Obamacare and the Supreme Court

[Uncle Ted]

Not quite:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...eans-for-you/#

Here is what the magic eight ball told me...

Your coverage:

Right now:
Your insurer cannot set a lifetime limit on benefit payouts. Any annual limits will be phased out by 2014.

Right now I have a $10M limit on lifetime (or at least that is what I was told).

Your insurer cannot cancel your plan after you get sick based on a technicality, or discriminate against your children if they have a pre-existing condition.

You may also be entitled to coverage of preventive services without out-of-pocket charges.

If you are an adult under age 26, and one or both of your parents have a health plan, they may be able to put you on it. If you have adult children you can probably keep them on your plan until they are 26.

So the government is now encouraging more 18-26'ers to become slackers and not get a job.

Starting in 2014:
You will have the option of buying a health plan through your state’s exchange with federal assistance. Based on your income, your annual premiums for that plan would be no more than $11,400. Your maximum out-of-pocket costs for deductibles and co-payments would be capped at 30 percent of the total cost.

Insurers cannot discriminate against you for having a pre-existing condition, and can only vary rates within a narrow range.

So if I pay the $600 dollar tax in 2014 then I am good for the "insurers cannot discriminate against my a pre-existing". Therefore, pay the tax, wait until I have a major health problem, and then sign up for some good insurance to pay for it. I might have to pay a little more but I take the "within a narrow range" that it will be very reasonable. In the mean time I will have more money in my pocket now.

[byu71]

Not quite, but close. Let's say Uncle Ted lives with only his wife (I have no idea if all his kids are moved out) and makes $100,000 a year (I'm sure he makes more). His penalty is around $1,400 a year. That's pennies compared to the cost of a typical health care plan that would be required under ObamaTax. Anyway you slice it, the penalty is the better option if you are currently healthy since you can get coverage at any time.

How do I who has Company insurance do that. Do I decline the coverage and then if I need to see a Dr. or go to the hospital call my HR department and sign up.

If people are actually thinking of doing this, it could become a major mess. I can see young people doing it, but if you get people with health care at work doing it, it could become quite a mess.

[Tone Loc]

Not quite, but close. Let's say Uncle Ted lives with only his wife (I have no idea if all his kids are moved out) and makes $100,000 a year (I'm sure he makes more). His penalty is around $1,400 a year. That's pennies compared to the cost of a typical health care plan that would be required under ObamaTax. Anyway you slice it, the penalty is the better option if you are currently healthy since you can get coverage at any time.

I'm excited! So when does this plan start? I am with Tim, if Obama benefits me then I will vote for him to get his 4 more years, f the rest of you.

[byu71]

I'm excited! So when does this plan start? I am with Tim, if Obama benefits me then I will vote for him to get his 4 more years, f the rest of you.

Yea, me too. After we all jump on, I hope there is enough of them left to f.

[Uncle Ted]

I'm excited! So when does this plan start? I am with Tim, if Obama benefits me then I will vote for him to get his 4 more years, f the rest of you.

The magic eight ball sez 2014. So we have another 18 months of paying health insurance.

[Moliere]

How do I who has Company insurance do that. Do I decline the coverage and then if I need to see a Dr. or go to the hospital call my HR department and sign up.

If people are actually thinking of doing this, it could become a major mess. I can see young people doing it, but if you get people with health care at work doing it, it could become quite a mess.

My company requires that I have health insurance (either through them or a spouse's employer). Most large corporations require this (and provide the insurance) as a way to keep employees healthy. Chances are if you work for a large corporation you won't have the option to opt out unless you can show you have insurance somewhere else.

The real benefit of this law will be those that work for small businesses or are contactors and are currently healthy. Oh, and poor people will benefit since a lot of their health coverage will now be covered.

[Uncle Ted]

Yea, me too. After we all jump on, I hope there is enough of them left to f.

Yes, encourage your kids to have kids. We need more young people to pay for our health care costs before the government goes bankrupt (or it can no longer print the money fast enough).

[Uncle Ted]

The real benefit of this law will be those that work for small businesses or are contactors and are currently healthy. Oh, and poor people will benefit since a lot of their health coverage will now be covered.

Like Ted the contractor.

[DU Ute]

Can he be conservative, have integrity, and be just plain wrong? That's a definite possibility!

LA Ute does it all the time.

[byu71]

Have any of you dealt with the IRS, the Social Security department, the Postal Service, etc. where you had to get a clear understanding on something so you can make a decision. If you have, you know you walk out of there more confused than when you went in.

Now we have this proceeding onward in the health care system. Nice.

There are going to be young people dropping coverage and planning on signing up when they need to. Whoops something happens and they can't sign up. Who pays. What was the intent. Can we sue the hospital for not having them sign up for coverage before treating them. A light just went off in my head. Another good deal for lawyers.

[venkman]

Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito.

So we get the swing vote, but one of the conservatives flip. It's crap like this that give one the impression the game is rigged.

Hope you enjoy the good cocktail parties you'll now be invited to, John.

[Uncle Ted]

My company requires that I have health insurance (either through them or a spouse's employer). Most large corporations require this (and provide the insurance) as a way to keep employees healthy. Chances are if you work for a large corporation you won't have the option to opt out unless you can show you have insurance somewhere else.

You should just have your company pay you on a 1099 and become a contractor. Then you can get this new government "insurance for health insurance" too.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

I think I can reword much of Roberts' opinion: It's not my job to get rid of damaging legislation, my job is to rule on the constitutionality of legislation.

I'm looking forward to the Obama speech where he compliments the Supreme Court for upholding his health care tax.

I really get Roberts' philosophy. His emphasis is on leaving these decisions to the voters. It's certainly commendable and should be what all the Justices strive for. My issue is similar to what Kennedy put in the dissent -- if it's a political question then the legislative branch damn well better be willing to stand up to scrutiny for what they pass. That means if it's a tax, which is never politically popular, then they need to call it a tax and not merely a penalty.

The result of this decision will in fact heap scrutiny on the Democrats. I'm not going to spin this as a win for the Republicans. This was a big piece of legislation passed by the Democrats and it was just upheld. I do however think overturning the entire law may have taken some of the edge off of this election and would have also given Obama something to run against. On the other hand overturning it may have made the Obama presidency appear like an utter waste.

I feel like the end result was going to be a negative regardless of outcome but I felt that upholding it would have been less negative for Obama. Roberts, however, threw everyone for a loop -- he's calling this thing a tax. And we have countless clips of Democrats avoiding calling this thing a tax. So, Roberts has made upholding this legislation more of a negative to the political prospects of Democrats than it otherwise would have been if it had simply been upheld on Commerce Clause grounds.

What are we left with? Democrats lie in order to pass a tax that is going to dramatically increase both the cost of insurance and healthcare. Sounds like a great thing for them just over four months out from the election.

[Northwestcoug]

Roberts teeing up the election season:

Instapundit said it best:

So there you are. The Supreme Court has refused to save us from ourselves. The remedy now will have to be political.

[byu71]

So we get the swing vote, but one of the conservatives flip. It's crap like this that give one the impression the game is rigged.

Hope you enjoy the good cocktail parties you'll now be invited to, John.

Have to wait and see, but the way it was done may be a stroke of genius.

Most everyone in here (my office) was going to vote Romney anyway. However, they have been pretty laid back about it and basically thought Obamacare would be reversed.

One market economist who has been great said things will be fine even with Obama in because the house and the Supreme Court won't let him get away with stuff like Obamacare.

Those folks around here who were pretty laid back are walking around and using some bad langauge. One tightwad claimed he sent Romney a check.