radar

what else the u.s.s.c. was up to while everyone was talking about their opinion on the affordable care act.



 

under the bus?

or over the edge, as the expression goes?  from truthout, more analysis on the u.s.s.c. ruling,  with respect to the so-called medicaid expansion.

While upholding the most hotly debated part of the health care overhaul law — a requirement that most Americans have health insurance or pay a penalty — the Supreme Court said in its ruling on Thursday that states did not have to expand Medicaid as Congress had intended — leaving a huge question mark over the law’s mechanism for providing coverage to 17 million of the poorest people.

In writing the law, Congress assumed that the poorest uninsured people would gain coverage through Medicaid, while many people with higher incomes would receive federal subsidies to buy private insurance. Now, poor people who live in a state that refuses to expand its Medicaid program will find themselves in a predicament, unable to obtain either Medicaid or subsidies.

the article reports that medicaid has repeatedly expanded over the last 25 years, but this time may be different, and it's not just about red and blue.  illinois, for example, a blue state in deep financial trouble, is delaying Medicaid payments to health care providers - and Dennis G. Smith, secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, states, “Virtually all states are struggling to sustain their current Medicaid programs.”

meanwhile, other citizens joyously celebrated the court's decision - below, an enthusiastic Missouri rally attended by seniors, women, students, and health care activists.



single payer supporters appear divided on whether the court's decision represents a step forward or backwards on behalf of Medicare for All.  (continue backwards in blog time from that link to more information on the topic.)

day after

economist paul krugman weights in on the u.s.s.c. ruling.

democracy now! (youtube below) speaks with guests robin lunge (activist in the drive for vermont's single payer system), health industry whistle blower wendall potter, dr. oliver fein (past president of physicians for a national health program), and jodi jacobson (rh reality check). 

democracy now! also spoke yesterday with film maker michael moore as the decision came down.

statement

president obama's statement on the u.s.s.c.'s ruling, mostly upholding the affordable care act. 


 

in a five-four decision [l.a. times], chief justice John Roberts joined the more liberal justices (Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) in upholding the constitutionality of the mandate, though not on the basis of the commerce clause, but because (in John Roberts' words), “The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that certain in­dividuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax," and, “Be­cause the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness."  

the court's 4 liberals wrote that they disagreed with roberts on the commerce clause.

the court also ruled that low income medicaid expansion could go through, but decided via 7 justices [n.y. times] that congress had overreached by bringing states into compliance with the medicaid expansion through "loss of existing federal payments."

Both the l.a. and n.y. times present the ruling on medicaid as a blow to the legislation which is supposed to extend medicaid coverage to 16-20 million more Americans -- and, with court opinion now setting the stage for even greater health care disparities by location (i.e. red and blue).

according to the l.a. times, however, the court did not touch President Obama's stated intent to guarantee health care for all Americans through the legislation. 

truthdig reports divided views coming in from the single payer camp.

 [...] In a live report on the court’s announcement broadcast by “Democracy Now!” Academy Award-winning filmmaker Michael Moore praised the decision as a move in the right direction, saying it was a serious defeat for the right-wing that had attacked the law. But Dr. Margaret Flowers, a pediatrician and member of Physicians for a National Health Program, said the existing law harms low-income Americans by forcing them to become customers of private health insurance companies, which will likely result in their having to go without other necessities or find alternative means of obtaining them.

more on that at truthout.

read the 193 page opinion here [msnbc link].

expectations

courtesy of the democratic underground

u.s.s.c. may rule on the health care legislation as early as monday.  kevin drum at mother jones considers various scenarios and presents this argument:

[..] What if they strike down the individual mandate but uphold the rest of the law?

We can game this out, but first you have to understand just who would be most upset by a ruling like this. The answer is: insurance companies. You see, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires insurance companies to accept anyone who applies for coverage and to charge everyone (with some specific exceptions) roughly the same rate. This works fine if insurance companies get a random selection of customers. They can easily figure out the average cost of care for this random group and then charge everyone that average, plus a little extra so they make some money. Nice and neat.

