Supreme Court decides 6-3 ACA subsidies are legal

[GenuineRisk]

http://america.aljazeera.com/article...v-burwell.html

So 6.4 million people keep their health insurance.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

http://america.aljazeera.com/article...v-burwell.html

So 6.4 million people keep their health insurance.

i figured they'd rule the subsidies would continue. like i said at a CE class, if the state chose to use the federal exchange, doesn't that then become that states exchange?

there's something wrong tho when legislators pass a bill, and then sue over the language that they put in the bill.

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...an_act_of.html

it they aren't yelling 'states rights' it's 'judicial tyranny'. both are used to say 'i don't like it, but i don't have a good reason why, or i don't want to say why because it might tick off some voters'.


either way, it's nonsensical.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i figured they'd rule the subsidies would continue. like i said at a CE class, if the state chose to use the federal exchange, doesn't that then become that states exchange?

there's something wrong tho when legislators pass a bill, and then sue over the language that they put in the bill.

What I found fascinating about the case is that the plaintiffs named really didn't have standing to even be a part of the case:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...eputation.html

There were people who thought the Supreme Court would dismiss based on the plaintiff's not having legal standing to bring the case. Which might have been perceived as a punt. This is better. Also, Scalia's rage is hilarious.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

What I found fascinating about the case is that the plaintiffs named really didn't have standing to even be a part of the case:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...eputation.html

There were people who thought the Supreme Court would dismiss based on the plaintiff's not having legal standing to bring the case. Which might have been perceived as a punt. This is better. Also, Scalia's rage is hilarious.

i was worried that they might do that...but i figured they'd only go that route if they didn't want to rule. i'm glad they took the case and ruled that they did.
i've been accused, not on here but elsewhere, of being inconsistent. they say why do you support if you don't like all of the law? and it's because it's a start, hopefully one step on the way to single payer, universal, whatever one wishes to call it.

[OldDog]

In summary

"Affordable" does not mean affordable.
"If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance" does not mean that if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.
"If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor" does not mean that if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.
"Penalty" does not mean penalty.
"established by the state" means not established by the state.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by OldDog

In summary

"Affordable" does not mean affordable.
"If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance" does not mean that if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.
"If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor" does not mean that if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.
"Penalty" does not mean penalty.
"established by the state" means not established by the state.

You left out a key point...the Supremes validated it again! 6-3 not exactly a cliff-hanger, especially with the hard line right being predictable. While the right was busy hating him, accusing him of being Muslim and a non-citizen, Obama did what so many previous leaders could not..expand health care for the poor and middle class, and while the bill is far from perfect, it beats the hell out of the Republican version....oh, that's right, they don't have an answer, they just oppose Obama's! The party of "no!" can choke on another failure...gives me a happy!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by OldDog

In summary

"Affordable" does not mean affordable.
"If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance" does not mean that if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.
"If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor" does not mean that if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.
"Penalty" does not mean penalty.
"established by the state" means not established by the state.

what does jiggery-pokery mean?

so, what would you recommend be done? i keep seeing and hearing repeal and replace.
with what?