BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

X ~ Man

On 8/13/11 1:38 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 09:18:04 -0600,
wrote:

On 12/08/2011 8:15 PM, TopBassDog wrote:
Speaking of good court decisions, Herr Krause. It is comforting to
know that there are a few jurists that follow your Constitutional
guidelines.
And one cut and paste deserves another, eh?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5180930.story

By David G. Savage and Noam N. Levey, Washington Bureau

August 13, 2011
Reporting from Washington—

A federal appeals court struck down a pillar of President Obama's
national healthcare law, ruling Congress does not have the power to
require all Americans to buy insurance and setting the stage for a
Supreme Court decision ahead of the 2012 election.

The 2-1 decision is a victory for Republican leaders in 26 states who
challenged the law last year, testing whether the signature
accomplishment of Obama's presidency would stand.

The Atlanta-based judges echoed the complaint that the mandate
represents an "unprecedented" expansion of federal power.

"The individual mandate is breathtaking in its expansive scope," two
judges of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in their 207-page
majority opinion.

Even during the Great Depression or World War II, "Congress never
sought to require the purchase of wheat or war bonds, force a higher
savings rate or greater consumption of American goods," they observed.
Though Congress may regulate those who buy insurance, it may not
regulate those who "have not entered the insurance market and have no
intention of doing so," they said.

Conversely, other judges have upheld the law. In June, the Obama
administration prevailed before the federal appellate court in
Cincinnati, which in a split opinion ruled that the mandate
represented a constitutional exercise of Congress' authority to
regulate commerce.

About 50 million Americans lack basic health insurance. As a result,
hospitals and taxpayers are forced to pay about $43 billion a year to
cover the costs of those who are treated but cannot pay.

Many healthcare experts believe an insurance mandate is crucial not
only to controlling this cost shift but also to guaranteeing that all
Americans can get insurance, a right provided by the law. Without such
a requirement, they argue, consumers would be able to wait until they
were sick to buy insurance. That in turn would push up premiums.

However, the mandate galvanized GOP opposition to the law and helped
fuel the "tea party" movement.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the ruling "only
strengthens and adds more momentum to the efforts of those of us who
are working to repeal."

The White House, meanwhile, minimized the opinion, citing the divided
rulings by multiple federal courts around the country.

"Today's ruling is one of many decisions on the Affordable Care Act
that we will see in the weeks and months ahead," Obama aide Stephanie
Cutter wrote in a blog posting.

The ruling was not a total victory for the challengers. The appeals
court rejected the states' claim that Congress went too far by
expanding the Medicaid program for low-income Americans. The judges
also agreed the rest of the healthcare law could stand, even if the
insurance mandate is struck down.

The Atlanta-based court has a conservative reputation and had been
seen as the best forum for those challenging the law. The majority was
made up of Chief Judge Joel Dubina, an appointee of President George
H.W. Bush, and Judge Frank Hull, a female appointee of President
Clinton. The dissenter, Judge Stanley Marcus, was also a Clinton
appointee.

In dissent, Marcus said judges have a duty to act with "caution,
restraint and great humility" and uphold the laws enacted by the
elected representatives.

"At bottom, Congress rationally concluded that the uninsured's
consumption of healthcare services shifts enormous costs unto others …
and the individual mandate directly addresses this cost-shifting
problem," said Marcus in dissent.

The administration can appeal Friday's decision directly to the
Supreme Court. If an appeal petition is filed in the fall, the
justices are likely to hear the case early next year and rule by late
June.

Striking down the mandate could have dramatic consequences if
insurance premiums surge, as many experts fear.

That could put more pressure on the federal treasury because millions
of Americans are expected to qualify for federal subsidies starting in
2014 to help them buy insurance.

Ballooning subsidy costs could increase pressure to cut back other
healthcare initiatives in the law, including the expansion of state
Medicaid programs for low-income Americans.

Eliminating the mandate would probably have less impact on other parts
of the healthcare overhaul, including portions of the law designed to
make Medicare more efficient and to improve the quality of care that
hospitals and doctors provide.

In another ruling Friday, three judges of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court
of Appeals rejected a challenge to the insurance mandate brought by
former state legislator Steven Baldwin and the Pacific Justice
Institute, ruling they had no standing to sue.

Times staff writer Carol J. Williams in Los Angeles contributed to
this report.

Obomber is probably furious. Wonder if his lawyer buddy on the supreme
court will circumvent the constitution?

You're a racist little moron and a dim wit.

My wife and have to pay tens of thousands of dollars in income taxes to
pay for wars we don't support and to subsidize tax breaks for
corporations that export American jobs overseas...

We have to pay about $4000 a year in local property taxes to send other
peoples' kids to school...

But the courts say I can go without medical insurance, which forces
other people to pay even more than they otherwise would in order to
cover the costs of my unwillingness to pay for health insurance.

America…charting the course of its own failure.

--
Don't forget to leave a bit of beef for rec.boat's right-wing
conservatrashers and ID spoofers to feed upon. The more they feed, the
quicker rec.boats will fall into the black hole of cyberspace and disappear.