ACA is constitutional: the reactions

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve no doubt heard that earlier today the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the vast majority of the provisions in thethe Affordable Care Act are constitutional, a decision that no doubt came as a surprise to many. Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the court’s more liberal bloc in making the ruling.

There’s been a lot of reaction from folks on both sides of the issue, and here’s some statements from various elected officials and organizations here in Wisconsin.

Here’s the statement of Democratic State Rep. Mark Pocan, who’s running to replace Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin’s 2nd Congressional district.

“As a progressive, I see the Affordable Care Act as a critical first step toward universal health care coverage. In the Wisconsin Assembly, I helped guarantee coverage to 98 percent of our residents as well as all of our children. On the Joint Finance Committee, I fought to implement that coverage along with SeniorCare, Wisconsin healthcare programs that the Affordable Care Act bolsters.

“In Congress I will continue to work to expand health care. I look forward to the day when every man, woman, and child receives health care as a right, not a privilege.”

Here’s a statement from Democrat Pat Kreitlow, who’s challenging incumbent Republican Rep. Sean Duffy in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional district.

“Talking with Wisconsin families who are worried about the cost of health care and The Affordable Care Act’s impact on government spending, it’s clear that this law and the decision upholding it was an important step, but there are a lot of changes that need to be made before we can have true reform.

“As we go forward, let’s not forget what the health care issue is all about. Families and small business owners cannot afford to go back to a system where abuses by private insurance companies create higher medical bills and hurt local job creation. We need folks in Washington who are willing to overcome partisan differences to take on the real challenge of exploding health care costs families face without returning to a system that enabled insurance company abuses against our children and without creating a system that unduly hurts jobs and adds to the deficit.

“I understand what middle class families and small businesses in Northern and Central Wisconsin are going through, and I will make sure that their voices – not those of insurance or pharmaceutical special interests – are what guide choices going forward. A healthy economy depends on healthy families and reducing costs for healthy outcomes.”

And here’s the reaction of Ken Taylor, the executive director of the Wisconsin Council on Children & Families.

“The Supreme Court’s ruling is great news for everyone in Wisconsin,” said Ken Taylor, executive director of the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families. “Many Wisconsinites have been benefiting from the parts of health care reform already in effect. This decision will allow thousands more to benefit from a health care system that is fairer and more responsive to the needs of health care consumers.”

And last (but certainly not least), here’s the statement of Rob Zerban, the Democrat challenging Republican Rep. Paul Ryan in the 1st Congressional district.

“I am pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act, protecting millions of Americans from living at the mercy of health insurance corporations,” said Rob Zerban.

“While I still support stronger healthcare plans, like ‘Medicare for All’, President Obama’s health care reform was a bold move in the right direction toward providing affordable healthcare for all Americans.

“It is a shame that Paul Ryan did not, and continues not to support providing health care for people in his district. From voting against the Affordable Care Act to working to end Medicare as we know it, Paul Ryan would gladly put American families at risk simply to ensure profits for his campaign contributors in the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.”

Share:

Related Articles

14 thoughts on “ACA is constitutional: the reactions

  1. I find the statements related to standing up to the insurance companies somewhat ironic. This was a huge victory for the health insurance companies. They know it, Wall street knows it, United Health’s stock was up over 8% today:

    http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=UHS&source=story_quote_link Tenet Health care was up over 5%.

    Today the health insurance companies gained billions of dollars in market cap. They know that this bill provides them with a license to print money. Only middle class America seems to believe that this a victory at the expense of the insurance companies.

    1. Yeah, count me among those who always believed the Affordable Care Act was severely flawed and far more complicated than it needed to be. I know there were easier health care reform “solutions” than the one we ended up with.

          1. Obama care guarantees that a single payer system will never occur since it requires everyone to become dependent on private insurance.

  2. Don’t forget the quote from Scott Walker, who is lying in calling it a ‘massive tax hike’ and refusing to implement ACA in Wisconsin until after the November election. Perhaps that could be a different post in order to keep from sullying all these nice quotes.

