Healthcare Mandate Struck Down

Posted by Tina

An Atlanta court has ruled against the federal mandate to purchase healthcare insurance. This represents another win on the long road to the Supreme Court for those who think Obamacare should be scrapped.

Washington Post

A federal appeals court struck down a central provision of the 2010 health-care law Friday, ruling that Congress overstepped its authority by requiring virtually all Americans to obtain health insurance.

The divided three-judge panel from the U. S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta is the first appellate court to rule against any portion of the statute. The decision marks a significant victory for the 26 Republican attorneys general and governors who challenged the health-care law on behalf of their states.

That’s two in one day!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Healthcare Mandate Struck Down

  1. Quentin Colgan says:

    Not to worry!
    We’ll just get rid of the need for insurance!
    THIS is precisely how Obama will get us to single payer medicine. He planned this one way back.
    Obama know that insurance does NOT make people well, health care does. He has never wanted to waste money fattening the insurance companies’ profits–he is the banker’s man, after all.
    As mentioned often here at Post_Scripts, the Democrats are way better at the game than the Republicans–having double-crossed them repeatedly. This is just one more example of how the baggerz have aided and abetted Obama without even knowing it!
    All part of the how . . .

  2. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: “This is just one more example of how the baggerz have aided and abetted Obama without even knowing it!”

    Interesting take there Quentin. A court strikes down a provision in the health care law and it is just one more example of how Obama is taking advantage of members of the stupid Tea party who are foolishly aiding and abetting his true cause. Dang those Tea party folks sooooooo dumb!

    On this we can agree, no members of the Tea party, contributors to Post Scripts, or people who comment (like me) ever saw that coming.

    Well, maybe some did.

    A tip of the hat to you, sir.

  3. Tina says:

    Obama will not take us to single payer…it would be single payer hell.

    Obama is an incompetent radical progressive killer of the American dream, freedom, and choice; a man who seeks to enrich himself by using others and at the expense of others. He is a man who profits without doing a thing to EARN it.

    An insurance policy is a product. Americans would have many choices if government would change regulations to invite competition and remove restrictions on the types of policies made available. Freedom and choice would be preserved and costs would come down.

    Government single payer is an oppressive, unavoidable, single option that will suck up massive amounts of money from the people and deliver an inferior product leaving the people with no other option.

    It’s insane to ruin the entire system to try to accomodate the few. There are better ways to see that health care costs are affordable and can be delivered to anyone who needs it.

  4. Gregory says:

    I want to know what is called the new regulations to get rid of health insurance. What are content contained in these regulations? Why should the rules be held like that? And how effective are the rules of health insurance for everyone?

  5. Tina says:

    Gregory thank you for asking. Obmamacare doesn’t get rid of health insurance but it does give government an advantage that will gradually move people away from private plans causing them to go out of business and dissappear.

    The bill is very long and very complex. Legal people are still going through it in an attempt to know how to implement it and determine its legal implications. You can read a summary of the bill here:

    http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill04.pdf

    Other than that I would suggest a few articles. The following article talks about language in Obamacare that guts Medicare Advantage, a program that contains free market principles and has helped to keep costs down for those seniors who choose it:

    http://netrightdaily.com/2011/06/obamacare-taking-the-%e2%80%98advantage%e2%80%99-out-of-medicare-advantage/

    …this very sensible and worthwhile program is right in ObamaCares bulls-eye, slated for $145 Billion in cuts over the next ten years, specifically designed to lower MAs (Medicare Advantage) attractiveness to consumers and to effectively force them back into traditional Medicare. Its own actuaries predict that ObamaCares changes will cut in half the number of MA enrollees by 2017.

    The language in Obamacare that establishes insurance exchanges is another area of concern. An article in Human Events will help to explain how this language will eventually lead to a single payer, government system and ruin our health care by limiting services and forcing costs up.

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39246

    The main feature of the California HBE (insurance exchange) allows the exchange governing board to meet in secret and determine not only which insurance companies can participate and what must be covered, but also what they can charge.

    Exchange employees would not be limited by Civil Service pay rates and personnel decisions would also be secret. The exchange would operate independent from either legislative oversight or the governor’s authority.

    The main goal of this California HBE is to impose government price controls on insurance while mandating the expanded coverage that policies must provide.

