These Five People Just Saved Millions Of Americans By Protecting Health Care

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Supreme Court Health Care Decision: Individual Mandate Survives

HuffPost

By- Mike Sacks

Posted: 06/28/2012 10:10 am Updated: 06/28/2012 11:16 am

WASHINGTON — The individual health insurance mandate is constitutional, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday, upholding the central provision of President Barack Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act.

The controlling opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, upheld the mandate as a tax, although concluded it was not valid as an exercise of Congress’ commerce clause power. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined in the outcome.

The decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius comes as something of a surprise after the generally hostile reception the law received during the six hours of oral arguments held over three days in March. But by siding with the court’s four Democratic appointees, Chief Justice Roberts avoided the delegitimizing taint of politics that surrounds a party-line vote while passing Obamacare’s fate back to the elected branches. GOP candidates and incumbents will surely spend the rest of the 2012 campaign season running against the Supreme Court and for repeal of the law.

Five justices concluded that the mandate, which requires virtually all Americans to obtain minimum health insurance coverage or pay a penalty, falls within Congress’ power under the Constitution to “lay and collect taxes.”

“The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause,” Roberts wrote. “That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it. In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.”

Ginsburg, writing separately for the four liberals, said they would have upheld the mandate under the commerce clause too. “Unlike the market for almost any other product or service, the market for medical care is one in which all individuals inevitably participate,” she wrote. “Virtually every person residing in the United States, sooner or later, will visit a doctor or other health care professional.”

Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined in a dissent.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Romney: Strike Down Of Health Care Law Would Be ‘Right Thing’

CNN Politics

Political Ticker

June 11th, 2012

08:55 PM ET

Posted by  CNN’s Ashley Killough

(CNN) – Mitt Romney on Monday said he hopes the Supreme Court does the “right thing” and overturns President Barack Obama’s sweeping health care reform.

“Gosh I hope they do the right thing and turn this thing down,” Romney told donors in Atlanta, according to pool reports. “And say it’s unconstitutional because it is.” – Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

– Check out the CNN Electoral Map and Calculator and game out your own strategy for November.

This month, the high court is expected to announce its decision on the legality of the Affordable Care Act, a measure passed by Congressional Democrats and signed into law by Obama in 2010.

While Romney has not recently made comments about the decision, he has long maintained he would overturn the law through an executive order in his first day in office.

“This piece of legislation is bad policy, it’s bad for our health care, and I can tell you if I’m president I’m going to stop it in its tracks on day one,” he said Monday.

Democrats have frequently targeted Romney over the health care issue by pointing to a similar plan he signed into law as governor of Massachusetts in 2006. In his defense, Romney says the plan was tailor-made for Massachusetts residents and he would oppose a federal mandate.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

How ‘Obamacare’ Is Saving Seniors Billions On Meds

TPM

Sahil Kapur May 1, 2012, 6:16 AM

In the first two years after “Obamacare” was signed, Medicare reforms in the law saved seniors a total of $3.4 billion in prescription drug costs by bridging a coverage gap, according to official figures.Over 220,000 beneficiaries have saved an average of $837 in the first three months of 2012, the Medicare agency said Monday. That’s on top of $3.2 billion in savings enjoyed by some 5.1 million seniors in 2010 and 2011 thanks to the Affordable Care Act, according to the advisory on the new figures.The savings were wrung through a combination of discounts on Medicare prescription drugs — 50 percent on brand names, 7 percent on generics — and rebates for seniors who fell under a coverage gap known as the “doughnut hole.”

“The Affordable Care Act is helping millions on Medicare save billions of dollars on care and prescription drugs,” top Medicare official Marilyn Tavenner said in a statement. “The Affordable Care Act gives people on Medicare the relief they need from medical costs and more resources to stay healthy.”

The figures, circulated to reporters, reflect the administration’s latest attempt to highlight the successes of President Obama’s signature domestic achievement. Just last week, they released data showing that an “Obamacare” insurance regulation is yielding rebates for consumers and businesses who provide employees health care.

Republicans have instead seized on cost projections and some of the law’s failures, such as the now-neutered long-term care CLASS program, to paint the law as an expensive monstrosity. The dedicated stream of attacks from the law’s opponents, and ensuing partisan shouting matches that have defined debates of the law, has painted the legislation in a negative light.

Polls say Americans continue to view “Obamacare” unfavorably on balance. With a Supreme Court decision looming on its constitutionality, the law is shaping up to be an important issue in the November elections.

Image from Shutterstock

SOURCE

Read Full Post »

Romney Wants Insurance Companies To Be Able To Deny Coverage (VIDEO)

3/28/12

Last night on the Jay Leno show, Mitt Romney said he wants insurance companies to be able to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.

http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/mitt-romney-part-2-32712/1393112

Before the Affordable Care Act:
Insurance companies could deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, from asthma to cancer.

Today:
Insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to children under 19 with pre-existing conditions, and adults with pre-existing conditions who haven’t found affordable insurance can now get coverage through the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Program.

In 2014:
This program serves as a bridge until 2014, when insurance companies won’t be able to turn anyone down or charge more due to a pre-existing condition.

Read Full Post »

INFOGRAPHIC: The Affordable Care Act Turns Two

Think Progress

By Adam Peck  on Mar 23, 2012 at 8:30 am

Two years ago today, President Obama affixed his signature to the Affordable Care Act, the first major piece of federal healthcare legislation since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. The bill was the end result of months of careful negotiations in Congress and years of failed attempts by previous administrations to reform an increasingly expensive and outdated healthcare system.

