Good news, the State’s lawsuit against Obamacare and the Federal government can proceed. The individual mandate is one of the 2 remaining claims in the lawsuit.
Not surprisingly, the Fed’s state…
Hmmm, like this hasn’t happened before when the tables were turned?
From a separate Politico article, the judge states…
Ya don’t say.
One final note, every state has a risk pool, every state. That means health isurance is available to everyone. The problem is it’s expensive but that’s because health insurance IS expensive. There are many people who can get health insurance but don’t elect to purchase it. A vast subset of these folks can afford it but elect not to pay what the believe are outrageous prices. Part of that problem is they have no reference to what healthcare costs or what the group plan they were on previous costs. In their temper tantrum against the “evil insurance companies” they shoot themselves in the foot. This subset of the uninsured I have little sympathy for.
On the issue of the so-called “individual mandate,” the law’s provision that all Americans obtain healthcare insurance, Vinson said the plaintiffs had “most definitely stated a plausible claim” for their objections.
“The power that the individual mandate seeks to harness is simply without prior precedent,” he said.
“Having failed in the legislative arena, opponents of reform are now turning to the courts in an attempt to overturn the work of the democratically elected branches of government,” Stephanie Cutter, an assistant to the president for special projects, wrote on the White House blog. “This is nothing new. We saw this with the Social Security Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act – constitutional challenges were brought to all three of these monumental pieces of legislation, and all of those challenges failed. So too will the challenge to health reform.”
On the issue of the so-called “individual mandate,” the law’s provision that all Americans obtain healthcare insurance, Vinson said the plaintiffs had “most definitely stated a plausible claim” for their objections.
“The power that the individual mandate seeks to harness is simply without prior precedent,” he said.