    1. Well, Walker was not the first to call it a “tax” today.

      That’s what the Supreme Court called it today.

      And that is going to fuel the righties, as Walker is just joining the chorus of those who will use this against Obama — who kept denying that it was a tax.

      Ouch.

      1. If the individual mandate as construed (un-Constitutionally apparently) under the Commerce Clause was the necessary funding mechanism, how will we now pay for it?

        1. That wasn’t the funding mechanism. There are several tax hikes to health care providers which they happily agreed to in anticipation of the increased business from the no-longer uninsured.

  3. How ’bout some response gems from the other side of the aisle? I inserted my own opinions as well.

    Ron Johnson, Propagandist:
    “It is now up to Congress – and hopefully a new President – to repeal this unpopular monstrosity and replace it with free market reforms that will actually improve the quality and restrain the cost of health care in America.”
    Well, Mr. Johnson this unpopular monstrosity is a real-life, bonafide example of “free market reform” that “will actually improve the quality and restrain the cost of health care in America.”

    Rand Paul, “Constitutional Scholar”:

    “Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional.”
    Well Paul Jr: When “not just a couple” but a majority of “people on the Supreme Court” – also known as Supreme Court Justices declare something to be unconstitutional, it does make it so. It’s their job.

    And, unsurprisingly, Ron Paul, Historical Ignoramus:
    “Today we should remember that virtually everything government does is a ‘mandate.’ The issue is not whether Congress can compel commerce by forcing you to buy insurance, or simply compel you to pay a tax if you don’t. The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of a free society should be the rejection of force.
    Well, little sniveler, you might try making that argument to: George Washington whose 1792 Congress passed a law mandating eligible militia men to purchase a gun, George Washington signed that bill. You might try debating what a free society means to John Adams whose 1798 Congress passed a law requiring private sector mariners to purchase health insurance. John Adams signed that bill into law. You might also try making that argument to Thomas Jefferson who advocated the same bill to create government-run health care, paid for by…God Forbid…Taxes.

  4. The company I work for has over 20,000 employees and what Obamacare calls a Cadillac health plan for the employees. Because of this they will have to pay a tax on the plan. Now if they just drop the insurance and pay the tax for not having insurance for the employees they will pay less out of pocket then what they will for the healthcare plans. I am expecting that within 2 years I will be shopping for my own health care because Obamacare is penalizing people for having insurance. I have no problem with a national plan to help those who don’t have insurance, there is no reason this country does not help everyone, but I am pissed that I am being punished for have a very good plan now.

  5. If you have a Cadillac plan you are probably in the 1% of employees lucky enough to have one. Currently you pay no income tax on that benefit. The plan asks those who have such plans to help pay for those who don’t. Someone needs to be the ones helping those without. So if you have to pay some tax when you receive a great benefit you think your employer will just throw the whole thing out? Think about it.

    1. Yes, Bill H, because for some of those with so-called Cadillac plans, because their employer hiked the costs for years now for those in the Milwaukee area, the boss will throw the whole thing out — because the boss is you.

      They are your state employees in the Milwaukee area.

      Think about that.

      Another hit to take-home pay that the taxpayers of Wisconsin already have hit by 11 percent or more.

      (The minimums that the Obama administration use in the ACA do not take into account the varying local costs of health care, and perhaps you have noticed the media coverage for years now that finds Milwaukee’s health care costs highest in the country?)

  6. The ACA will tax the employee on the excess over averages, yes. If the employee contributes that is also used in the calculation as to how much is taxable to the employee. I was responding to JWayne who thinks that his employer will drop the plan because the employee has to pay income tax. His argument was that Obamacare will cause employers to drop insurance. My response still is to him, Think about it.
    Also there is hope, whether is occurs or not, that other provisions in the plan will control health care costs. If there is some competition among insurance providers maybe something will happen. I can’t guess what we will be discussing in 2015 after everything is fully implemented.

Comments are closed.