Even before the ink dried, Republicans started calling for the law’s repeal and have so far voted at least 25 times to roll back or defund it.  Should they succeed, millions of Americans would become uninsured,  seniors would pay more for prescription drug coverage, and the insurance industry would once again be able to deny coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions and impose annual and lifetime limits on coverage.

While most of the law does not go into effect until 2014, take a look at some of the benefits Americans are already enjoying and what Republicans would take away:

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Fox News Lies; An Elderly Woman Dies

Crooks and Liars

By karoli

March 20, 2012 09:00 AM

When I first saw this image on Facebook, I wasn’t sure how on earth Fox News could have killed someone’s mother. And then I read the message that went with the photo. Tracy Knauss posted it on his Facebook page along with a message which said in part:

I know this personally. FOX News killed my precious mother, Hallie. She watched FOX religiously. And when she fell ten days before she died, she refused to go to the doctor because, “I don’t want Obamacare to get all of my information! she declared, recalling the warnings from FOX News “anchors.” She was emphatic. She was not going to consort with the muslim enemy. As she made out her will she told her lawyer, “I don’t want any of my money going to the Muslim Brotherhood!” And her last protestation dealt with “Obama’s death panels.” Mother died just days later. I hold FOX News responsible for my mother’s death.

Hallie Jean Mayes Knauss Culpepper passed away on February 16, 2012. Ten days earlier, she had fallen, but as Knauss says, refused to see a doctor. Her obituary notes that she was a “lifelong, dyed-in-the-wool Republican” who at one time had also been a business owner (TECO Products, now Griffin Products).

And it seems, she got her news from Fox. It’s not hard to understand where she got the idea that “Obamacare” had death panels. Just three days before Mrs. Culpepper’s death, they were still calling them death panels. Republicans have been working hard (with the cooperation of some turncoat Democrats) to repeal that board, which is really the last best hope we have for keeping Medicare out of the crosshairs of budget hawks.

The death panel lie has been around since the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act in 2009, when Liberty Council first started circulating emails to seniors and Sarah Palin amplified it. Then we had the Fox News Parade of Idiots saying it over and over again, along with the usual complement of birthers. Is there any doubt in anyone’s mind that a lifelong Republican who entered the age of television with the Fairness Doctrine where fair coverage and truth telling was part of the mix, would believe what Fox told her?

Don’t write this woman off as some ignorant back-country hick. She clearly wasn’t. She owned a companyat one time. She paid attention to events and politics in the news, or at least, in the news as she understood it. She, like most of her neighbors, voted Republican. But until Fox News came along, Republicans weren’t stupid. They had different philosophies about government and its role, but they weren’t blatantly invested in advancing a lie-based ideology until Fox News came along.

It isn’t hyperbole to say Fox News killed her. She fell and feared the doctor would kill her. That fear can be laid at the feet of Roger Ailes and his obsession with advancing lies to promote his agenda. When are they going to be held accountable for this?

SOURCE

Read Full Post »

Clarence Thomas’s Conflict Of Interest On Affordable Care Act

.

Clarence and Ginni Thomas, promoting a Tea Party event on Fox News.

by Joan McCarter for Daily Kos

Tue May 31, 2011 at 06:01 PM PDT

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has somewhat of a conflict just being a justice, concerning the very right-wing and very prominent political activities of his wife, Ginni. But that conflict is particularly a problem since the Supreme Court will almost undoubtedly be hearing a case against the Affordable Care Act, the law that his wife has been paid handsomely to fight. A Friday afternoon news dump consisting of his financial disclosure form highlights this little problem he has.

His new financial disclosure form indicates that his wife, Virginia, who served as Liberty Central’s president and CEO, received $150,000 in salary from the group and less than $15,000 in payments from an anti-health care lobbying firm she started.The disclosure was apparently prompted in part by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), who had been needling Thomas (including on Twitter) for months to disclose how much money his wife earned from Liberty Central. That’s because challenges to Obama’s health care reform law are likely to end up before the Supreme Court sooner rather than later, and if Thomas and his wife benefited from her income working against the bill, the justice has an enormous conflict of interest in hearing any legal challenge. Thomas had failed to disclose Virginia’s income on his financial disclosure forms for 20 years; under pressure from Weiner and others, he had recently amended old disclosures to reflect hundreds of thousands of dollars she had earned working for the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that also opposed Obama’s health care plan.

(Gee, I wonder why Rep. Anthony Weiner would be the target of right-wing hackers in a smear campaign over the weekend?)

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Michele Bachmann’s ‘Bombshell’: ‘Secret’ Costs In Affordable Care Act

by Joan McCarter for Daily Kos

Tue Mar 08, 2011 at 08:20 PM EST

Dumb as a bag of hammers, or staggeringly deceitful? Of course, there’s always room for both with Rep. Michele Bachmann, who just “discovered” $105 billion in “secret” money in the Affordable Care Act. Here she is on Fox News revealing her “bombshell.”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Now, she might not have actually read the bill she voted on, or read the law she’s been lying about for all these months. That’s entirely possible. Because that “secret” money was right there, in the bill all along, as the House Democratic leadership team tweets:

There is no “secret money.” Three full months before the House passed the Senate bill, CBO – charged with accurately estimating the cost of legislation – provided a cost estimate of the legislation (Dec 19, 2009) that included the provisions Rep. Bachmann has just “discovered.” The final cost estimate was available on March 20, 2010 – a year ago. (CBO also concluded that the Affordable Care Act will reduce the deficit by $210 billion).

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »