Press "Enter" to skip to content

Supreme Court Upholds PPACA/ObamaCare

Last updated on 2021.06.17

From the SCOTUS Blog's live coverage of the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act:

Chief Justice Roberts' vote saved the ACA.

ObamaCare is pretty much constitutional, including Mitt Romney's major contribution, the individual mandate to buy health insurance.

In his weak ramblings yesterday, poor excuse for an anonymous blogger "Bill Clay" said, "If [PPACA] does go down, Mitt Romney will be right that the first three and a half years of Obama's presidency have been for nothing."

Chief Justice Roberts's salvation of the PPACA (as predicted by Robert Reich!) apparently says that the first three years of the Tea Party have been for nothing.


  1. Bill Fleming 2012.06.28

    Justice Roberts is slowly making his way onto my "good guy " list. That's two in a row. Immigration and now this. Hope and change, baby. Hope and change.

  2. mhs 2012.06.28

    This really points a gun at the Teapots. The court left an out for states to opt-out of expanded coverage, but, they then cannot participate in additional funding from the federal government. The choice will be: will we reject the feds and go our own way on care if it requires a state tax increase to pay for?

    That'll keep a few folks up at night.

  3. Ashley Kenneth Allen 2012.06.28

    Here’s a list of some–and by no means all—of those changes in effect now. The websites below give details of the sweeping changes that will occur over the next several years.

    It is now illegal for an insurance company to deny payment for treatment or cancel your coverage after you get sick because of an error or technical mistake on your application. Policies can be canceled only on the basis of fraud.
    Rules prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to children under the age of 19 due to a pre-existing condition.
    Insurance companies are prohibited from imposing lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays.
    Preventive care: All new health plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, copay, or coinsurance.
    Young adults can stay on their parent’s plan until they turn 26 years old. Check with your insurance company or employer to see if you qualify.
    Small business owners (with up to 25 employees and average annual wages of less than $50,000) can get a tax credit of up to 35% of the employer cost of providing employee insurance; this goes up to 50% in 2014 if purchased through an insurance exchange.
    States can receive federal matching funds to provide Medicaid coverage for low-income childless adults. States will be required to provide this coverage in 2014.
    Seniors who reach the coverage gap (donut hole) in their Medicare Part D prescription drug plan this year will receive $250. Beginning Jan. 1, 2011, they get a 50 percent discount when buying Part D-approved brand-name drugs. Additional savings will kick in until the coverage gap is closed in 2020. Seniors on Medicare will also receive certain free preventive services beginning in January.
    A temporary reinsurance program has been created to help employers continue to provide health insurance coverage to early retirees over age 55 who are not eligible for Medicare as well as their spouses and families.
    Individuals who have been uninsured for at least six months because of a pre-existing condition have new insurance options through a Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan. In 2014, all discrimination against pre-existing conditions will be prohibited.

  4. mike 2012.06.28

    Disappointed in Roberts.

  5. Troy 2012.06.28

    The Court ruled the federal government has the ability to tax a person for not doing something, in this case not buying insurance.

    Obama said this was not a tax. I guess he was wrong.

    In November, we will know if today was a Democrat/Obama phyrhic victory.

  6. Winston 2012.06.28

    After I heard Obamacare had been upheld. I turned the tv channel to FOX News (for entertainment reasons only) and Karl Rove was on and he looked like he had just ate a cat....This is a great day for America!

  7. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.28

    I'm disappointed too, Mike. Chief Justice Roberts should have been able to bring more of his conservative colleagues across the ideological divide to do what's right for America.

  8. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.28

    Troy, the best you've got is that Obama won on his back-up argument? I can live with that. So can millions of Americans who get health insurance thanks to President Barack Hussein Obama. Four. More. Years.

  9. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "the first three years of the Tea Party have been for nothing."

    The first 200 years of America has been for nothing.

  10. Bill Fleming 2012.06.28

    I figured Troy would like this decision. He has said all along, the law would be okay if the penalty were considered a tax.

  11. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "I figured Troy would like this decision."

    And so will Big Insurance and the corporate medical establishment.

  12. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    The most contentious aspect of the 2010 law is the ``individual mandate.’’ Requiring that most Americans obtain insurance is a critical tradeoff in barring insurance companies from denying benefits for pre-existing conditions and imposing other limits on coverage.

    Without forcing healthy people to buy insurance and pay into the pot, not enough premiums will flow into an insurance plan to cover everyone who gets sick. In anticipation of the Supreme Court ruling, insurance companies in recent weeks have been scrambling to explain why they need this provision if they are going to be required to cover all comers, regardless of their medical history or condition.

