Court eager to tackle heart of health care law

  • Article by: ROBERT BARNES , Washington Post
  • Updated: March 27, 2012 - 12:05 AM

A procedural challenge to the statute did not appear to interest any of the justices.

  • 120
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
davo90210Mar. 26, 12 9:13 AM

How can they judge a tax legal or not if it has not been tax yet?

iowasenseMar. 26, 12 9:21 AM

Interesting debates going on over this. However, it still comes down to whether or not an individual can be coerced into signing a contract that they do not want to sign.

mjcmspMar. 26, 12 9:31 AM

I love how the sign in the front page picture is completely incorrect. Opponents of this law seem to not know what they are talking about. 'obamacare' had nothing to do with the decreased mammogram breast cancer screening guidelines that this sign is obviously referring to. It's just all a bunch of red herrings that opponents keep presenting. Death panels anyone? The individual mandate was a Republican idea from the 90s. Romney implemented an individual mandate. Even Jim DeMint (tea party favorite) said that the program Romney implemented should be implemented nationally. There is a long history of Republicans supporting an individual mandate (it was originally their idea) right up until Obama and the Democrats actually got it done.

parks12005Mar. 26, 12 9:45 AM

With any luck, this atrocity will be struck down.

mall0108Mar. 26, 12 9:47 AM

There are 2 major issues with health care in the US. 1) It is becoming very expensive 2) Partly because of 1, too many people are not buying it... The worst possible economic solutions is to 1) Force people to buy it 2) If they don't, the government buys it for them or penalizes you... This will not end well. God bless the USA and people finally realizing that in a democracy you can vote yourself money.

pmobergMar. 26, 12 9:49 AM

People have forgotten that what is so disparagingly referred to as "Obamacare" is similar to what was first proposed in the 1960 presidential debates - by Richard Nixon. Back then it was a solid Republican idea.

gocanucksMar. 26, 12 9:53 AM

The Republicans view is: If you were meant to have health care insurance, the holy father wouldn't have given you a preexisting condition.

shootermcgvnMar. 26, 1210:15 AM

I like how all you democrats like to demonize republicans by saying they don't want everyone to have access to health care. This couldn't be further from the truth! What republicans disagree with is how to go about paying for it. Spending well over $1,000,000,000,000 (yes, that's twelve zeros) to cover the 30M people who don't currently have insurance is absurd. There are other ways such as tax credits...etc to help the uninsured. That way, those of us who don't have insurance would be un-effected. Obama's healthcare bill is just another example of making responsible people pay for the irresponsible!!!

toolman28Mar. 26, 1210:15 AM

iowasense , You will get treated no matter what - and that means that those with health insurance get to pay for those that do not - why do Republicans think it is fine for me to subsidize others ? And part of your health care premium goes to pay higher hospital costs because the hospital simply raises its rates to cover the loss treating those that will not or cannot pay

staruser00Mar. 26, 1210:20 AM

What most of the people against this legislation and single-payer programs conveniently forget is that the insured are already paying for the uninsured. The uninsured and not turned away from hospitals and those costs get passed along to everyone else. Insurance works best when everyone pays in.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters



question of the day

Poll: Who will win the Wild-Colorado playoff series?

Weekly Question