 But without a mandate, they're unlikely to get a random selection of customers. Instead, healthy folks will probably stay out of the market and buy coverage only when they come down with some kind of serious illness. This is a disaster for insurers.

 courtesy of occupy ventura

of course, most americans feel that single payer is the best way to go, regardless.  where a number of states are making gains.  (and in spite of what happened with the democrats in california.)  steve early, writing for labor notes, asks if vermont can win single payer:

The new system will take five or six years to fund and implement, however, between phasing out existing insurance arrangements, overcoming legal obstacles, dealing with provisions of the Affordable Care Act, and finding the money to pay for it all.

Meanwhile, the local business community, private insurance companies, and right-wing PACs have regrouped and counterattacked, with non-stop advertising. They’re doing their well-funded best to make sure that single payer never happens in this state or any other. They know that a lot can change, politically and in the state budget, between now and final implementation of Vermont’s health care law, particularly in a state with two-year gubernatorial terms.

 courtesy of the wall street revolution

single payer advocate donna smith urges people to come to philadelphia (blogged earlier here) for the Independence Day related health care rally - and whatever the supreme court justices say - right?  I mean, supreme court justices have guaranteed health care - why shouldn't everyone else? 

i think, thinking about health care in america - is similar to thinking about the education of our children. 

it's important to keep our expectations high:  everyone in, nobody out.

no matter what the scions of wall street say, we must keep demanding health care as a human right.  we owe that to ourselves, our children, our children's children, our descendants.

power to the people.

My name is Olivia. I can’t hold a sign because I’m so little.

I was born with club feet. One was so bad, it was nearly upside-down. My feet have been stretched into place and casted into position every week since I was 3 weeks old. It really hurts. I’m 3 and a half months old now, so I’ve done that a lot. It costs about $500 each time. (You can see one of my casts peeking out under my dress.)

On March 21, 2012 I had my first surgery, because the stretching wasn’t working. That cost nearly $9,000, but if my feet don’t get fixed, I’ll never be able to walk.

Medicaid is paying to fix my feet. My Daddy is a disabled veteran, but his insurance won’t cover my feet. My Mom is trying to raise my 3 brothers and I while she wracks up student loans getting her college degree, because minimum wage isn’t enough to keep a roof over our heads.

WIC is paying for my formula, because Mom’s milk never came in. She feels kinda bad about that, but sometimes these things just happen.

I hear that some people want to get rid of Medicaid, the Pell Grant, and WIC, so that the 1% can have even more tax breaks. Well, I want to be able to walk. I need to eat. And my Mom would like to be able to provide for me better someday. I don’t understand why people want to take that away from me. What did I do wrong?

*photo credits:  courtesy of the 99%.

In Absentia

Supreme Court, U.S. Courtroom

Photograph by Harris & Ewing, 1905-1945

Deaf Ears

If justice is blind, it is also deaf. 

In what John Nichols recalled as retired Justice Steven’s “haunting reminder of once prevalent southern lynchings,” Troy Davis was executed late this evening, dying 11:08 P.M. in Georgia.  Community activists decry his execution as legal murder or lynching by the State.

Courtesy of Feministing
U.S. Demonstrators, "I Am Troy Davis"

The U.S. Supreme Court halted the execution moments before Mr. Davis, strapped into a gurney, was to be lethally injected with poisons at 7;  however, it turned out our hopes for a stay had been falsely raised when, not much later, the Court summarily and unanimously turned down the appeal, without explanation. 

Within the next half hour, Troy Davis was killed.

“I am innocent,” Mr. Davis stated simply, shortly before his death.
 

Courtesy of Community Radio For Northern Colorado
International Demonstration For Troy Davis, France

Mr. Davis’ courageous 19 year effort on death row produced 700,000 signatures on petitions to the Georgia prison authorities, worldwide demonstrations, and appeals for clemency from prominent political and community leaders, including a Nobel laureate, a former U.S. President, the Pope, the European Union, 50 members of Congress, former representatives, and a former director of the F.B.I.  No physical evidence connected Mr. Davis to the crime, 7 out of 9 witnesses recanted, alleging police coercion, and one of the two remaining witnesses reportedly boasted of being the actual murderer.  Even jurors came forward to assert that, if they had known differently, they would not have voted for a conviction, and Mr. Davis would be free.

Courtesy of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta

Courtesy of Amnesty International U.S.A.

Yet nine people in Washington on the highest court of American "justice" were so far away from this country and the rest of the world, they couldn't hear a thing.