ObamaCare/ObamaTax/Trojan Horse

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Today is the day our Constitution died. June 28th 2012. The day a Conservative Justice allowed a purely unconstitutional law to go forward in order foster Social Justice.

What am I talking about you ask? Simple. The law wasn't about an individual mandate or a penalty vs a tax: It was about moving us from a private health care system to a public one. Obama knew he could never get a single payor system passed through Congress so he devised a plan via Pelosi/Reid which gets us there slowly over the next ten years. Chief Justice Roberts knows the real implication of Obamacare and apparently agrees with it. The U.S. govt. NEVER argued that Obamacare was a TAX but rather a PENALTY; however, the Justices knew the intention of the law was to get all Americans under the health care umbrella so the means justified the ends.

If you are a proponent of a Single Payer Health system then Obamacare is your ticket to get there. Look forward about ten years and see the result of this law:

1. Govt. Expenses for health care increase by over 1 trillion dollars due to subsidies for the middle class and expansion of Medicaid to 17 million more Americans. The taxes raised by the Obamacare Medicare Tax on the "richest americans" and health care companies won't raise a fraction of that amount.

2. Small Businesses will dump their employees in the exchanges and pay the penalty/tax. It will be much cheaper to pay the penalty for these formerly privately insured people than the now, prohibitively expensive private policies.

3. Govt. will go from insuring 50% of the population via MEdicare/Medicaid to over 75% if you include subsidies. This means our govt. will control the health care market almost completely by 2022.

4. Once the defecit skyrockets out of control (like it hasn't already) and the budget for health care balloons higher by 1 trillion dollars ( I expect 2 trillion higher in 10 years) the liberal Senators will start calling for the Medicare Option. All Subsidized policies must now be MEDICARE and those over the age of 50 can also "opt-in." The end result here is a broad expansion of CMS with govt. now "insuring" over 90% of the population.
This expansion will be the justification for raising Medicare taxes to a 10% rate on the middle class and 15% rate on the "rich" in the USA. After all, that 10% now buys health insurance for your entire family and is progressive in nature like the liberals want in the USA.

5. The vast majority of Physicians end up as employees of CMS with only a select few "opting out" of all govt. insurance. I expect SCOTUS challenges to Federal and State laws linking PROVIDER LICENSURE with acceptance of CMS reimbursement with NO BALANCED BILLING ALLOWED. It gets better. "Participating or EMPLOYED CMS Physicians receive a different reimbursment rate than NON PARTICIPATING Hospitals and Doctors." CMS may decide to pay non participating providers 50% of the usual and customary CMS rate.

6. Now the good news. Medical School tuition and expenses up to a certain amount paid for by CMS in return for a CMS contract. CMS picks your location after Residency. CMS determines number of Medical School and Residency slots available.

7. CMS/IPAB decides who is going to get that elective hip replacement or kidney transplant. CMS will determine how you practice and what is best medicine in all areas of care. You will simply follow the guidelines as published.

8. Midlevel Nurse Anesthesia providers who thought Socialized medicine was their best friend find out the cold, hard truth: They fare even worse under this system. They can now practice in rural hospitals and certain centers "solo" but their reimbursement rate is 3/4 what it is today (roughly $75 per hour in 2022).

9. Gone is Medicine on Demand. Welcome to the VA Systems of the USA. Quality health care for all from 0800-1530 provided you get surgical clearance from the senior Anesthesiologist running the PreopClinic and you wait the appropriate amount of time in line (usually 2 years or so).

10. Physician salaries are now negotiated by the CMS Health Care Union with ties to the AFL/CIO.


June 28th 2012. The day Chief Justice Roberts sided with Social Justice over Individual Liberty. The day our Constitutional republic died.

Agree 100%.

Romney must win come November, as well as many Republican Senators.

If we get another Obama term, we are finished. If we get Romney 2012 and he is weak, we are finished. If we get Romney 2012, then Hillary 2016, we are finished.

Now is the time to stand up and fight for America.

Will CMS "forgive" previously held medical school debt? What will the anesthesiologist pay and schedule be like in 2022 for those of us in private practice? What about those of us who chose MD solo groups in 2012?

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Today is the day our Constitution died. June 28th 2012. The day a Conservative Justice allowed a purely unconstitutional law to go forward in order foster Social Justice.

What am I talking about you ask? Simple. The law wasn't about an individual mandate or a penalty vs a tax: It was about moving us from a private health care system to a public one. Obama knew he could never get a single payor system passed through Congress so he devised a plan via Pelosi/Reid which gets us there slowly over the next ten years. Chief Justice Roberts knows the real implication of Obamacare and apparently agrees with it. The U.S. govt. NEVER argued that Obamacare was a TAX but rather a PENALTY; however, the Justices knew the intention of the law was to get all Americans under the health care umbrella so the means justified the ends.

