Quantcast

Is the Supreme Court's delay in healthcare decision a good sign for Obama?

flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 21:58:09
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Seems to me that if it was a slam dunk unconstitutionality, the decision would have been forthcoming right away.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Muriel 2012/06/24 23:11:16
    Undecided
    Muriel
    I don't think so.
  • gr8punkin 2012/06/22 12:53:53
    No
    gr8punkin
    If it was an up down vote then I think it would have come out right away, but since they have to decide whether to let it stand, take out the individual mandate, or strike it down entirely the decision process is much harder. I also think that delay bodes poorly for the president, and may be an indicator that the justices are trying to determine how much to strike down.
  • ray 2012/06/22 11:34:17
    Undecided
    ray
    Seems more like they are waiting for the end of the session , so the can announce their decision at the last possible moment and get out of Dodge to avoid the backwash.
  • Don Leuty 2012/06/22 08:49:45
    No
    Don Leuty
    +2
    Just business as usual. It takes time to write and publish opinions. Must be really nerve-wracking when one insults the judges before they even here the case. And B0 is supposed to be Harvard Law?!?
  • JanHopkins 2012/06/22 06:32:25
    Undecided
    JanHopkins
    How many pages of the new healthcare law do they have to read, assimilate and define? If congress wasn't able to do it in a years time perhaps we should give the Supreme Court a few weeks to work on it.
  • Cognito22 2012/06/22 02:04:00
    No
    Cognito22
    +2
    I'm looking forward to reading their reasoning for declaring it unconstitutional.
  • apachehellfire65 2012/06/22 01:02:39
    No
    apachehellfire65
    +3
    if there had been no claim then they would have ruled on it quickly.or at least as quickly as they go.the longer they take the more his anus should pucker. the last thing he wants is anyone taking a long hard look at this.
  • Cognito22 apacheh... 2012/06/22 01:54:12
    Cognito22
    +2
    You have a way with words. LOL
  • Mark In Irvine 2012/06/22 00:47:28
    Undecided
    Mark In Irvine
    +1
    I'm not sure ... informed observers seem to think that many parts, if not all, of the ACA will be upheld ... this is predicted to be VERY SIGNIFICANT "commerce clause" decision - i'd bet that the justices (and their clerks) are still writing their opinions ...
  • ETpro 2012/06/22 00:41:49
    Undecided
    ETpro
    +1
    SCOTUS prediction is definitely not my strong suite.
  • Mel the Witch POTL PWCM~JLA 2012/06/21 22:26:43
    No
    Mel the Witch POTL PWCM~JLA
    +6
    No, I think it means the "Bama" is Screwed
  • darcie lamar 2012/06/21 22:24:20
    No
    darcie lamar
    +5
    Friday afternoon release. LOL. Happens all to often to take the rage out of those who will oppose the decision. Either way, Obama loses.
    !. Obama supporters are getting exclusions - this will become another lawsuit that will delay the implementation of forcing some to pay, others to slide by.
    2. There are so many people on welfare that won't pay the forced cost. The system Obama has tried to implement ( and no one read) will be bankrupt in this economy.
    I am a beliver in reform of the HCS. It would be great to have affordable access for people, but this Obamacare is not the answer.
  • darcie ... darcie ... 2012/06/21 22:32:55
    darcie lamar
    +3
    Obama Administration Grants Health Care Waivers to Big Companies, Unions


    Published October 08, 2010

    FoxNews.com

    McDonalds got a break Thursday -- as did the 351,000 members of the United Federation of Teachers -- when the federal government gave waivers to high-profile companies and organizations letting them opt out of a key mandate in the new health care law.

    The one-year waiver to 30 employers, insurers and union plans, covers about 1 million people and allows the groups to maintain minimal coverage below the new law's standards.

    Administration officials defend the move as a means to protect lower wage workers wanting coverage. It makes sure a new class of of uninsured Americans is not created before other options are available.

    "The waivers are about ensuring and protecting the coverage that people have until there are better options available to them in 2014," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. "This is about implementing a bill correctly. This is about ensuring ... we don't put them at the mercy of health insurance companies."

    Among those getting the out are several fast-food restaurants, small manufacturing and construction businesses, some farm workers and the New York City school teachers, whose union supported the health care law but also provides supplemental...












