Obama care passes. Any opinions? Lawyers reading it over

[LedZeppfan77]

I suppose this will depend on each of our individual situations? I have not yet made heads or tails of it but have emailed a lawyer to try and post something that may give the average person an idea of what this means.

[Anjin-san]

We are screwed.

[Glyn]

According to ABC:

The court's ruling means:

• Americans have to buy health insurance or pay a tax
  
• Individuals under 26 can get health insurance under their parents' plan
  
• People on Medicare can get free mammograms
  
• People with a pre-existing condition can get health insurance
  
• Insurance companies can't deny people coverage even if they get sick and make a mistake on their health insurance application
  

The above information may not be correct, I am not a lawyer and have not actually read all of the court's statement. From what I understand they cannot call it a "penalty" for not having insurance, instead they will be calling it a "tax." I don't know if we are screwed, the part about coverage for pre existing conditions sounds good. The problems may come in the taxes for businesses though. I know of at least one company that will go bankrupt because they can't afford it.

[TypeO]

Biggest problem is it's not sustainable.

It's like a government Ponzi scheme - you need more and more people paying in.

What needs to happen is lower the cost of medical care, not get more people to pay for it.

Tort reform is the best way to lower medical care costs across the board.

The amount of unnecessary testing and procedures that are performed is staggering.

And the vast majority of it is to defend against malpractice suits.

In addition, the government could create tax breaks for Doctors and people in the medical field - all the way down to assistants office staff - and then require the doctors in turn reduce their fees by an equal amount to the tax breaks they receive, or risk losing the tax advantage.

The way the government keeps expanding reminds me of trying to build a more powerful engine.

Look, we now have a 100,000 horsepower engine!

Only problem is, it weighs so much that the power-to-weight ratio makes it slower than a 5 horsepower scooter.

[Anjin-san]

Read it and weep:http://bostonherald.com/news/document.bg?f=misc/SupCoHealthCare11-393c3a2.pdf&h=Supreme%20Court%20deciosion%20on%20health%20care%20reform&p=&k=bh

[tmtomh]

I'm surprised - and greatly relieved - that it was upheld.

[Sagittarius Rising]

Biggest problem is it's not sustainable.

It's like a government Ponzi scheme - you need more and more people paying in.

What needs to happen is lower the cost of medical care, not get more people to pay for it.

Tort reform is the best way to lower medical care costs across the board.

The amount of unnecessary testing and procedures that are performed is staggering.

And the vast majority of it is to defend against malpractice suits.

In addition, the government could create tax breaks for Doctors and people in the medical field - all the way down to assistants office staff - and then require the doctors in turn reduce their fees by an equal amount to the tax breaks they receive, or risk losing the tax advantage.

The way the government keeps expanding reminds me of trying to build a more powerful engine.

Look, we now have a 100,000 horsepower engine!

Only problem is, it weighs so much that the power-to-weight ratio makes it slower than a 5 horsepower scooter.

Tort reform is not the answer and the whole malpractice angle is a red herring. Malpractice cost amounts to about 1% of overall health care costs, tort reform would only lower medical standards and reduce doctors liability. Maybe you think that's a great idea however you may change your mind the next time you or a loved one are under the knife. Sounds strange coming from me, a board certified and licensed clinical psychologist who has to pay malpractice insurance. Also, as a member of the greater health care community, I am 100% for ACA and feel it is long overdue. I am sick and tired that Americans are denied health coverage for ANY reason. We are the only first world nation without universal health care and that fact makes me ashamed to say the least. All I can say is this, if the northern European countries have it, and have the best health care in the world as well, and have the worlds strongest economy's too boot all I can say is they must be doing something right. Regardless of your position this fact cannot be denied.

[cryingbluerain]

[GeorgeC]

Here in Canada we have a state-funded health care system. It's not terribly efficient and we have higher tax rates than in the US, but we are certainly "free" in every serious social and political sense. If, Zeppelin forbid, I or a loved one requires serious medical attention I don't worry that I'll go bankrupt while being cured.

If Americans want to shave a few billions off of their national budget deficit (and thereby stave off bankruptcy, and thus ensure future freedom), they should lobby their legislators to:

1. End the government's war on recreational drug use, notably cannabis

2. Cut back on defence spending to a point where you can only fight one World War at a time

3. Quit subsidizing mammoth oil companies that are profitable enough already

4. End the crackdown on law-abiding workers and their families who are not legal citizens

[TypeO]

Tort reform is not the answer and the whole malpractice angle is a red herring. Malpractice cost amounts to about 1% of overall health care costs, tort reform would only lower medical standards and reduce doctors liability. Maybe you think that's a great idea however you may change your mind the next time you or a loved one are under the knife. Sounds strange coming from me, a board certified and licensed clinical psychologist who has to pay malpractice insurance. Also, as a member of the greater health care community, I am 100% for ACA and feel it is long overdue. I am sick and tired that Americans are denied health coverage for ANY reason. We are the only first world nation without universal health care and that fact makes me ashamed to say the least. All I can say is this, if the northern European countries have it, and have the best health care in the world as well, and have the worlds strongest economy's too boot all I can say is they must be doing something right. Regardless of your position this fact cannot be denied.

Red herring fail.

Re-read my comment.

You missed the issue.

I didn't say malpractice costs was the problem.

It's the unnecessary testing and procedures that are performed to AVOID malpractice liability.

The amount of unnecessary testing and procedures that are performed is staggering.

And the vast majority of it is to defend against malpractice suits.

About 3 years ago my wife had Pericarditis, inflammation, fluid and swelling around in the sac around the heart.

The doctor sent her for a test he bluntly admitted would not reveal anything useful, but it was necessary before he could recommend the procedure she actually needed.

But if he skipped the unnecessary procedure, he would be held liable in the event of a lawsuit.

Worst of all, many of these needless procedures are only in place because of successful malpractice lawsuits which created a precedent.

And it would NOT lower medical standards.

You want to portray doctors as hacks who will do whatever they can get away with doing or avoid doing.

That's bullshit.

That same 1% you quoted about malpractice pretty much identifies the amount of incompetent doctors by extrapolation.

The overwhelming majority of doctors do the right thing, do their very best, and consider each and every patient as important as the next.

They are the same doctors whether we have Obamacare or not.

With Obamacare you portray them as part of a huge successful program.

Without Obamacare they're untrustworthy hacks doing the bare minimum.

Sorry, you can't have it both ways, Sag.

All I can say is this, if the northern European countries have it, and have the best health care in the world as well, and have the worlds strongest economy's too boot all I can say is they must be doing something right.

Which Europe is that?

Because the Europe in THIS world is collapsing in on itself, trying to prevent one domino after another from falling.

Or, more fittingly, much like the little Dutch boy trying to stick fingers in ever-increasing holes in dykes.

[tmtomh]

The Fourth Reich's days are numbered.

Really dude?

[tmtomh]

Here in Canada we have a state-funded health care system. It's not terribly efficient and we have higher tax rates than in the US, but we are certainly "free" in every serious social and political sense. If, Zeppelin forbid, I or a loved one requires serious medical attention I don't worry that I'll go bankrupt while being cured.

If Americans want to shave a few billions off of their national budget deficit (and thereby stave off bankruptcy, and thus ensure future freedom), they should lobby their legislators to:

1. End the government's war on recreational drug use, notably cannabis

2. Cut back on defence spending to a point where you can only fight one World War at a time

3. Quit subsidizing mammoth oil companies that are profitable enough already

4. End the crackdown on law-abiding workers and their families who are not legal citizens

+1 (though I don't live in Canada)

[Sagittarius Rising]

Oh yeah, healthcare for everyone is the problem. It's not like the defense budget of two unecessary wars have any impact. That's right, let's keep buying those piece of shit F-35's at $177 mil per plane even though an old ass F-16 will fly circles around it. And of course let's build some more aircraft carriers, we only have 11 now compared to 0 every other non-Nato nation has. How about more subs to fight what??? Homicidal wales??? I say we cut the defensce budget by at least 60%, bring them home from Afghanistan now (along with most other foreign bases), and we can easily afford free health care and higher education through college for all. Now that sounds like a great idea to me!

