wait and see if it is a good plan or not. I know the far right wing doesn't want our President to to secede at anything in spite of themselves and everyone else. I thought when the election was over congress was supposed to represent all of us, not just the party they are from.

Grandpa-2986035

...the far right wing doesn't want our President to to secede at anything...

Actually, they would prefer he secede from the office.

Can you tell me who is going to pay for the expanded medicare? All you sheep keep saying "now the poor will have health insurance" who is going to pay for it? The poor can't afford it and so where do you think the government gets its money? TAXES. Maybe you all would like to have income tax go to 50% in addition to all the other taxes goig up (Property, sales etc) so the states can pay. Instead of working until May for the government. you'll work until November.

I would like to see one person explain that. So far I haven't.

Easy to pay for it. Just bundle it with the prescription plan Bush set up.

Who do you think pays for health care for the poor now when they go to the emergency room? That's right, you and me.

Actually ChicagoDavid...the hospitals take a huge hit.

mxracer- actually, I believe Canada has a 15% income tax that covers EVERYONE's health care. I'd much prefer that, myself. I'd be paying a bit more for my family than I already pay in premiums, and I'd get rid of the stupid 3k deductible they threw at us last year. And EVERYONE would be covered. That means people that currently are on disability due to treatable problems would get treated and get off disability (not including the scammers). That means EVERY child would get whatever health care is necessary. It would even encourage the start of new businesses, since they wouldn't have to worry about losing health coverage when they leave a job.

As for the current plan's cost, which is less expensive- a visit to a doctor's office at the start of a problem (only available with cash prepayment or insurance), or waiting for it to go away, and ending up with an ER visit and possibly a hospital stay? If someone doesn't have insurance, we pay either way. And it doesn't matter if it's a millionaire or dirt poor, if they are uninsured and go to the ER, unless the person chooses to pay, the cost is absorbed by the rest of us.

No, its Republicans who are just trying to have the poor die off rather than raise historically low taxes on the wealthiest Americans by even one dime.

The Democrats in our government just effectively "raised the tax rate" on healthy young people with their penalties and fines for all those millions who do not want to buy health insurance.

These are typically low to middle-low income folks, who will now foot the bill. This was the liberals answer. Oh, and by taxing / penalizing millions of union members with their "Cadillac" insurance plans that liberals have declared war on.

So it seems Obama and Democrats are more than happy to raise taxes on the middle class and the poor, while leaving the wealthy alone. So your claim that Republicans are involved in any of this is 100% false, as they voted against this law, 100%.

Hahahaha.....great statement!

Hey skonsin.....if you think you can generalize an entire group of people based on their political alignment, then you are dead wrong. The only thing liberals know how to do is name call, with the same phrases over and over. You have nothing to stand on but childish name callling, and if you care so much about the poor and their well being, what else are you doing in your society to help the poor? How much of your time and money are donated to helping these people??? Please enlighten us on how you (Mother Teresa) are so involved in helping the poor. My guess is that you just scream and yell for laws that adversely affect most Americans because it "might" help the poor and this gives the appearance that you have a big heart and only care about others (never yourself), while hardly lifting a finger to make a change in your community. I am very active in soup kitchens and my "bible thumping" church to help our community's homeless any way we can.

Shove your stereotypes up your you know where. If we are going to resort to name calling, I would brand you an immature, blind, whiny, pretentious, judgmental, intolerant, selfish cry-baby.

A rational person characterizes a group by its collective behavior, i.e., that conduct that is indicative of what the group does with its collective power. If you don't want to be be associated with a group that, as part of its basic tenets, promotes callous self-interest instead of generosity toward the less fortunate, then detach yourself from that right-wing association. Similarly, if you don't want to be associated with a group that, as part of its basic tenets, advocates for generosity toward the less fortunate instead of callous self-interest, then detach yourself from that left-wing association. Your choice which brush you want to be painted with; but don't seek to avoid being painted with one of these two brushes if you choose to associate yourself with any support for either side.

I think...... by accident you hit on the reality of this bill! States that opt out will find poor people gravitating to liberal states that buy in. Thereby creating the same divide that facilitated the civil war. Only instead of Slavery it will be "surance vs nosurance" issue.

Actually, it is not unusual for those of us that work in healthcare to see poor persons who have moved to simply obtain healthcare/insurance. However, who will then take care of your lawns, your children, wash your cars, clean the hotel rooms, work in the kitchens and a ton of other jobs that these poor folks find themselves trapped in if such a migration happened? And when that happens what happens to your state's economy?

Better yet, what will happen to your states Congressional representation? Oh right, you wont have much. Businesses will leave too, since the climate will be better in other states where more poor are able to work, be insured and not have to collect welfare. Hey! That's why Republicans proposed this idea in the first place!!

Actually states that opt out will give uninsured free bus tickets to CA or NY. It's already been done.

Business will flock to states with less poor since that would lower taxes. Why do you think companies are fleeing CA, IL, NY, etc. and headed for AL, NC, TX, WI, etc.?

Phil,

and who is going to work in those business, when poor is gone? think about it, oh wait that requires brain.

@phil "Business will flock to states with less poor since that would lower taxes. Why do you think companies are fleeing CA, IL, NY, etc. and headed for AL, NC, TX, WI, etc.?"

Phil, you do know that WI had the worst job creation record in the midwest last year don't you?

Right. Just because a similar plan in Massachusetts has resulted in LOWER premiums doesn't mean it will for the nation at large, especially if a Democrat proposed the law. Now, when a GOP one proposed it, that was different.....not.

They are already rationing care, but hey, that's what they wanted. We did NOT want this. If you think 2010 was bad just wait for this Nov. What part of shellacking did you not understand?

Phil, get off Faux talking points, and grow your own

They are already rationing care, but hey, that's what they wanted.

As a resident of that state, I demand you show me a single story. My healthcare certainly hasn't been rationed. Nobody I know has had their care rationed. People talk about it, but it simply isn't reality.

We already had health care rationing-

Do you have insurance? Do you have cash to pay for your care? No? Ok, we'll do the minimum required to keep you alive, and then send you home.

correct, Mike.

Repeal.

Ignore.

That's history.

Business will probaly opt out as well. If paying a 2000.00 tax on each employee will be cheaper than paying whatever it cost for insurance the business will pay the fine. Whatever method will gian them the most profit will be the way they will go.

Sorry, business will flock to those states, lower taxes, less crime. It's already happening.

High Rolla. I beleive the fine is only for 3 years when it more than doubles.

Gary: it was never "completely inclusive"...but it needs to go anyway...this is a total fiasco...Obama lied about the universal mandate note being a tax...total sick of him and his administration.

@juanita dominguez

You're mad because he didn't say it was a tax, but how about being that he ran against the mandate during primaries and the general election, then switch pro-mandate once elected? It was clear that penalties were a tax from the very beginning, we wouldn't be here if Obama had kept his word.

Juanita,

you need to go, he didn't lie about it, and its not obamacare, it is Republican care, or National Romney care bill.

Sorry bman80.....A Democrat House passed it, A Democrat Senate Approved it and a Democrat President signed it......it's all Democrat.

Sucks when you screw the entire country and have to take "responsibility"......a fairly NEW word for Liberals.

AlfieJR: how can you not see that this is totally Obama's fault?...he's a LIAR...he said that this universal mandate wasn't a tax...LIAR-IN-CHIEF....what a total mess this has all turned in to. I hope every state can opt out of this fiasco.

Alfie, Republicans genuinely seek to allow those who won't vote for them to die. So, yes, Republican governors will allow the sick, elderly, poor, and all non-whites to die if they can.

you got that right, JohnSixty. the Republican plan for healthcare is: the poor should die as soon as possible, especially the old ones.

but of course if you inherit wealth, then you should live forever!

And the liberal lies just keep on coming. It's getting old guys.

Phil, show me the facts backed by source please, if not don't talk

Alfie and John.

How about if you live in the real world.

The poor have medicaid. I know, I have family and have known others who used it.

You have 10 million people who don't have insurance and don't want it.

You have 10 million people who don't have insurance that want it who have pre-existing conditions.

Most of that 10 million still don't get insurance because Insurance now offer such insurance, the premiums are high to cover for such problems that result from such conditions.

BTW CBO estimates that 21 Million people who had health insurance through there employers that they like will lose it. That is low because Surveys on businesses are coming out that 56 - 75% of businesses are going to drop there Employer based plans.

Do you not understand that people for the first time will see what health insurance really costs when they go to the exchanges and have to pay $6,000 - $20,000 per year for what they were paying $2000 - $6000 per year for. Pitty those who weren't paying anything.