    Obama Administration Grants Health Care Waivers to Big Companies, Unions


    Published October 08, 2010

    FoxNews.com

    McDonalds got a break Thursday -- as did the 351,000 members of the United Federation of Teachers -- when the federal government gave waivers to high-profile companies and organizations letting them opt out of a key mandate in the new health care law.

    The one-year waiver to 30 employers, insurers and union plans, covers about 1 million people and allows the groups to maintain minimal coverage below the new law's standards.

    Administration officials defend the move as a means to protect lower wage workers wanting coverage. It makes sure a new class of of uninsured Americans is not created before other options are available.

    "The waivers are about ensuring and protecting the coverage that people have until there are better options available to them in 2014," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. "This is about implementing a bill correctly. This is about ensuring ... we don't put them at the mercy of health insurance companies."

    Among those getting the out are several fast-food restaurants, small manufacturing and construction businesses, some farm workers and the New York City school teachers, whose union supported the health care law but also provides supplemental insurance to its members.

    Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, said his union wants to weight whether it would be too costly to cover its new members.

    "We have 13,000 new members because of federal legislation, and rather than automatically raising payments to providers, have asked for a waiver while we see if we have additional costs that would make such payments necessary," he said.

    Unions were among the major supporters of the president's push for health care reform. But some experts say less than a month before the Nov. 2 midterm election, the move signals a political concern.

    "Democrats are going to have a hard enough time getting their candidates elected to the House and having a bunch of hamburger jockeys losing their health insurance is certainly not a way to endear yourself to the populous," said Joe Antos of the American Enterprise Institute.

    Although the waivers are to last one year, groups can apply to extend them until 2014. Critics note that the 30 groups permitted the out are well-organized, and predict many more organizations will seek waivers.


    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politi...
    (more)
  • 4dc darcie ... 2012/06/21 22:41:17
    4dc
    +3
    wow...obama repaying his supporters...imagine that...and i'll bet he's not even close to done
  • flaca BN-0 4dc 2012/06/21 22:47:31
    flaca BN-0
    his supporters wanted Universal Healthcare (single-payer). He however was more pragmatic than that. Not that he gets any credit for it.
  • 4dc flaca BN-0 2012/06/23 01:03:26
    4dc
    no credit given where none is deserved
  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2012/06/21 22:20:55
    No
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +3
    They work for weeks on decisions - then they all agree it is ready - only means they are fine tuning the words. If the SC were to start making instant decisions, we would have a problem - it would mean that they were not researching every aspect, looking at former SC decisions and not thinking.
  • flaca BN-0 Jackie ... 2012/06/21 22:23:01
    flaca BN-0
    +1
    do you think Supreme Courts weigh in among their decisions how much "upset" it would cause to cancel or advocate something? I mean in this case much of the law is already researched and ready in terms of paperwork etc. The hospitals and insurance companies have been preparing for over a year now and have spent bunches on getting the new system ready to go.
  • Jackie ... flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 22:28:30
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +4
    Theoretically, it has no influence but I think it becomes a factor sometimes. I hope it does not this time - this law is very bad. Now, don't get me wrong, there are three or four things that can be salvaged in a new law but this one is just plain wrong on so many levels; I am hopeful that they will toss most, if not all, of it.
  • flaca BN-0 Jackie ... 2012/06/21 22:37:58
    flaca BN-0
    but do you accept that the old system wasn't working either?
  • Jackie ... flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 22:54:03
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +2
    I accept that some number were uninsured (I say some number because it changed every 2 minutes) and there were several outstanding ideas to assist these folks. I accept that government involvement caused medical costs to escalate over the past 30 years. An area they should never have messed with at all - not an area that they know/knew beans about - Doctors and hospitals predicted this many years ago and they were correct.
    The system worked fine - the problem of no insurance was real and was the only thing that actually needed to be addressed. Some of the other, what I called 'good things' could have been addressed by simple measures - pre-existing conditions for one: simple nation wide pools - the number is so small (compared to the population) that all the rhetoric was ridiculous.
    I can go on but this is looking book like - suffice it to say, this bill - all 2700 pages of it, is just bad and intrusive and already has caused more problems than it has solved.
  • flaca BN-0 Jackie ... 2012/06/21 23:20:24
    flaca BN-0
    the problem is nobody has been able to attack the problem of the ever spiralling costs. No politician has had the balls to stand up and tell it how it is. Both here and in Europe the h/c systems are not working because too many people are sick.... sick with obesity, diabetes etc. It increases the costs. Nobody predicted this epidemic. Then we have the huge baby boomer factor. One day we're all gonna have to admit it: we're unhealthy, we don't get enough exercise and we're getting older. We should have planned for it years ago. We didn't. Just like most things, we always deal with it at the last minute...........
  • darcie ... flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 23:31:09 (edited)
    darcie lamar
    +1
    Personal responsibility would certainly be a plus in the world you describe. I live on a different plantet. People here jog, run, swim, go to the the gym and eat healhly. It's and individual choice to care for yourself and children. For instance, I allow my kids one hour on the computer, and for that they get two hours of play outdoors, or more if we're having fun. Gotta go play, I spent my hour - for now. Key words personal responsibility!
  • Jackie ... flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 23:33:57
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +2
    But you forget something very important - my freedom to live my life as I see fit. I cost you nothing - I pay my bills, have the insurance policy I want, and money saved - how I live my life is none of your (generally) business.

