Supreme Court Takes Its Time on Health Care
Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on November 15th, 2011 5:45 am by HL
Supreme Court Takes Its Time on Health Care
The Supreme Court has agreed to decide the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care overhaul once and for all and it has devoted 5½ hours to oral arguments—more time than any other case in 40 years. Arguments usually last only an hour, except in special cases. The court will rule on four points, including whether the law’s mandate that all Americans buy private insurance is constitutional. —PZS NPR: In an apparent effort to be as comprehensive as possible, the court certified four questions for review. First, and most important: Did Congress exceed its constitutional authority in requiring virtually all Americans to have basic health care coverage? The second: If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, does the rest of the law stand? Even the government now says there would be no way to provide the goodies everyone likes in this law without the expanded pool of people paying into the system. The third question: Does the law impose unconstitutional conditions on the states by requiring them to pay 5 percent more into Medicaid by 2017 to cover the increased number of people under the program? And the last question: Is it is premature to decide the first three? Read more
The Supreme Court has agreed to decide the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care overhaul once and for all and it has devoted 5½ hours to oral arguments—more time than any other case in 40 years. Arguments usually last only an hour, except in special cases.
The court will rule on four points, including whether the law’s mandate that all Americans buy private insurance is constitutional.? —PZS
NPR:
In an apparent effort to be as comprehensive as possible, the court certified four questions for review. First, and most important: Did Congress exceed its constitutional authority in requiring virtually all Americans to have basic health care coverage?
The second: If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, does the rest of the law stand? Even the government now says there would be no way to provide the goodies everyone likes in this law without the expanded pool of people paying into the system.
The third question: Does the law impose unconstitutional conditions on the states by requiring them to pay 5 percent more into Medicaid by 2017 to cover the increased number of people under the program?
And the last question: Is it is premature to decide the first three?
Related Entries
- November 15, 2011 Oakland Mayoral Adviser Tells Keith Olbermann Why He Quit
- November 14, 2011 Cops Send Occupy Oakland Protesters Packing
Report Claims Rep. Bachus Capitalized on Financial Meltdown
It’s already bad to think of a congressman cashing in on his insider knowledge of impending economic catastrophe, as Alabama’s Rep. Spencer Bachus stands accused of doing, but it’s all the more darkly ironic given his role as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Bachus is denying that he used his position to his financial advantage after a damning report aired on “60 Minutes” on Sunday night, but even conservative rabble-rouser Andrew Breitbart isn’t buying it. Bachus isn’t the only high-profile public servant implicated in the report, but his alleged offense apparently registered higher on the scandal-o-meter. —KA Politico: While the CBS report also cited the alleged trading activities of Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the online conversation is funneling most of its outrage toward Bachus. “Forget Pelosi, Here’s The Most Stunning Detail From The Congressional Insider Trading Report,” reads the title of a post at BusinessInsider, which continues, “the most shocking revelation actually concerns a lesser-known Congressman, Rep. Spencer Bachus, who shorted the market as the economy collapsed in 2008.” Read more
It’s already bad to think of a congressman cashing in on his insider knowledge of impending economic catastrophe, as Alabama’s Rep. Spencer Bachus stands accused of doing, but it’s all the more darkly ironic given his role as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
Bachus is denying that he used his position to his financial advantage after a damning report aired on “60 Minutes” on Sunday night, but even conservative rabble-rouser Andrew Breitbart isn’t buying it. Bachus isn’t the only high-profile public servant implicated in the report, but his alleged offense apparently registered higher on the scandal-o-meter.? —KA
Politico:
While the CBS report also cited the alleged trading activities of Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the online conversation is funneling most of its outrage toward Bachus.
“Forget Pelosi, Here’s The Most Stunning Detail From The Congressional Insider Trading Report,” reads the title of a post at BusinessInsider, which continues, “the most shocking revelation actually concerns a lesser-known Congressman, Rep. Spencer Bachus, who shorted the market as the economy collapsed in 2008.”
Related Entries
- November 15, 2011 Oakland Mayoral Adviser Tells Keith Olbermann Why He Quit
- November 14, 2011 Cops Send Occupy Oakland Protesters Packing