Geez, this gets tired. NOT ALL THE POOR HAVE MEDICAID. The feds do not require states to cover single adults without children living in their home. So, for example, the non-custodial father who works close to min wage without benefits and is required to pay child support (usually based on 25% of earnings, and if he is unemployed is based on the assumption he can work full time and earn min wage) or else go to jail, lose his license, and otherwise be unable to work. Even though healthcare for him would be in everyone's interests, he can't get it. Even though he may have a chronic medical condition (and not all such conditions are attributable to diet/exercise) he can't get it. My niece, who grew up with epilepsy (due to a drug given in infancy that turned out to be dangerous for babies and toddlers), can't drive, works full time for $8.25 an hour, no benefits, who requires expensive epilepsy medications and cannot afford the MRI that has been recommended for several years, can't afford or obtain health insurance. Her sister, who is 21 and works as a waitress, doesn't smoke and isn't overweight had no coverage or ability to pay for a $30,000 broken ankle requiring surgery. She was learning to skateboard in the hope that skateboarding to work would save gas $. The healthcare needs are there already, the critical care is provided at tremendous cost--and who is paying now? What about the critical care that could have been avoided with basic healthcare? I know a young woman who just spent 17 days on a vent and a week in the hospital after the vent, all due to a staph infection that turned into septicemia and pneumonia. Any idea what 17 days in a CCU costs these days?

" totally Obama's fault?...he's a LIAR" Geez, get a grip. The law was written by Congress. Congress is supposed to know what it means when it crafts statute, which is why SCOTUS looks first to the statutory language when it interprets legislation that is being litigated. The exec dept, defending the law, argued both based on commerce clause and taxing authority. As is clear from the decision, something can be a tax under the constitution without being a tax as people might ordinarily understand it. And some taxes are selective, based on choices people make. Cigarettes. Gasoline. Booze. Not purchasing health insurance.

Ehf=svaz. your name looks Muslim, you're exempt from it. Why do you complain?

JohnSixty...wow, you went to college?? I guess you speak some Arabic languages also?

ehf-svaz

you are the failure to know that only congress has the power to do that, but hey it is easy to spread lies on here

bman80, obama is the commander in chief of the military. He has the direct authority to close the base at his discretion.

After all...he is King.

jpeg

He cannot close a base unless congress approves. But he may do something like that anyhow. Congress being split cannot/will not reign him in. The People put him in, the people have to remove him. Any pain they endure from this lack of judgement is just too bad.

Next time, don't put someone in such a high office without some real provable credentials and a track record of success.

Elizabeth brooks, don't blame romney, he's not the president.

Elizabeth, why would you want the Mexicans not to be treated if they become ill? Think what you're saying. I mean really, think what you say. You're saying that you want someone or their children to die or be ill while a cure sits readily awaiting in a medical facility.

That's inhumane.

Because I believe all illegals should get out of the country and go home...I don't care how they got here illegal is ilegal ...you obviously have a job and probably live in a state that is not handing out college to illegals and I beleive they drive many legals into joblessness.....now about half the jobs I apply for are requesting you speak Mexican......hello I believe they are part of what drives medicl costs up as they line the emergency rooms up on every wall and who do you think is paying for that

Elizabeth, I went to college and learned how to speak Spanish. I am not Hispanic. Sorry, your complaint has no merit.

Nobody is forcing you to stay. If you think you can move to another country as great as this country really is than by all means, don't let the flag hit you on the way out. Oh, and for the record, not all mexicans are illegal.

Elizabeth,

first of all don't blame Illegals, nothing in law that allows them coverage, don't believe me: read the law yourself. Romney is joke, what he going to say? he is one implemented this law in his state.

Mexicans speak Spanish by the way, shows how smart you are.

AlaskaGirl....If you are a Mexican in this country without permission, you are illegal.

If you are hispanic and legally a citizen of this country, you are an AMERICAN.

John Sixty,

Listening to some Phd's on law, Roberts with his education, should have known that he is not supposed to pick whether the "penalty" was a tax or commerce Regulation. It was not in the law as a tax and it is Congress's jobs to call it a tax, not his. What the Administration did was give them to possibilities of what the law could be, pick one. Roberts bit on it. What a fail.

Education is a good thing, if you really use appropriately.

jpeg: you figure that out all by yourself? LOL

They won't love it Mick. Verizon doesn't like to pay the govt or their employees.