    Look at it this way - if people are obese, diabetic and so on; they will die early and cost less (sorry, it sounds callus but it is true) Only the long livers cost money, why do you think Medicare is cutting dialysis for some patients over 75 as well as other care options - they want them to hurry up and die.
    Why do you think Obamacare cut 500 billion from Medicare and put it towards the 'costs' of Obamacare?

    There are no easy answers and we should never promote control of how people chose to live. Europe HC systems were doomed to failure from the very beginning - there is simply no way to manage universal health care without controlling peoples lives completely AND that is a terrible thing to even contemplate.

    Later friend, Have a great evening
  • darcie ... Jackie ... 2012/06/21 23:16:15
    darcie lamar
    +2
    I agree. We do need health insurance for people with pre-existing conditions, competition across state lines, no one should be dropped when they are really in need of their healtcare and TORT Reform. From my experience, the government has never run anything with fiscal responsibility and over runs in projected costs are always the norm.
  • Jackie ... darcie ... 2012/06/21 23:18:39
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +2
    I fully agree - This law was passed on taking anomalies and pretending they were the standard - small fixes , sure but the least responsible group to run 1/6th of our economy is the government
  • HarleyCharley 2012/06/21 22:12:54
    No
    HarleyCharley
    +3
    it's normal...
  • Cuppajo 2012/06/21 22:06:37
    No
    Cuppajo
    +3
    I honestly believe they're waiting to kick him while he's down.
    Good.
  • flaca BN-0 Cuppajo 2012/06/21 22:09:16
    flaca BN-0
    +1
    he's not down at present though. He just sealed the latino vote at a very high level. If anyone's down at the moment it's Romney.
  • Jackie ... flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 22:22:31
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +2
    he is high in the poles - and in June, it is truly meaningless (and I would say the same thing about Romney) Hell, Kerry was way ahead of Bush at this time of year and, in the end, no one wanted him.
  • flaca BN-0 Jackie ... 2012/06/21 22:24:12
    flaca BN-0
    +1
    true Jackie: it's amazing how everything can flip on a dime at the last minute. One thing you have to admit: politics ain't boring right now!
  • Jackie ... flaca BN-0 2012/06/21 22:29:50
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +1
    It never is to me - my majors were political science and history so I am a political junkie and am interested.
  • Cognito22 flaca BN-0 2012/06/22 04:00:36 (edited)
    Cognito22
    I think the Supreme Court decision will be the coup de grace.
    One thing Americans can't tolerate is a loser . . . and that decision against ObamaCare is going to paint him as such.

    After that, it's going to go downhill.
    Representatives up for re-election are already turning down the DNC convention invitations.
    Next, they won't want to be seen campaigning with him.

    Of course, I could just be wishful thinking.
  • Mel the... Cuppajo 2012/06/21 22:28:16
    Mel the Witch POTL PWCM~JLA
    +2
    I like your thought pattern
  • mae 2012/06/21 22:05:24
    Yes
    mae

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/21 08:13:31

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals