Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Obama Submits Defense of Health Care Law

Steelerman6794
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2012 5:39:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've been on the fence for a while when it comes to this law. Although I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional (considering its current makeup), I'm remain extremely interested in the arguments both sides are making.

The first half of the government's defense talks a lot about how important it is that everyone has insurance, and that most of the uninsured participate in the health care market anyway, with the rest of society bearing the costs.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com...

The brief goes on to give a brief historical precendent (which I didn't find very convincing) for the individual mandate. Finally, the main argument is made that the commerce clause and elastic clause jointly enable the government to enforce the sweeping legislation.

No one denies that the health care law is an expansion of government power. Overall, do you think that it's a just and/or legal expansion?

Again, I'm on the fence, so I'll be really interested in any of your comments.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2012 5:45:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/6/2012 5:39:54 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
I've been on the fence for a while when it comes to this law. Although I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional (considering its current makeup), I'm remain extremely interested in the arguments both sides are making.

The first half of the government's defense talks a lot about how important it is that everyone has insurance, and that most of the uninsured participate in the health care market anyway, with the rest of society bearing the costs.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com...

The brief goes on to give a brief historical precendent (which I didn't find very convincing) for the individual mandate. Finally, the main argument is made that the commerce clause and elastic clause jointly enable the government to enforce the sweeping legislation.

No one denies that the health care law is an expansion of government power. Overall, do you think that it's a just and/or legal expansion?

Again, I'm on the fence, so I'll be really interested in any of your comments.

I favor a universal system, and I think that this system basically benefits insurance companies. More work needs to be done even if the court upholds this.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2012 6:09:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/6/2012 5:45:09 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/6/2012 5:39:54 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
I've been on the fence for a while when it comes to this law. Although I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional (considering its current makeup), I'm remain extremely interested in the arguments both sides are making.

The first half of the government's defense talks a lot about how important it is that everyone has insurance, and that most of the uninsured participate in the health care market anyway, with the rest of society bearing the costs.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com...

The brief goes on to give a brief historical precendent (which I didn't find very convincing) for the individual mandate. Finally, the main argument is made that the commerce clause and elastic clause jointly enable the government to enforce the sweeping legislation.

No one denies that the health care law is an expansion of government power. Overall, do you think that it's a just and/or legal expansion?

Again, I'm on the fence, so I'll be really interested in any of your comments.

I favor a universal system, and I think that this system basically benefits insurance companies. More work needs to be done even if the court upholds this.

Does it benefit the insurance companies when they have to pay for a terminally ill patient for whom the cost of treatment is higher than the cost that they are paying to the company?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2012 6:43:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/6/2012 6:09:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/6/2012 5:45:09 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/6/2012 5:39:54 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
I've been on the fence for a while when it comes to this law. Although I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional (considering its current makeup), I'm remain extremely interested in the arguments both sides are making.

The first half of the government's defense talks a lot about how important it is that everyone has insurance, and that most of the uninsured participate in the health care market anyway, with the rest of society bearing the costs.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com...

The brief goes on to give a brief historical precendent (which I didn't find very convincing) for the individual mandate. Finally, the main argument is made that the commerce clause and elastic clause jointly enable the government to enforce the sweeping legislation.

No one denies that the health care law is an expansion of government power. Overall, do you think that it's a just and/or legal expansion?

Again, I'm on the fence, so I'll be really interested in any of your comments.

I favor a universal system, and I think that this system basically benefits insurance companies. More work needs to be done even if the court upholds this.

Does it benefit the insurance companies when they have to pay for a terminally ill patient for whom the cost of treatment is higher than the cost that they are paying to the company?

Forcing everyone to purchase the mandate more than convers these costs; that was one of Obama's key reasons for supporting the bill. Why do you think that insurance companies are in favor of the bill?