If you are a proponent of a Single Payer Health system then Obamacare is your ticket to get there. Look forward about ten years and see the result of this law:

1. Govt. Expenses for health care increase by over 1 trillion dollars due to subsidies for the middle class and expansion of Medicaid to 17 million more Americans. The taxes raised by the Obamacare Medicare Tax on the "richest americans" and health care companies won't raise a fraction of that amount.

2. Small Businesses will dump their employees in the exchanges and pay the penalty/tax. It will be much cheaper to pay the penalty for these formerly privately insured people than the now, prohibitively expensive private policies.

3. Govt. will go from insuring 50% of the population via MEdicare/Medicaid to over 75% if you include subsidies. This means our govt. will control the health care market almost completely by 2022.

4. Once the defecit skyrockets out of control (like it hasn't already) and the budget for health care balloons higher by 1 trillion dollars ( I expect 2 trillion higher in 10 years) the liberal Senators will start calling for the Medicare Option. All Subsidized policies must now be MEDICARE and those over the age of 50 can also "opt-in." The end result here is a broad expansion of CMS with govt. now "insuring" over 90% of the population.
This expansion will be the justification for raising Medicare taxes to a 10% rate on the middle class and 15% rate on the "rich" in the USA. After all, that 10% now buys health insurance for your entire family and is progressive in nature like the liberals want in the USA.

5. The vast majority of Physicians end up as employees of CMS with only a select few "opting out" of all govt. insurance. I expect SCOTUS challenges to Federal and State laws linking PROVIDER LICENSURE with acceptance of CMS reimbursement with NO BALANCED BILLING ALLOWED. It gets better. "Participating or EMPLOYED CMS Physicians receive a different reimbursment rate than NON PARTICIPATING Hospitals and Doctors." CMS may decide to pay non participating providers 50% of the usual and customary CMS rate.

6. Now the good news. Medical School tuition and expenses up to a certain amount paid for by CMS in return for a CMS contract. CMS picks your location after Residency. CMS determines number of Medical School and Residency slots available.

7. CMS/IPAB decides who is going to get that elective hip replacement or kidney transplant. CMS will determine how you practice and what is best medicine in all areas of care. You will simply follow the guidelines as published.

8. Midlevel Nurse Anesthesia providers who thought Socialized medicine was their best friend find out the cold, hard truth: They fare even worse under this system. They can now practice in rural hospitals and certain centers "solo" but their reimbursement rate is 3/4 what it is today (roughly $75 per hour in 2022).

9. Gone is Medicine on Demand. Welcome to the VA Systems of the USA. Quality health care for all from 0800-1530 provided you get surgical clearance from the senior Anesthesiologist running the PreopClinic and you wait the appropriate amount of time in line (usually 2 years or so).

10. Physician salaries are now negotiated by the CMS Health Care Union with ties to the AFL/CIO.


June 28th 2012. The day Chief Justice Roberts sided with Social Justice over Individual Liberty. The day our Constitutional republic died.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Today is the day our Constitution died. June 28th 2012. The day a Conservative Justice allowed a purely unconstitutional law to go forward in order foster Social Justice.

What am I talking about you ask? Simple. The law wasn't about an individual mandate or a penalty vs a tax: It was about moving us from a private health care system to a public one. Obama knew he could never get a single payor system passed through Congress so he devised a plan via Pelosi/Reid which gets us there slowly over the next ten years. Chief Justice Roberts knows the real implication of Obamacare and apparently agrees with it. The U.S. govt. NEVER argued that Obamacare was a TAX but rather a PENALTY; however, the Justices knew the intention of the law was to get all Americans under the health care umbrella so the means justified the ends.

If you are a proponent of a Single Payer Health system then Obamacare is your ticket to get there. Look forward about ten years and see the result of this law:

1. Govt. Expenses for health care increase by over 1 trillion dollars due to subsidies for the middle class and expansion of Medicaid to 17 million more Americans. The taxes raised by the Obamacare Medicare Tax on the "richest americans" and health care companies won't raise a fraction of that amount.

2. Small Businesses will dump their employees in the exchanges and pay the penalty/tax. It will be much cheaper to pay the penalty for these formerly privately insured people than the now, prohibitively expensive private policies.

3. Govt. will go from insuring 50% of the population via MEdicare/Medicaid to over 75% if you include subsidies. This means our govt. will control the health care market almost completely by 2022.

4. Once the defecit skyrockets out of control (like it hasn't already) and the budget for health care balloons higher by 1 trillion dollars ( I expect 2 trillion higher in 10 years) the liberal Senators will start calling for the Medicare Option. All Subsidized policies must now be MEDICARE and those over the age of 50 can also "opt-in." The end result here is a broad expansion of CMS with govt. now "insuring" over 90% of the population.
This expansion will be the justification for raising Medicare taxes to a 10% rate on the middle class and 15% rate on the "rich" in the USA. After all, that 10% now buys health insurance for your entire family and is progressive in nature like the liberals want in the USA.

