Shannon 2


About the author

Jamie Moses

Jamie Moses founded Artvoice in 1990

13 Comments

Click here to post a comment
  • Your average American will mindlessly oppose this idea if it means that their federal taxes will go up by even one cent.  Never mind that it will result in a massive state and county tax savings (through the abolition of Medicaid), or that salaries will go up –  God forbid we pay more taxes.

  • My prediction: the winner today wins the presidential election. Americans love rooting for (and voting for) the guy they already think is going to win.

  • The politicized, partisan, conservative-activist SCOTUS has given the liberal President quite a week!

  • ” politicized, partisan, conservative-activist Supreme Court”

    Well at least you can STFU with that talking point now, huh?

    Also, massive tax increase by Obama. Thanks O. At least the court upheld it on the right merit – that it’s a tax, period.

    • To your first point, no, I won’t STFU about that talking point. Any court with Scalia, Thomas and Alito on it is politicized, partisan, and conservative-activist. Unless you’re a huge fan of, e.g., Kelo v. New London or Citizens United. 

      To your second point, LULZ. It’s not a “huge tax”. It’s a mandate that you have health insurance. It’s not like you’re being asked to buy super-more health insurance on top of what you may already have. And if you don’t have it, you’ll have much easier and cheaper access to health insurance. And if you choose not to have any at all, then you’ll be assessed a fine, a tax, whatever you want to call it. 

      Because the opponents of this plan aren’t just misguided and wrong (see discussion, supra) but ignorant of the status quo.  

      Right now, you and I (and everybody) are taxed to help pay for uninsured people’s emergency room visits. ERs can’t turn people away, and the uninsured use them for primary care.  Those hospitals seek reimbursement for the cost of providing those services through two Federal Programs, Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) and Upper Payment Limit (UPL)–that require a 50% local share match. So…instead of forcing the cost of health care provision onto the people who don’t have insurance, you (a person with insurance) are paying for them to get health care with both your federal and county tax dollars. 

      Choice is clear…do you want the person without health care to be taxed…or do you want to continue to be taxed because they don’t have health care?

      In the olden days, before Obama made the right wing go fucking numbnuts insane, “personal responsibility” was a conservative talking point.  Now it’s soshulizm. 

    • You do realize that your taxes are lower under the Obama administration, than they’ve been in over half a century, right?

  • OK,

    I understand that the Republican Governors strategy is they are going to refuse to enforce it.  What a novel idea I wonder where that got it from.

  • How could these local “news” outlets have gotten this so wrong right from the start of todays decision? Literally within a minute of the 1003 am release, this appeared on the SCOTUSBLOG (www.scotusblog.com/  sponsored by bloomberg Law)
    “The bottom line: the entire ACA is upheld, with the exception that the federal government’s power to terminate states’ Medicaid funds is narrowly read.”What followed over the next 5 minutes was a detailed analysis into the weeds of the ruling including a review of the dissenting views.Maybe an important local and national story is awaiting the uncovering of whom supplied the locals with the headlines- cause it was clearly not the Supreme Court.

  •  Since Congressmen/women were prominently featured with their opinions, let’s her from a Congressman who understands economics, freedom and happens to be a doctor.

    “I strongly disagree with today’s decision by the Supreme Court, but I
    am not surprised. The Court has a dismal record when it comes to
    protecting liberty against unconstitutional excesses by Congress.

    “Today we should remember that virtually everything government does
    is a ‘mandate.’ The issue is not whether Congress can compel commerce by
    forcing you to buy insurance,  or simply compel you to pay a tax if you
    don’t.  The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government
    force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of  a free
    society should be the rejection of force. In a free society, therefore,
    individuals could opt out of “Obamacare” without paying a government
    tribute.

    “Those of us in Congress who believe in individual liberty must work
    tirelessly to repeal this national health care law and reduce federal
    involvement in healthcare generally. Obamacare can only increase third
    party interference in the doctor-patient relationship, increase costs,
    and reduce the quality of care. Only free market medicine can restore
    the critical independence of doctors, reduce costs through real
    competition and price sensitivity, and eliminate enormous paperwork
    burdens. Americans will opt out of Obamacare with or without Congress,
    but we can seize the opportunity today by crafting the legal framework
    to allow them to do so.” – Ron Paul

    • Yeah, because our free market system of health care only costs twice as much as any other civilized country. Best part is we rank way behind in just about every measure of health and wellness, gotta be proud of that.  Ron Paul is an interesting guy, I even agree with him on some issues but he is still like your crazy old uncle, fun to hang out with but you wouldn’t really want him in charge.

    • Ron Paul would repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And, also too…the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yeah, he’s just the leader we need…for 1956.