ABBY: Didn't you know that Willardo is a "Born again Conservative"???

Have you seen the video of this lying weasel in 2007 singing the praises of the mandate AND ESPOUSING IT TO BE USED NATIONALLY???

This is a man who will say ANYTHING to get a vote. He has no core, there's nothing there under that suit. He labeled himself as a "Progressive", was pro choice, pro gay rights including marriage and service in the military, pro gun control, on and on it goes. Now he is "severely Conservative" whatever that is. LOL

Severely conservative = stick up his a$$.

Severely liberal = snivelling little fascist.

Phil,

I am sorry but fascists were right wingers. oppps burst your bubble

Phil must not come back to read replies to his posts. He posts that same mistake almost every day.

bman

Fascism = ACA

It isn't racial, but it is autocratic through boards, commissions, centralization, and everyone must submit.

Yeah, You have all kinds of choice, that we dictate to you boards and commissions. We stock with people who think like we really do, not like we want you to believe.

Now is the ACA a republican concoction that they passed by "deeming" a different version as passed, and had a republican president sign?

Wow. If you are so foolish to allow yourself to dependent on a government anywhere in the world for a "humanistic and caring" feeling then we feel sorry for you.

What do you think a governments job is? babysitter? nanny? psychologist? life coach?

Liberals are so "humanistic and caring" they will bankrupt the country to force their will on the everyone.

Pjam09

Government is not there to fight wars for right wingers, but to take care their people in need.

Phil,

I do believe everything went down in late 2008, that we had to push for bail out during your Bush presidency.

bman, maybe you should try reading the Constitution...the first and foremost responsibility of the Federal government is to defend the country.

And yes, it is unfortunate everything fell apart in 2008 under a Democratic controlled Congress.

and now you have a republican controlled Congress.

Wake up Grandpa! The Republicans control the House of Representatives. The Democrats control the Senate. Congress is the House and Senate combined.

If you don't understand the difference, you can be deceived pretty easily.

Doing nothing:

hmm

let see:

Health care reform 1

Financial Reform 1

Repeal of DODT 1

Job creation since 2010 1

slow recovery 1

and all with your republicans blocking every move.

So what bills your republican house that creates jobs tried to pass please? ("deficit cutting bills don't count")

My, Bman. How disengenuous of you.

Every bill passed giving a business the ability to create a job as defined by republicans never made it out of a senate committee

Constitution 101. A bill to become law must be passed by the house, the senate and signed by the President. The Senate and President, don't want to hear anything the Republicans have to say. And you can count on it that if the Republicans cannot get 60 votes in the Senate that they will still have a very difficult time changing anything unless some democrats or independents join them.

One of the questions some people have about Robert's statement yesterday.

"It is not the Supreme Court's job to protect the American People from their Political Choices!"

Did he vote with the Democrats to get America to wake up and vote for another party?

Because when you bankrupt the country there will be nothing left for ANYONE. There will be no one to bail us out so when it happens only the rich will survive, you know, Soros, Buffet, Gates, Kerry, Pelosi, Boxer, Gore, and all the other rich liberals.

Phil,

yea your fiscal conservatives, where were during Reagan when he tripled deficit? What about Bush when he increased by 83%? where you under the rock?

And bman, where were you when obama added another $6 trillion...not counting the ACA monstrosity?

Bman - I was a new voter during the Reagan Era. I saw House Majority Leader Tip O'Neale refused to make enough cuts to budget to match the Reagan Tax Cuts. I saw the Democrat refused to eliminate the political pay-off generated departments of Energy and Education.

Do you not understand that since the these two departments were created that our education level began declining and that we became even more energy dependent?

Stop listening to the elite Liberals and Progressives - they have no problem lying about things because they gain power by doing so.

The whole economy will be toast if Obamacare is allowed to remain in effect:

U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011

"By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.

Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.

CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.

As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.

Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.

As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.

CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3

P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.

The supreme called it a kind of tax, not Obama.

Yes they did and it is now a tax and the only way it can be enforced is as a tax because it breaks the Interstate Commerce Rules if it is not a tax, which it looks like it was meant to in first place regardless of what was said that is fine. IF Obama wants not as a tax then it is unconstitutional It is a tax if obama doesn't want it as a tax then he needs to repeal it himself, he caused us to be taxed now.
That is how it was argued before the SCOTUS from the government side.. well the tax hell