5. The vast majority of Physicians end up as employees of CMS with only a select few "opting out" of all govt. insurance. I expect SCOTUS challenges to Federal and State laws linking PROVIDER LICENSURE with acceptance of CMS reimbursement with NO BALANCED BILLING ALLOWED. It gets better. "Participating or EMPLOYED CMS Physicians receive a different reimbursment rate than NON PARTICIPATING Hospitals and Doctors." CMS may decide to pay non participating providers 50% of the usual and customary CMS rate.

6. Now the good news. Medical School tuition and expenses up to a certain amount paid for by CMS in return for a CMS contract. CMS picks your location after Residency. CMS determines number of Medical School and Residency slots available.

7. CMS/IPAB decides who is going to get that elective hip replacement or kidney transplant. CMS will determine how you practice and what is best medicine in all areas of care. You will simply follow the guidelines as published.

8. Midlevel Nurse Anesthesia providers who thought Socialized medicine was their best friend find out the cold, hard truth: They fare even worse under this system. They can now practice in rural hospitals and certain centers "solo" but their reimbursement rate is 3/4 what it is today (roughly $75 per hour in 2022).

9. Gone is Medicine on Demand. Welcome to the VA Systems of the USA. Quality health care for all from 0800-1530 provided you get surgical clearance from the senior Anesthesiologist running the PreopClinic and you wait the appropriate amount of time in line (usually 2 years or so).

10. Physician salaries are now negotiated by the CMS Health Care Union with ties to the AFL/CIO.


June 28th 2012. The day Chief Justice Roberts sided with Social Justice over Individual Liberty. The day our Constitutional republic died.

Obama made it take effect over ten years so it would be difficult for the succeeding president to repeal. Not because he could not get it through congress. Remember he had a senate super majority and a house majority when it was passed. He did not need to trick congress. This is all because the average American is a moron that elects people that hate this country.

PS: Roberts does NOT agree with it. This is a political stunt by our leaders to whoop Obama's a** in November. Think about it. Roberts knows that if he allowed it to go through as a tax, once the tax kicked in the American people would not be happy with the Democrats and would vote Republican. That is why The speaker of the house is making a vote to repel it on July 12th. He knows he will not be able to, he does know however that once the tax is implemented they can say, "we tried to repel it, they would let us, now you have higher taxes." Then Obama and the democrats are done forever. Then our economy will be fixed and all the liberal politicians including my favorite Pelosi will go down as antagonists in history, and the end of liberal America. I wonder if our founding fathers have spun themselves to China yet.

Originally Posted by genius19971995

Obama made it take effect over ten years so it would be difficult for the succeeding president to repeal. Not because he could not get it through congress. Remember he had a senate super majority and a house majority when it was passed. He did not need to trick congress. This is all because the average American is a moron that elects people that hate this country.

PS: Roberts does NOT agree with it. This is a political stunt by our leaders to whoop Obama's a** in November. Think about it. Roberts knows that if he allowed it to go through as a tax, once the tax kicked in the American people would not be happy with the Democrats and would vote Republican. That is why The speaker of the house is making a vote to repel it on July 12th. He knows he will not be able to, he does know however that once the tax is implemented they can say, "we tried to repel it, they would let us, now you have higher taxes." Then Obama and the democrats are done forever. Then our economy will be fixed and all the liberal politicians including my favorite Pelosi will go down as antagonists in history, and the end of liberal America. I wonder if our founding fathers have spun themselves to China yet.

Obama certainly doesn't want his signature legislation repealed. Whatever you may think about Obamacare there is no denying the obvious fact that in ten years a single payer system is much more likely now than it was before the law passed. Now that the law is constitutional the tax will proceed as written and I expect a series of increases in this tax over the next ten years. Right or wrong Justice Roberts has decided to allow Obamacare to become the law of the land with no further appeals.

As for repealing Obamacare that isn't very likely nor is voting out pelosi

Originally Posted by Coastie

Agree 100%.

Romney must win come November, as well as many Republican Senators.

If we get another Obama term, we are finished. If we get Romney 2012 and he is weak, we are finished. If we get Romney 2012, then Hillary 2016, we are finished.

Now is the time to stand up and fight for America.

Will CMS "forgive" previously held medical school debt? What will the anesthesiologist pay and schedule be like in 2022 for those of us in private practice? What about those of us who chose MD solo groups in 2012?

1. Romney may win but ask yourself whether 51 percent of Americans like getting free or mostly free stuff from the top 5 percent of Americans.

2. Even if Romney wins it is unlikely Obamacare gets repealed. More likely is Hilary Clinton endorses single payer in 2016 and The Medicare option for all opt in

3. CMS won't forgive your debt. Sometime in the future those doctors who sign a contract with CMS may get partial loan forgiveness on medical school debt. But, because this country is broke I wouldnt count on it.

4. MD solo practice must show its value to hospitas and ACOs. If your ACO thinks it makes financial sense to have an all MD model compared to an ACT then you will be fine. Management companies and hospitals in general prefer a liberal ACT model.

5. There is no way the median income in 2022 with Obamacare fully in place is higher than the Medan income in 2013 for most of us. This means the good old days in terms of money is right now.

My hospital administration sent out emails celebrating the decision. I think they are insane.

Originally Posted by urge

My hospital administration sent out emails celebrating the decision. I think they are insane.

In the short run they get more money. In the long run they are screwed but don't care because of fat bonuses.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

In the short run they get more money. In the long run they are screwed but don't care because of fat bonuses.

I will try to explain obamacare to everyone in a simple to understand message.

Obamacare takes health insurance from people who have it and it gives to those who don't.

Truth:

As much as it pains me to say it.... Romney is getting my vote come election day.

Romney is the White Obama. I doubt he gets this "tax" repealed.

Originally Posted by urge

My hospital administration sent out emails celebrating the decision. I think they are insane.

So did the AAMC. How's THAT for irony. The organization I paid MCAT monies to, that takes monies from future docs,
is celebrating the financial demise of...future docs.

https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsre...14/120628.html

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Today is the day our Constitution died. June 28th 2012. The day a Conservative Justice allowed a purely unconstitutional law to go forward in order foster Social Justice.

1 through 10.

June 28th 2012. The day Chief Justice Roberts sided with Social Justice over Individual Liberty. The day our Constitutional republic died.

Nah, I disagree Blade. The Constitution didn't die today, I totally get that you're livid and rightfully so. But SCOTUS has been making decisions based on a means to an end for 200 years. This was Roberts flexing his muscles, they've done it before. Congress is a worse offender. The Presidency does it too from time to time. SCOTUS is my favorite institution in the Govt, sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong in a BIG way (dred scot, hirabayshi, the dangling chad), but saying that Roberts had no right to rule on this because it's a tax, is wrong and even though I don't agree with the Courts' reasoning, Roberts et al had every right to make this determination. We've learned that the Court will twist things to fit into any box they possibly can, and then, voila, it's legal and constitutional. They say the Court isn't politically motivated, that they call in a vacuum. That's like saying Congress and the WH aren't motivated politically. Of course they are. There was a famous quote I remembered from PoliSci that I have to post here:

"Judges ... rule on the basis of law,
not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to pressures of the times."
Justice Warren E. Burger
Chief Justice, U. S. Supreme Court

They SHOULD be, but they are not. Roberts wanted his legacy to be 275 million americans loving him. This vote was SO politically charged.

Today isn't the day the Constitution died. If you actually want to pick a day, February 24, 1803: the day the Court granted itself the right to Judicial Review in determining the case of Marbury v Madison. ( I disagree with you, but we're polemicizing here, so). Judicial Review, you know, that thing that is ABSOLUTELY not explicitly granted in the US Constitution. However, SCOTUS seemed to make that argument and who was to stop them? (Crickets). If there was to be a revolt, that was the day. And think about it, 1803 was NOT LONG after the Constitution was written. I mean, you could have just walked over to Madison and ASKED him what he meant in Article III. But, ya know, why open that can of worms. February 24, 1803. That's the date. Personally, of course we are all rather lucky Judicial Review exists, it's framed the US in part.

For the record, all your items 1-10, yeah, they SUCK. I get it. Sorry man!

D712

Acording to the Majority on the Court the Govt. can now TAX you for anything it deems necessary for the social good. For example, no solar panels on your roof? Don't drive a hybrid car? Weigh too much? The govt. can now TAX you for NOT buying solar panels, for NOT buying a hybrid car and FOR not weighing a certain amount. There is nothing they can't tax you for.

In addition, Obamacare is the death of private practice as we know it today. Circa 2022 the only real insurance for most Americans will be govt. run healthcare and we will be forced to accept it no matter what it pays us.

I would think several on this Board are happy about Socialized Medicine and, if that is the case, then Obamacare is the necessary pain and sacrifice they must endure until Congress completes the transition in 10-12 years.

Congradulations Obama. Your Signature healthcare Trojan horse legislation will indeed launch us into a single payer system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPpe4...eature=related

Obamacare 101

A Finalized Path to Full, Socialized Medicine in America -- Thanks to Conservatives

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richards...conservatives/


With today’s ruling the U.S. government can do virtually anything it wishes to its citizens – liberty and rights be damned, without limit. Officially in America we now have a totally arbitrary and limitless government. That is, we have a “total government.” In short, we’ve got totalitarian government. As to how much further liberty we may lose in our lifetimes, it’ll depend only on how arbitrary and vicious reigning rulers choose to be, or not. There’s no real Rule of Law any more, only the Rule of Men – and these are mostly ignorant, reckless men.

ObamaCare decision may hasten the arrival of a single payer system





Businesses will have a strong incentive to push employees into one of the two public plans or drop coverage altogether and pay the $2,000 penalty imposed by the ACA. Middle and upper income employees displaced from employer-based plans will likely find one of the “public options” the least expensive and most sensible choice.
Once one major firm in a market—be it a national market like autos or local market like dry cleaners—drops private insurance in favor of a government plan, or drops health coverage altogether and simply pays the $2,000 per employee fine, others will be compelled by price competition to follow.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/28/obamacare-decision-may-hasten-arrival-single-payer-system/#ixzz1zC1pVfpY

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Acording to the Majority on the Court the Govt. can now TAX you for anything it deems necessary for the social good.

That's not new, it's been the case for a very long time.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

For example, no solar panels on your roof? Don't drive a hybrid car? Weigh too much? The govt. can now TAX you for NOT buying solar panels, for NOT buying a hybrid car and FOR not weighing a certain amount. There is nothing they can't tax you for.

These are bad analogies. If you're OK with calling a penalty for non-action a tax (I'm not) there are still big differences between these examples and the health care law. People who don't buy health insurance are a burden on the public health system if they get sick.

People who don't buy solar panels are NOT a burden on the public if their house is dark. People who don't buy hybrid cars are NOT a burden on public roads if they can't afford gas and stay home (and cars are already taxed differentially based on such non-use issues as purchase price, age, and other factors). Taxing a person because of their physical characteristics is an enormous stretch and would never stand any degree of scrutiny. Besides, being fat is just one of 28,482 ways people increase their health risk. Given a patient over the age of 14 or so, almost 100% of the disease we see and treat is self inflicted to one degree or another.


My objection to the Court's line of reasoning here is in calling this a tax in the first place. Oddly enough, I seem to recall Obama indignantly and vehemently arguing that it wasn't a tax at all.


And for all the **** Clarence Thomas takes about being a rote conservative lackey and never saying a word about anything during oral arguments for any case, he was the only Justice who wrote anything about backing up the truck on commerce clause abuse. Looking back at Heller and McDonald, he was also the only one who expressed any interest in rolling back other horrific precedent too (ie reliance on the 14th Amendment's due process clause instead of privileges or immunities).

Originally Posted by sevoflurane

As much as it pains me to say it.... Romney is getting my vote come election day.

Kagan, Sotomayor, and Holder are the only 3 reasons I need to not vote for Obama in Nov.

Here's hoping he doesn't pull a McCain and choose a Palin for his running mate.


But ultimately, I think none of this matters as much as the next few job reports. There's another one next week.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Acording to the Majority on the Court the Govt. can now TAX you for anything it deems necessary for the social good. For example, no solar panels on your roof? Don't drive a hybrid car? Weigh too much? The govt. can now TAX you for NOT buying solar panels, for NOT buying a hybrid car and FOR not weighing a certain amount. There is nothing they can't tax you for.

In addition, Obamacare is the death of private practice as we know it today. Circa 2022 the only real insurance for most Americans will be govt. run healthcare and we will be forced to accept it no matter what it pays us.

I would think several on this Board are happy about Socialized Medicine and, if that is the case, then Obamacare is the necessary pain and sacrifice they must endure until Congress completes the transition in 10-12 years.

Congradulations Obama. Your Signature healthcare Trojan horse legislation will indeed launch us into a single payer system.

Hang tight, empirical Medical Doctor. :-). I agree with PGG (this is becoming fun) that it's a bad analogy. First off, that power has always been there. Second, it's like saying, "I could lay down for Blade during surgery and the dude could just stick me with enough Propofol to turn me whiter than...a Westhampton tennis club. I mean, sure you could, but u don't. And furthermore, because I would trust u more than ANY senator, would the public be ok with u doing that and thus would the Supreme Court follow suit in saying your propofol happy means to an is legal? No. The court follows public opinion. As much as they wanna deny it. An extreme example is race. And it's good they follow the public when ruling on those issues (even though my quote above has them denying what they do as of they are some sort of extra solar system heavenly object). Nobody is taxing anyone for being fat as much as ur not killing patients on purpose. could yes? Will find it legal, no.

D712

Originally Posted by doctor712

Hang tight, empirical Medical Doctor. :-). I agree with PGG (this is becoming fun) that it's a bad analogy. First off, that power has always been there. Second, it's like saying, "I could lay down for Blade during surgery and the dude could just stick me with enough Propofol to turn me whiter than...a Westhampton tennis club. I mean, sure you could, but u don't. And furthermore, because I would trust u more than ANY senator, would the public be ok with u doing that and thus would the Supreme Court follow suit in saying your propofol happy means to an is legal? No. The court follows public opinion. As much as they wanna deny it. An extreme example is race. And it's good they follow the public when ruling on those issues (even though my quote above has them denying what they do as of they are some sort of extra solar system heavenly object). Nobody is taxing anyone for being fat as much as ur not killing patients on purpose. could yes? Will find it legal, no.

D712

The Public was not in favor of this law and espcially not in favor of forcing anyone to purchase health care against their will.

Clearly, the framers of the Constitution wanted LIMITED Federal govt. and in 2012 we have the exact opposite of that. I view this decision by the Court And Justice Roberts as proof we no longer live in a Constitutional Republic with limited Federal powers:



The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits

The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.


I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government



In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock


Thomas Jefferson

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

The Public was not in favor of this law and espcially not in favor of forcing anyone to purchase health care against their will.

I think the uninformed hand-out wanting public ABSOLUTELY wanted this.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Clearly, the framers of the Constitution wanted LIMITED Federal govt. and in 2012 we have the exact opposite of that. I view this decision by the Court And Justice Roberts as proof we no longer live in a Constitutional Republic with limited Federal powers:

Ooooooooo k.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits

Another policy in the constitution that you no longer believe is valid, is that Congress shall levy taxes as they see fit. So, ya know...

By the way, and I know you know this, I'm not any happier about the decision than you are. I'm just arguing the constitutional aspect. This was by the books.


D712

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government



In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock


Thomas Jefferson

This has nothing to do with SCOTUS or taxation or Congress' abilities. But it's a very well written quote if nothing else.

I understand your disdain for the outcome, but, this is about as straightforward as SCOTUS can be after a law was passed and sent to them for a ruling.
Period.

The law is terrible. It's breaking the back of the US to feed into the entitlement state. I believe real Americans need to dig in against the entitlement state and starve the beast. Go John Galt. Imagine if hard working people stood up against the indigent, lazy, un-intelligent masses that are now shaping American policy and said "screw you"!

Imagine the drug-seeking-entitle-man rolling into the ER just to be kicked to the curb while actually having an AMI. Their realization that they're screwed and it's their fault would be priceless.

Originally Posted by yappy

Imagine the drug-seeking-entitle-man rolling into the ER just to be kicked to the curb while actually having an AMI. Their realization that they're screwed and it's their fault would be priceless.

Really? Political orientation and thoughts re healthcare reform notwithstanding, no physician wants this (or should want this).

Originally Posted by Coastie

Agree 100%.

Romney must win come November, as well as many Republican Senators.

If we get another Obama term, we are finished. If we get Romney 2012 and he is weak, we are finished. If we get Romney 2012, then Hillary 2016, we are finished.

Now is the time to stand up and fight for America.

Will CMS "forgive" previously held medical school debt? What will the anesthesiologist pay and schedule be like in 2022 for those of us in private practice? What about those of us who chose MD solo groups in 2012?

If I understand your post, we are pretty much finished

I agree, our best shot right now is a Romney presidency, but physicians almost saw the largest medicare cuts in history under George Bush. Safe to say there are no political safe havens for physicians, so we might as well bend over and hope for lube.

In full disclosure I'm not a physician. I have a strong belief in duty and consequences and try to live my life accordingly. I hate to see physicians and hospitals struggle because they are being forced to act by populations that would never reciprocate. I don't loose sleep over people who made bad choices falling on hard times. In fact I believe it's the lack of hard consequences that foster unhealthy/destructive behavior in the first place.

I understand your point of view though.

Originally Posted by lushmd

Really? Political orientation and thoughts re healthcare reform notwithstanding, no physician wants this (or should want this).

Originally Posted by Osteoimperfecta

If I understand your post, we are pretty much finished

I agree, our best shot right now is a Romney presidency, but physicians almost saw the largest medicare cuts in history under George Bush. Safe to say there are no political safe havens for physicians, so we might as well bend over and hope for lube.

I expect VA hours for govt level pay. I'd love to get those VA benefits for my retirement

Originally Posted by doctor712

This has nothing to do with SCOTUS or taxation or Congress' abilities. But it's a very well written quote if nothing else.

I understand your disdain for the outcome, but, this is about as straightforward as SCOTUS can be after a law was passed and sent to them for a ruling.
Period.

Straightforward? They had to rewrite the law so it would pass muster.

Judicial review. Straightforward. Been preserving your US Constitution for 200+ years.

Par for course.

D712

Supreme Court Unlawfully Rewrites Obamacare to Save It; Four Votes (Led by Kennedy) to Strike It

Posted by Ilya Shapiro

Today’s baby-splitting decision rewrites the Affordable Care Act in order to save it. It’s certainly gratifying that a majority rejected the government’s dangerous assertion of power to require people to engage in economic activity in order to then regulate that activity. That vindicates everything that we who have been leading the constitutional challenge have been saying: The government cannot regulate inactivity.* It cannot, as Chief Justice Roberts put it, regulate mere existence.*

Justifying the individual mandate under the taxing power, however, in no way rehabilitates the government’s constitutional excesses. *As Justice Kennedy said in summarizing his four-justice dissent from the bench, “Structure means liberty.” If Congress can slip the Constitution’s structural limits simply by “taxing” anything it doesn’t like, its power is no more limited than would it be had it done so under the Commerce Clause. *While imposing new taxes may be politically unpopular and therefore harder to do than creating new regulations, that political check does not obviate constitutional ones—and in any event, Congress avoided even that political gauntlet here by explicitly structuring the individual mandate as a commercial regulation.