    Without the mandate, individual insurance premiums would rise to the point of becoming prohibitively expensive, and tens of millions more people would remain uninsured – the very problem the law was meant to address, analysts said.

    That is why Troy Jones and the SDGOP Establishment are celebrating. The paid lobbyists will have more taxpayer funded and debt financed money available to line the pockets of the corporatists who fund the campaigns of those who play Steve Hickey.

  13. Troy 2012.06.28

    Bill, if you think I said it would be "OK" if it were a tax as in a good law, that is not what I meant. I only said the best constitutional argument was it was a tax. As a Republican wanting Obama and Co. beaten in November, the ruling has net very positive results for the election.

    Besides President Romney, the Senate will include:

    Akin from MO
    Allen from VA
    Berg from ND
    Mack from FL
    McMahon from CT
    Rheberg from MT
    Thompson from WI

    Potential Dems now in trouble

    Brown from OH
    Stabenow from MI

    When you factor in the 2014 Dem Senators running for re-election, replace and repeal actually got a boost.

  14. Troy 2012.06.28

    Steve, you a a fricking idiot. I am not celebrating but I understand the rationale that the Constitution allows broad taxing powers. The election matters. You can either continue to rant about the establishment which is all over the TV rallying people to repeal this or get behind us. Your call.

  15. Jana 2012.06.28

    It will be interesting to hear Marty Jackley's reaction. How much did SD taxpayers wager on fighting this to buff up Marty's conservative street cred?

    It will also be interesting (in a the same way watching a train wreck is interesting) to hear the radical right after first seeing the AZ immigration law declared unconstitutional and now the Affordable Care Act upheld by the ultra conservative Supreme Court.

    Stace, how does the Supreme Court's ruling on the AZ immigration law impact what you would like to see SD adopt? Are you still thinking of supporting an immigration law modeled after the unconstitutional AZ law? Given that it has been determined to be unconstitutional, would you promote spending taxpayer dollars to fight that ruling with your proposed law?

    Some of the radical right screechers were also blasting the Governor and legislative leaders (not to mention booing Charlie) for putting in place the things necessary to comply with, and benefit from the Affordable Care Act Do you suppose in hindsight they will agree that this was a prudent thing to do on the part of the Governor?

  16. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "You can either continue to rant about the establishment which is all over the TV rallying people to repeal this or get behind us."

    Sorry Troy, I am done playing the political theatre that we see on TV. It is a manipulation. Romney passed ObamaCare before Obama was put into the White House. The SDGOP Establishment have been wanting to pass RomneyCare in South Dakota for years. There is no way for an informed voter to believe that the GOP will overturn ObamaCare if given the power. GW Bush expanded Medicare with his D plan. GW Bush appointed Roberts who approved this gift to Big Insurance and the corporate medical establishment. Don't insult my intelligence.

  17. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    Jana, why do you support cheap labor for corporatists and taxpayer funded customers for health insurance companies and corporate medical providers?

  18. Dougal 2012.06.28

    Jackley might make a statement, but maybe he's busy wiping the egg smeared on his face. Maybe he better walk up the staircase outside his office and do his job at the Secretary of State's Office.

  19. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    It takes a "fricking idiot" to not believe the governor who passed ObamaCare in Massachusetts is the one to repeal it. Wake up America and stop listening to what you see on TV.

  20. Dougal 2012.06.28

    Face it, Steve. The Tea Party is dead. The Supremes just put a stake through its fading heart. In fact, the Tea Party was never a factor in South Dakota and the 'establishment' Republicans running your state party have prevented the Tea Party from getting rooted. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

  21. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    Troy, this is from the same report I linked to above:

    The president fulfilled a longstanding goal of the Democratic Party in 2010 when he pushed through the most sweeping expansion of health care coverage since the federal government established the Medicare insurance program for the elderly in the 1960s. The law included a vast expansion of the federal Medicaid program to include millions of new beneficiaries and set up an array of cost-savings and reforms in federal healthcare programs. Modeled on the landmark healthcare plan passed by former Governor Mitt Romney in Massachusetts, the federal law also calls upon states to establish healthcare exchanges where low-cost and subsidized plans would be offered.

  22. Troy 2012.06.28

    The ruling on Medicaid was the standing which Jackley and the state's attorney generals primarily argued and they prevailed.

    Jackley won.

  23. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    Willard just conceded the presidential race to the President: From Boise State Public Radio's Scott Graf: "If you planned to drink every time Mitt Romney said "Obamacare", you just died."