    Laws encourage or discourage behaviors. Obamacare is written in a way that encourages businesses to drop insurance coverage. It is written in such a way as to discourage competition that would keep costs down. It is written to herd people into a government, single payer system over time.

    Democrat Representative Jon Conyers admitted that the law was written as a platform for a single payer system:

    http://www.youdecidepolitics.com/2011/03/15/democrats-obamacare-is-the-platform-for-single-payer/

    During a newsmakers program at the National Press Club on Monday, Conyers said that after discussing the issue with Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D.-Ohio) he voted for the health-care law because he saw it as a necessary platform for building toward a single-payer health-care system in the United States.

    We were promised that Obamacare would bring costs down and that we could keep our insurance and our doctors. Since Obamacare was passed the following has occurred as reported in newspapers across the nation:

    “The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead.”

    “In anticipation of the law that will take effect this Thursday, insurers in at least 4 states announced that they would be dropping the child only type coverage… WellPoint and CoventryOne, two of the nations largest insurers, announced that the individual coverage for the children would be discontinued in California, Colorado, Ohio and Missouri.”

    “On Dec. 1, Medicare physician fees will decrease by more than 24 percent, followed by another decrease of more than 6 percent on Jan. 1. These drastic fee cuts will force many Connecticut physicians either to accept no new Medicare patients or to drop out of the Medicare program entirely, with major implications for Connecticut seniors.”

    …it creates a problem for the city’s mental health-care providers, who said this week that they are faced with serving thousands of new clients they are not prepared to manage… The complaint by Hall and local mental health providers echoes general concerns about the health-care overhaul raised by hospitals, doctors, nurses and their advocates nationwide who say the mammoth program is being built on a network that cannot support it.”

    CT: Anthem Approved For Health Rate Hikes As High As 47 Percent.

    FL: Blue Cross Blue Shield: Rates Up 10% in 8 Months. Excerpt: “President Obama told us that under his plan, health insurance premiums would go down. I think he forgot to tell Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida.”

    NC: Celtic: Half of 18% Premium Increase Due to ObamaCare.

    NY: Insurance for New York City small businesses rise as much as 74% in 2011. Excerpt: “[The company CFO] wants to know why [the] health care provider, GHI, is asking state regulators for permission to hike insurance premiums by 50% to 74%. …The only solution he sees to rising rates is maintaining his current staff of 10 employees, instead of expandingwhich does nothing to reduce the city’s 9.4% unemployment rate.”

    OR: Regence BlueCross BlueShield: Expect Up to 17% Rate Hikes.

    WI: Celtic Insurance Premiums To Rise 18%.

    This is the kind of thing that has happened to private insurers and health centers across America in just the first year since the bill passed. The trend is away from private sector options and toward rising prices. Expect high taxes, expensive healthcare, shortages of doctors, and rationing:

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/27/the-obamacare-rationing-is-beginning/

    The government isnt going to say, We wont treat you for condition X the public outcry would be too great. No, they have learned from other nations that have government health care that that would mean disaster. What they do is much more subtle they simply limit options in the hope that patients wont realize that care is being rationed.

    For most diseases, there are several options for treatment and the treatment regimen is based upon the individual patients history and advice from their doctor. If the government refuses to pay for a particular type of treatment, that arrow is simply removed from the doctors quiver and the patient will most likely never be made aware of it. …

    …Breast cancer patients who rely on a drug called Avastin will soon have their Medicare and potentially their insurance coverage yanked for the drug thanks to an FDA campaign to de-label the drug. Its not about safety or effectiveness; it about cost. The drug, which can cost $80,000 a year, will still be available if you are rich enough to afford it. Everyone else will be out of luck. In most cases, doctors simply wont make patients aware of it because its not covered by their health insurance. Doctors tend to only work from the available options that a patients insurance covers to bring up others would be cruel and offer an unattainable false hope.

    This is a very bad bill and a very bad way to deliver healthcare and healthcare insurance to our citizens. There are better ways to tackle problems like pre-existing conditions, high premiums, and the uninsured. Market based, private sector solutions that force competition and encourage participation would work to bring costs down while opening up choices for our citizens.

  6. Any debate about premiums eventually comes to a central question: How much insurers should spend in medical care for every dollar they collect in premiums known in the industry as “medical-loss ratio.” Insurers are caught between investors, who want to see a low percentage spent on medical expenses, and federal reform, which will require insurers next year to spend 80 percent of premium revenue on medical expenses in the individual market.

Comments are closed.