Nor does the Court vindicate its constitutional sleight-of-hand by rewriting the Medicaid expansion to tie only new federal funding to an acceptance of burdensome and fundamentally transformative regulations. *While correct on its face—and a good exposition of the spending power and what strings the federal government can attach to its funds—that analysis is relevant to a hypothetical statute, not the one that Congress actually passed. *Moreover, allowing states to opt out of the new Medicaid regime while leaving the rest of Obamacare in place throws the insurance market into disarray, increases costs to individuals, and gives states a different Hobson’s choice—different but no less tragic than the one it previously faced. As Justice Kennedy wrote in dissent, while purporting to apply judicial modesty or restraint, the Court’s rewriting of the law is anything but restrained or modest.

In short, we have reaped the fruits of two poisonous trees of constitutional jurisprudence: *On the one (liberal activist) hand, there are no judicially administrable limits on federal power. *On the other (conservative pacifist) one, we must defer to Congress and presume (or construe) its legislation to be constitutional.* It is that tired old debate that produces the Frankenstein’s monster*of today’s ruling. *What judges should be doing instead is applying the Constitution, no matter whether that leads to upholding or striking down legislation.* And a correct application of the Constitution inevitably rests on the Madisonian principles of ordered liberty and limited government that the document embodies.

In any event, the ball now returns to the people, who opposed Obamacare all along, and whence all legitimate power originates.* It is ultimately they who must decide—or not—to rein in the out-of-control government whose unconstitutional actions have taken us to the brink of economic disaster.

Ilya Shapiro •*June 28, 2012 @ 12:51 pm
Filed*under:*General; Government and Politics; Law and Civil Liberties; Regulatory Studies; Tax and Budget Policy
*Print

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Obama certainly doesn't want his signature legislation repealed. Whatever you may think about Obamacare there is no denying the obvious fact that in ten years a single payer system is much more likely now than it was before the law passed. Now that the law is constitutional the tax will proceed as written and I expect a series of increases in this tax over the next ten years. Right or wrong Justice Roberts has decided to allow Obamacare to become the law of the land with no further appeals.

As for repealing Obamacare that isn't very likely nor is voting out pelosi

To say that it is some how unlikely is not true. It is intact very likely. Obama just committed political suicide by putting this tax into play. He will never win. All we need is four more votes in the senate! It is EXTREMELY likely that obamacare will be repealed.

PS: States do NOT have to follow the affordable care act. Many of the twenty-eight states that participated in the lawsuit will NOT. The only one for certain currently is Wisconsin.

Originally Posted by genius19971995

Obama just committed political suicide by putting this tax into play. He will never win.

It's all about the economy. It's always all about the economy.

Except when it's not, but this isn't one of those times.

.

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Supreme Court Unlawfully Rewrites Obamacare to Save It; Four Votes (Led by Kennedy) to Strike It

Posted by Ilya Shapiro

Today’s baby-splitting decision rewrites the Affordable Care Act in order to save it. It’s certainly gratifying that a majority rejected the government’s dangerous assertion of power to require people to engage in economic activity in order to then regulate that activity. That vindicates everything that we who have been leading the constitutional challenge have been saying: The government cannot regulate inactivity.* It cannot, as Chief Justice Roberts put it, regulate mere existence.*

Justifying the individual mandate under the taxing power, however, in no way rehabilitates the government’s constitutional excesses. *As Justice Kennedy said in summarizing his four-justice dissent from the bench, “Structure means liberty.” If Congress can slip the Constitution’s structural limits simply by “taxing” anything it doesn’t like, its power is no more limited than would it be had it done so under the Commerce Clause. *While imposing new taxes may be politically unpopular and therefore harder to do than creating new regulations, that political check does not obviate constitutional ones—and in any event, Congress avoided even that political gauntlet here by explicitly structuring the individual mandate as a commercial regulation.

Nor does the Court vindicate its constitutional sleight-of-hand by rewriting the Medicaid expansion to tie only new federal funding to an acceptance of burdensome and fundamentally transformative regulations. *While correct on its face—and a good exposition of the spending power and what strings the federal government can attach to its funds—that analysis is relevant to a hypothetical statute, not the one that Congress actually passed. *Moreover, allowing states to opt out of the new Medicaid regime while leaving the rest of Obamacare in place throws the insurance market into disarray, increases costs to individuals, and gives states a different Hobson’s choice—different but no less tragic than the one it previously faced. As Justice Kennedy wrote in dissent, while purporting to apply judicial modesty or restraint, the Court’s rewriting of the law is anything but restrained or modest.

In short, we have reaped the fruits of two poisonous trees of constitutional jurisprudence: *On the one (liberal activist) hand, there are no judicially administrable limits on federal power. *On the other (conservative pacifist) one, we must defer to Congress and presume (or construe) its legislation to be constitutional.* It is that tired old debate that produces the Frankenstein’s monster*of today’s ruling. *What judges should be doing instead is applying the Constitution, no matter whether that leads to upholding or striking down legislation.* And a correct application of the Constitution inevitably rests on the Madisonian principles of ordered liberty and limited government that the document embodies.