  24. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    Dougal, no arguments from me. Just understand that the "Tea Party" label has been put on those of us who are "conservative". The new bosses are the same old liberals. I am not in this to win, I am in this to tell the truth about what is really going on. The same smoke and mirrors that is being used to get conservatives to back Romney is being used to get Democrats to back the corporatists planned economy that includes healthcare (RomneyCare/ObamaCare/DaugaardCare).

  25. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "Jackley won."

    He told me that the best way to defeat ObamaCare is through the judical process, not the legislatvie process. Jackley has been proven wrong.

  26. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.28

    Remind me of the full argument from AG Jackley, Troy. He was basically defending South Dakota's right to access federal money even without doing everything the federal government tells it to, right? That doesn't sound like a resounding conservative victory to me.

  27. Troy 2012.06.28

    Basically, the Obamacare requirement that state's change their Medicaid eligibility rules or lose Medicaid funding. This is how the court ruled (7-2 agreed with this).

  28. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "That doesn’t sound like a resounding conservative victory to me."

    That is right Cory. We have two choices, one is liberal, and the other is...liberal too. The corporatists win either way.

  29. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    Greg Kaufman from The Nation: "not to be a buzz kill, but I think the #Medicaid decision potentially sucks for poor people. Fed gov loses stick to compel states to expand."

    Does anyone know whether the chemical toilet has administrative jurisdiction over tribal Medicaid disbursements?

  30. Troy 2012.06.28

    Larry, Kaufman is correct. It is looking like early enthusiasm among Democrats will become muted. Obamacare only works now with an additional tax increase that will apply to all Americans (not just those who don't comply with the individual mandate).

  31. Michael Black 2012.06.28

    We just got our rate increase notification a few weeks back for our health insurance. It's starting to hurt.

    It doesn't matter if you are Republican or Democrat, the monthly bill will soon become unaffordable for all of us.

    I'm personally against government being more involved than it need to be in our daily lives.

  32. Carter 2012.06.28

    In a way, I'm glad that there are some issues with tax increases and such. It gives the government more incentive to continue to fix the medical system. Hey, if we reform it, and it still sucks for poor people, then maybe we'll go all the way into single-payer healthcare.

  33. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "Fed gov loses stick to compel states to expand.”

    So why is the Marxist left so in love with tyranny?

  34. Steve Hickey 2012.06.28

    Sibby - No corporatist pac money has come to me to line the pockets of my campaign. Zero. You use my name and smear and yet what you say isn't true. Liar. Shame on you.

  35. Rorschach 2012.06.28

    Troy, you're trying a bit too hard to turn your lemons into lemonade. The prospects for GOP senate challengers got more difficult with this court decision then they would have been had the individual mandate been struck down. With a strike down the GOP challengers would have bludgeoned Dem senators from now till November for supporting an unconstitutional law. Now they lost their hammers. Nice try spinning it though.

    Here's my take. The GOP was for individual mandates (personal responsibility) before it was against them. Republicans who want to govern effectively as opposed to scoring political points are still for individual mandates.

  36. John Hess 2012.06.28

    At least we can maintain some faith in the Supreme Court, although they are reporting the GOP will continue to fight its implementation.

  37. Rorschach 2012.06.28

    Here's my election prognostication. I think the GOP will lose seats in the house, gain a couple seats in the senate. I think Romney will narrowly defeat President Obama in the electoral college but not get a majority of the popular vote. Romney will be so unpopular in 2014 that Dems will retake the house and senate and see great success in state legislatures and other state offices in 2014.

  38. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "The paid lobbyists will have more taxpayer funded and debt financed money available to line the pockets of the corporatists who fund the campaigns of those who play ball…like Steve Hickey."

    So why are you paying ball with them? The corporatists funded the Governor's campaign, and he did endorse you right? You supported DaugaardCare (SB38 & SB43), right?

  39. Rorschach 2012.06.28

    PS: Noem vows to continue talking about this on national tv - though she doesn't like to talk.

  40. Troy 2012.06.28

    Rorchsach, I have always said Congress has broad taxing powers under the Constitution. Obamacare was affirmed under the taxing powers, even though Obama said it wasn't a tax.

    John, the declaration the Medicaid and requirements on the states makes the bill effectively neutered without either additional taxes or significant addition to the deficit. Darn right we will fight its implementation as supported by a MAJORITY of Americans. We are a democracy and in November the GOP will end up on the right side.

  41. Jana 2012.06.28

    Get ready for kabuki theater.

    I'm guessing that the Republican House will entertain us all and rally the mouth breathers with a repeal bill...should be good theater, but an incredible waste of time and money!

    Of course, they're good at doing things full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing.

    Kind of like their jobs bills that they load up with ideological junk they know wouldn't pass muster, let alone create jobs.

    I just wish that the Republic would throw the entertainers out and realize that governing is not a game.

  42. Jana 2012.06.28

    In the immortal words of the Governor of Texas...oops.

    Should be Republicans and not Republic.

  43. Jana 2012.06.28

    Troy, I'm curious about the new tax on all citizens that you are referring to, guess I was thinking it was only for those who chose not to have health insurance.

    I guess I'm confused, because most people's taxes have gone down since Obama became President. I know mine have and some of my friends in the 6 figure income range have had theirs go down even more than mine.

  44. Troy 2012.06.28

    Rohrshach, actually people who analyze the polls say that if there is a repeat of the 2000 election (Gore winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college) it will be Obama losing the popular vote but winning the electoral college and not as you posit.

    The reason is Romney needs a shift of about 3% in the swing states he is currently behind to win an electoral college victory. If you translate that across the nation, he wins the popular vote by just under 3%. In fact, right now, among the likely voters it is a virtual tie in the polls yet Obama wins the electoral college 312-226.

    Ironic that the electoral college is Obama's best protection considering liberal past criticizing the electoral college and advocating abolishing the electoral college while the GOP supports retention of the electoral college.

  45. Troy 2012.06.28

    Jana, it is a tax. That is all I said.

  46. John Hess 2012.06.28

    Simpler would be better, like Medicare For Everyone, but there are some very positive things in the bill that go in the right direction.

  47. Bill Fleming 2012.06.28

    Jana, actually, with the accent it's more like "Eewps..."
    But yeah. Like you said...

  48. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    Jacklow on Bill Janklow's idea of public radio suggesting that employers should get out of the insurance business.

  49. Bill Fleming 2012.06.28

    ...a tax that's easy to avoid paying, Troy. Just buy health insurance. ;^)

  50. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    Jacklow sounding like a candidate for something in the earth hater party.

  51. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    Jacklow second-guessing SCOTUS: gawd.

  52. Jana 2012.06.28

    Guess I'm not following you on the tax's what you said that has me confused.

    "Obamacare only works now with an additional tax increase that will apply to all Americans (not just those who don’t comply with the individual mandate)."

  53. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    Michele Bachmann self-immolating: I'd pay to watch that.

  54. Jana 2012.06.28

    “Eewps…” again. (Thanks Bill!)

    My last post was for Troy...sorry. And Troy, I am genuinely interested in what that tax on everyone is.

  55. Jana 2012.06.28

    At last a job creating plan from the Republican party!

    There is going to be a huge demand on fact checkers as the R's spin the Supreme's decision.

    Good job guys. Now about that transportation bill....

  56. Jana 2012.06.28

    Oh my, Eric Cantor just weighed in...and he has a plan for lowering health care costs...wait...what....he's just saying that?

    Just curious Eric, how are you going to lower costs, you know as a government worker, and at the same time not have the government involved?

    Hey, maybe he's thinking that insurers will lower their premiums, hospitals will lower their charges and big pharma will cut their costs in half!

    Brilliant plan Mr. Cantor! Let the free market work this out so that we aren't spending a crazy amount of our national GDP on healthcare!

    (Cut to Stephen Colbert chanting we're #1, we're #1)

  57. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "Sibby – No corporatist pac money has come to me to line the pockets of my campaign. Zero. You use my name and smear and yet what you say isn’t true. Liar. Shame on you."

    This is what I said:

    "That is why Troy Jones and the SDGOP Establishment are celebrating. The paid lobbyists will have more taxpayer funded and debt financed money available to line the pockets of the corporatists who fund the campaigns of those who play ball…like Steve Hickey."

    Here is the link to his campaign financing:

    Steve Hickey's campaign was self funded, so my statement was wrong in regard to Steve receiving coporatists money. I apologize and repent with the promise that I will not repeat my depravity in regard to that issue. I stand behind the statement that Steve is playing ball with the SDGOP establishment.

  58. Rorschach 2012.06.28

    Troy, if my election prognostication differs from that of the "experts" I'm o.k. with that. It's all in good fun.

  59. Rorschach 2012.06.28

    And Troy, if you label something "Obamacare" and ask people if they're for or against it there may well be a sizable majority against it. If you educate people by telling them what is in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as Ashley Kenneth Allen has done above, people are strongly for it.

    Your party is labeling and demagoguing (sp?) for votes. The Democratic Party will be trading on actual facts. Where is the honor in the GOP dumbing down the conversation? The GOP seems to do that a lot these days. That just says to me the GOP can't defend its positions.

