The U.S. Supreme Court Rules On The Affordable Care Act
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-06-28/us-supreme-court-rules-affordable-care-act
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 2010 Affordable Care Act. The decision is considered to be a major victory for President Barack Obama because it validates his signature legislative achievement. It is also one of the most important Supreme Court rulings in decades. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, saying the law was a valid exercise of Congress's power to tax. Today's decision will still require the health care industry and the government to address rising health care costs. And with Republicans vowing to continue to fight to repeal the law, health care will be front and center in the 2012 presidential and congressional elections. Diane and her guests discuss the legal, political and practical implications of the Supreme Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act.
Guests
Jeffrey Rosen
professor of law at The George Washington University; legal affairs editor at The New Republic.
Susan Dentzer
editor-in-chief of Health Affairs, and an on-air analyst on health issues for The PBS NewsHour
Susan Page
Washington bureau chief for USA Today.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Strange how the supreme court was able to switch the mandate from a penalty to a tax which the administration insisted many times it was NOT a tax. The Supreme Court legitimized the lying to the American people with it's decision.
I`m a baby boom senior who remembers the Vietnam draft.For me big government can draft you,put you in harms way,and expect you to sacrifice your life . Buying health insurance,something everyone of us will need someday,is not the monster ready to devour everything.Opposition to common sense life giving needs are purely political,and morally stupid.
As a Massachusetts resident, I would really like to understand what makes Obama care that different from what Romney did for MA. How can Romney be against something that sounds so similar to what we already have in MA? I have to provide proof on my state taxes that shows I have health care or I have to pay a penalty. I'm just curious what Romney sees that is so abominable about Obama's. Currently everyone has emergency health care, hospitals can't turn people away. I think it is about time people were asked to pay for it so the rest of us can stop footing the bill with our insurance premiums.
Patsy Nomore wrote:
"I`m a baby boom senior who remembers the Vietnam draft.For me big government can draft you,put you in harms way,and expect you to sacrifice your life . "
Earth to Patsy Nomore Van Winkle. The draft was ended in 1973.
marymoquin wrote:
MA is a state and abides by its state constitution. The Federal Government is not a state. It abides by the U.S. Constitution.
Read Amendment 10.
Jeffrey Rosen lauded Justice Roberts for ruling in a way that avoided partisanship. Shouldn't the court be ruling on the merits of the case, most importantly whether or not the legislation is Constitutional or not? Rosen has completely lost his way - another partisan hack.
It's interesting how Prof. Rossen and others proclaim Chief Justice Roberts' opinion to ultimately uphold the mandate as a tax is the highth of objective non-partisanship, when if he would have sided with the minority of the court, Prof. Rossen and others would reach the exact opposite conclusion. It is disingenious to assume, or expressly say, that the four liberal members of the court are simply being objective arbiters of the law in reaching their liberal conclusions when the conservative members are labeled as hyper-partisan (or worse) when they reach conserative conclusions. Fall out and reaction to this decision, including on this program, presupposes that a decision which liberals are happy with equals fairness, justice and objectivity, and when a decision which conservatives are happy with is rendered, the decision is unfair, unjust and obviously bent toward subjective conserative whim of the conservative justices. Justice Breyers', Sotomayor, Kagan and Ginsburgs' tendancy to be predictably liberal does just as much (if not more) to undermine the court's credibility as Justice Alito, Scalia and Thomas' tenancy to be predictably conservative.