In any event, the ball now returns to the people, who opposed Obamacare all along, and whence all legitimate power originates.* It is ultimately they who must decide—or not—to rein in the out-of-control government whose unconstitutional actions have taken us to the brink of economic disaster.

Ilya Shapiro •*June 28, 2012 @ 12:51 pm
Filed*under:*General; Government and Politics; Law and Civil Liberties; Regulatory Studies; Tax and Budget Policy
*Print

Blade,

When you start off an article title "Supreme Court Unlawfully...." I don't have to even read the hummer. I mean, where is your empirical side? You quote and quote and quote scholarly articles (which I love reading) and then when it comes to this, you post Schlock that reads as if it were written by the Drudge Report. This Cato employee should be ashamed. Sleight-of-hand = unlawful.

D712

The constitution also died in 2005 with Kelo Vs New London, when the supreme court decided that the government can take away anyone's private property to give to another private entity (usually a private entity that has given them lots of money, or promises lots of money or new taxes).

Agree with each of your diagrams Blade. What sucks (especially the super power cartoon) is that our decline took a relatively short time. I mean, when I was growing up in 80s, we were IT. USSR went away and then we were REALLY IT. anyway, SCOTUS is not to blame here. Who is to blame? The anesthesia board members (and us public) who voted in Obama and their democratic reps in senate and house. Those people are sadly responsible for this policy. The VOTERS.
D712

Originally Posted by BLADEMDA

Look at the graph above. Obamacare is Trojan horse for a single payer system as this law explodes the cost of private health insurance. Obama flat out lied about the "affordability act" to every single American EXCEPT the liberals in Congress. Just like in Atlas Shrugged these Liberals give a nice name to the act so the moronic public will buy into the manure they are selling. Usually, the name is the EXACT opposite of what the Law actually does. In this case the "affordability act" is actually the "Unaffordability act" of 2020.

Around 2022 the average premium plus out of pocket expenses for a Family will exceed $40,000 (U.S. Dollars). This cost will cause a massive public outcry for a "public option" or a single payer system. I expect the election of 2016 will feature Hillary Clinton screaming for the public option to save the middle class American from the greedy insurance companies. The irony is that the Democrats created the fiasco and forced Insurance companies to their own premature demise.

I also expect govt. subsidies for the middle class will increase dramatically in order to allow the average family to purchase health insurance. These massive subsidies (hubdreds of billions of dollars) will be partially paid for by new taxes on income (raise the Medicare tax) and more borrowing from China. The medicare tax of 2012 will necessarily double for most Americans and probably Quadruple for those earning over $250K. The govt. will need MASSIVE Revenue increases to pay for this Law.

Right now, the Medicare tax on salary and/or self-employment (SE) income is 2.9%. If you're an employee, 1.45% is withheld from your paychecks, and the other 1.45% is paid by your employer. If you're self-employed, you pay the whole 2.9% yourself.
Starting in 2013, an extra 0.9% Medicare tax will be charged on: (1) salary and/or SE income above $200,000 for an unmarried individual, (2) combined salary and/or SE income above $250,000 for a married joint-filing couple, and (3) salary and/or SE income above $125,000 for those who use married filing separate status. For self-employed individuals, the additional 0.9% Medicare tax hit will come in the form of a higher SE bill.
Medicare Tax on Investment Income
Right now, the maximum federal income tax rate on long-term capital gains and dividends is only 15%. Starting in 2013, the maximum rate on long-term gains is scheduled to go up to 20% and the maximum rate on dividends is scheduled to increase to 39.6% as the so-called Bush tax cuts expire.
But that's not all. Also starting in 2013, all or part of the net investment income, including long-term capital gains and dividends, collected by higher-income folks can get socked with an additional 3.8% "Medicare contribution tax." Therefore, the maximum federal rate on long-term gains for 2013 and beyond will actually be 23.8% (versus the current 15%) and the maximum rate on dividends will be a whopping 43.4% (versus the current 15%). Yikes!
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will not apply unless your adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds: (1) $200,000 if you're unmarried, (2) $250,000 if you're a married joint-filer, or (3) $125,000 if you use married filing separate status.
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will apply to the lesser of your net investment income or the amount of AGI in excess of the applicable threshold. Net investment income includes interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, rents, income from passive business activities, income from trading in financial instruments or commodities, and gains from assets held for investment like stock and other securities. (Gains from assets held for business purposes are not subject to the extra tax.)
For example, a married joint-filing couple with AGI of $265,000 and $60,000 of net investment income would pay the 3.8% tax on $15,000 (the amount of excess AGI). If the same couple has AGI of $350,000, they would pay the 3.8% tax on $60,000 (the entire amount of their net investment income).