Supreme Court ObamaCare

Transparency. Good word.

Televised Supreme Court cases? I can see why the Justices prefer to keep them not live. But I would think cable TV access that could be edited per the Supremes would be great for the American public.
Court TV could run it at night, might be a great sleep aid....

that is really why CSPAN was created. If anyone was allowed in, they would be perfect. Non-partisan, no talking heads to tell us what someone just said, just a camera running.

Too bad it isn't being covered. I would think there would be a huge amount of interest.

Well, apparently we've put the discussion of whether it's a "tax" or a "penalty" aside. It's a "penalty", even if the method of collecting it is through the IRS forms.

it is being covered, just no cameras... reporters and regular folks are allowed in... reporting the "old fashioned" way with a pad and paper.

mtntrekker wrote: Too bad it isn't being covered. I would think there would be a huge amount of interest.

Sarcasm?
NPR is pretty much going wall to wall with coverage. Like I said before, this is huge. Might be the most influential Supreme case since Roe. V. Wade.

LadyJazzer wrote: Well, apparently we've put the discussion of whether it's a "tax" or a "penalty" aside. It's a "penalty", even if the method of collecting it is through the IRS forms.

The tax issue is exactly what is being presented to the court today. It works the same in MA. I used to manage benefits for a company when MA rolled it out, years ago. If the employee doesn't qualify for company insurance (part time, etc), then they are put into a pool where they can select insurance from an exchange of companies that offer more affordable insurance. If they choose not to enroll, then they are penalized via tax penalty the following year - the idea is to get people to be insured so that the public is not paying for health care via hospital emergency rooms, etc. The "penalty" is small and some think it is not enough of a burden to convince some to get insurance until they need it.
With the implementation of other parts of the affordable care act in place, insurance companies cannot turn you down for pre-existing conditions, HOWEVER, you cannot enroll when you get sick, you can only enroll during "open enrollment periods"
It is working well in MA and the polls show that most citizens like it.

Wily Fox aka Angela wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Well, apparently we've put the discussion of whether it's a "tax" or a "penalty" aside. It's a "penalty", even if the method of collecting it is through the IRS forms.

The tax issue is exactly what is being presented to the court today. It works the same in MA. I used to manage benefits for a company when MA rolled it out, years ago. If the employee doesn't qualify for company insurance (part time, etc), then they are put into a pool where they can select insurance from an exchange of companies that offer more affordable insurance. If they choose not to enroll, then they are penalized via tax penalty the following year - the idea is to get people to be insured so that the public is not paying for health care via hospital emergency rooms, etc. The "penalty" is small and some think it is not enough of a burden to convince some to get insurance until they need it.
With the implementation of other parts of the affordable care act in place, insurance companies cannot turn you down for pre-existing conditions, HOWEVER, you cannot enroll when you get sick, you can only enroll during "open enrollment periods"
It is working well in MA and the polls show that most citizens like it.

Yeah, it's going to be hard for Romney to run AGAINST RomneyCare when it worked so well, and the majority of the citizens like it...

Ooops....

Religious Right prays for Supreme Court to overturn Health Care Reform:

[youtube:2sag5cmc][/youtube:2sag5cmc]

Yeah, Because Jesus hates health care