Ps. Why is funding the military-industrial complex not considered corporate socialism, however health care for all is? I guess if it takes lives it is capitalism but if it saves lives that must be socialism.

[Anjin-san]

Oh yeah, healthcare for everyone is the problem. It's not like the defense budget of two unecessary wars have any impact. That's right, let's keep buying those piece of shit F-35's at $177 mil per plane even though an old ass F-16 will fly circles around it. And of course let's build some more aircraft carriers, we only have 11 now compared to 0 every other non-Nato nation has. How about more subs to fight what??? Homicidal wales??? I say we cut the defensce budget by at least 60%, bring them home from Afghanistan now (along with most other foreign bases), and we can easily afford free health care and higher education through college for all. Now that sounds like a great idea to me!

Ps. Why is funding the military-industrial complex not considered corporate socialism, however health care for all is? I guess if it takes lives it is capitalism but if it saves lives that must be socialism.

[Sagittarius Rising]

Red herring fail.

Re-read my comment.

You missed the issue.

I didn't say malpractice costs was the problem.

It's the unnecessary testing and procedures that are performed to AVOID malpractice liability.

About 3 years ago my wife had Pericarditis, inflammation, fluid and swelling around in the sac around the heart.

The doctor sent her for a test he bluntly admitted would not reveal anything useful, but it was necessary before he could recommend the procedure she actually needed.

But if he skipped the unnecessary procedure, he would be held liable in the event of a lawsuit.

Worst of all, many of these needless procedures are only in place because of successful malpractice lawsuits which created a precedent.

And it would NOT lower medical standards.

You want to portray doctors as hacks who will do whatever they can get away with doing or avoid doing.

That's bullshit.

That same 1% you quoted about malpractice pretty much identifies the amount of incompetent doctors by extrapolation.

The overwhelming majority of doctors do the right thing, do their very best, and consider each and every patient as important as the next.

They are the same doctors whether we have Obamacare or not.

With Obamacare you portray them as part of a huge successful program.

Without Obamacare they're untrustworthy hacks doing the bare minimum.

Sorry, you can't have it both ways, Sag.

Which Europe is that?

Because the Europe in THIS world is collapsing in on itself, trying to prevent one domino after another from falling.

Or, more fittingly, much like the little Dutch boy trying to stick fingers in ever-increasing holes in dykes.

Man, you have no clue to what you are talking about. Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway...they are doing swimmingly, it is the mediterranean countries which are doing poorly. I travel all over the world and I have experienced the different systems so please don't tell me what is fact, I am in the health care industry and I deal with doctors daily, do you? In regards to your unecessary tests, that has little to do with malpractice and everything to do with screwing the system out of money as much as possible. And the doctors themselves, about 50 / 50, most are primarily motivated by the money and place their patients behind that. If you only heard what doctors say about their patients or what goes on in operating rooms. Let's just say the conversations make Gray's Anatomy look like a tea party.

Try doing some research instead of posting nonsense propaganda, especially when the person you are debating is in the industry.

[Anjin-san]

My God your full of shit!

[Sagittarius Rising]

Typical Anjin, you cannot come up with a rational argument therefore you post this. How enlightened you are.

[Sagittarius Rising]

My God your full of shit!

And this..very intelligent response. You should join the Harvard Debating Team.

[Anjin-san]

And this..very intelligent response. You should join the Harvard Debating Team.

Shall I,you mean like Liz Warren?

Shall I point out you carp point by point?

[Jahfin]

Nice carp right here:

[Mudslider]

It's going to cost you!!

Obama is a socialist and he took one giant step today in proving that. Freedom in America lost a battle today, but the war is far from over. More citizens were against mandated government care than for it. Liberals for it have no clue to whats going on, nor aware of the cost involved. Americans will now be taxed heavier than ever before, big business, who do most for job creation, will not be able to hire nearly as much because they are being taxed and regulated to the hilt. Obama has not created one job since being president and this law will continue to hurt job growth. Medicaid, including food stamps will increase dramatically as the eligibility requirements are being reworked so millions more will qualify....who pays for that? You and I!!! Obama has been known as the entitlement president and this proves it. Oh, don't forget all the illegal immigrants Obama is letting in....you will be paying their shelter, food and healthcare to. They even get reduced college education!! Socialism has never worked - take a good look at many countries in Europe. Obamae is simply out to attack freedom.

Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, will not sit well with the private insurance carriers who will stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.

The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.

Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.

The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.

Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.

What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.

Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?

What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.

In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.

I look for Obama's Socialist Healthcare to go one of two ways:

(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.

Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.

(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.

(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).

The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.

And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Whose on first?"

Another take:

Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.

Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.

For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."

I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.

Maybe what we need to do here is vote for a free America come November. What a novel idea! Lets make this clown a 1-term president and take America back.

[Sagittarius Rising]

Shall I,you mean like Liz Warren?

Shall I point out you carp point by point?

Please do, though I prefer trout to carp, to each their own. Though unless you are a doctor (like me) or an insurance company executive you are the one who is ignorant of the facts. I am in the industry. It would be like me going to my mechanic and telling him his business or telling him he does not know his job even though I am not a mechanic myself. But go ahead, be my guest.

[Mudslider]

I'm surprised - and greatly relieved - that it was upheld.

You are simply uneducated. Do you have a clue to what this means?

[Anjin-san]

Tort reform is not the answer and the whole malpractice angle is a red herring. Malpractice cost amounts to about 1% of overall health care costs, tort reform would only lower medical standards and reduce doctors liability.

Now where did you get that statistic from?Costs staying the same or rising?Do pass that on to your patients?

I am sick and tired that Americans are denied health coverage for ANY reason.

The SCOTUS ruling doesn't deal with that,....

We are the only first world nation without universal health care and that fact makes me ashamed to say the least. All I can say is this, if the northern European countries have it, and have the best health care in the world as well, and have the worlds strongest economy's too boot all I can say is they must be doing something right.

What?They have the best? News to me and one more thing it is financially breaking their backs.

higher education through college for all.

Bit off-topic,you do realize that 1 trillion in student loans are due?

especially when the person you are debating is in the industry.

You say and I say, I am Gandalf the grey,.....

Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the

mandate must make a “hared responsibility payment” to the Federal Government. §5000A((1). The Act provides that this “penalty”

will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual’s taxes, and “shall be assessed and collected in the same manner” as tax

penalties. §§5000A©, (g)(1).

Another tax,great!

[tmtomh]

Oh yeah, healthcare for everyone is the problem. It's not like the defense budget of two unecessary wars have any impact. That's right, let's keep buying those piece of shit F-35's at $177 mil per plane even though an old ass F-16 will fly circles around it. And of course let's build some more aircraft carriers, we only have 11 now compared to 0 every other non-Nato nation has. How about more subs to fight what??? Homicidal wales??? I say we cut the defensce budget by at least 60%, bring them home from Afghanistan now (along with most other foreign bases), and we can easily afford free health care and higher education through college for all. Now that sounds like a great idea to me!

Ps. Why is funding the military-industrial complex not considered corporate socialism, however health care for all is? I guess if it takes lives it is capitalism but if it saves lives that must be socialism.

Not totally with you on some of your numbers (60% cut in defense budget), but overall I agree with you.