  60. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    I have a question for Steve Hickey:

    Did Dusty Johnson ask you to vote for the big projects legislation that is now Referred Law 14?

  61. Jana 2012.06.28

    Troy, just read your post on the War College and I have to admit that you have put out the most intelligent response to the SCOTUS decision that I have seen so far.

    We might disagree, but I do respect the thought that you put into your comments...still puzzled by the tax on everyone and not just those who choose to gamble with their health care at everyone else's expense.

    Wasn't the whole concept behind the mandate put forward by the Heritage Foundation a push for personal responsibility? Last I checked, that seemed to be a pretty popular thing for Republicans.

    I do have to chuckle a little that my Democrats worked so hard to say that the penalty for not taking personal responsibility wasn't a tax...and that ends up being the point that Robert's used to defend "Obamacare."

    And at least we can agree that Sibby is crazy...see Sibby, you are bringing people together in a hyper partisan world...good job!

  62. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "That just says to me the GOP can’t defend its positions."

    No they misrepresent their positons. It was Romneycare before it become Obamacare.

  63. Steve Hickey 2012.06.28

    Sibby - Dusty and every other interested party made their case to me and every other legislator. Same story with HB1234. These insinuations that I was bought or leveraged are just false. I got an endorsement from the Gov cuz I asked for one for a Lincoln Day dinner ad. They have funneled no money to me in 2010 or in 2012, so far. However, I'm not self-funding my campaign this time around, even a nickel, so it'll be bare bones if checks don't come in. If some Obamacare healthcare group sent me money, I take it, say thank you, and then vote my convictions on whatever bills came up. It is a false assumption that a South Dakota legislator getting a PAC check means they are in someones pocket and they've sold their soul.

  64. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.28

    Jana, there's a difference between the language we use to win elections and the language that wins a legal argument. I've coached and judged enough debaters to know that sometimes the argument you think is just filler turns out to be the crucial point for the judge. A win's a win. PPACA is constitutional. Yahoo!

  65. Rocker 2012.06.28

    Note to Michael Black - Like you and most others with private health insurance - we feel your pain from paying higher premiums. The reason our insurance goes up is because we pay for those that don't have insurance...that is called "cost shifting."

    What's unfortunate is that our health care system is broke. It is financially unsustainable. As Americans, we can't afford the health care we demand....period. I don't care about Republicans or Democrats, I care about my family, my friends and my neighbors, and the fact that it needs to be fixed. So when we vote in November we need to send the message that we don't care about credit and blame, we just want these issues fixed. We have all these incredibly intelligent minds, so work together and don't come out of the room until it's done! By done, we mean - health care that is effective, affordable, sustainable and ethical. The victory should not be one celebrated by a political party, but as citizens of an amazingly healthy country!

  66. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "It is a false assumption that a South Dakota legislator getting a PAC check means they are in someones pocket and they’ve sold their soul."

    Steve, thanks for answering my question. I have to disagree with the above statement. It is nearly impossible to separate yourself from those that hand you money. If handing out money did not make a difference, then these people would have stopped handing it out a long time ago. Second if money does not manner, then end campaign finance reporting requirements. Money has corrupted the political process, and I will say that the degree does vary from individual to individual.

  67. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "The reason our insurance goes up is because we pay for those that don’t have insurance…that is called “cost shifting.” "

    Rocker, there is also a cost shift from those who are on government plans (Medicaid, Midicare, and the IHS) as their reimbursement rates are below cost. The only way to make the system more efficient is to apply the cost/benefit rule. That can't be done as long as those receiving the benefit are not paying the cost.

  68. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    And Mr. Hickey, is Dusty one of those evil blue badges?

  69. Rocker 2012.06.28

    Correct - Medicaid pays providers about 79-cents on the dollar, Medicare is at about 85-cents and IHS - they run out of money before you can calculate it. Bottom line is that if you have private insurance, you're already paying for those other entities.

  70. Bree S. 2012.06.28

    Justice Roberts is a pragmatist. We need a Republican as President to control the next Supreme Court appointments.

  71. Michael Black 2012.06.28

    This is not a matter of politics for my family. It's a matter of money. We cannot take double digit increases forever. It won't matter how noble the cause or how great the principle. We won't be able to afford it.

  72. Jana 2012.06.28

    Here's some questions that I hope every reporter asks our elected Republican leaders.

    Are you for increasing the amount that seniors pay for their prescriptions?

    Are you for people being able to gamble with their healthcare costs by not having insurance at the expense of everyone else?

    Are you against finding $500 billion in savings in Medicare costs by streamlining electronic information and eliminating fraud?

    Are you for insurance companies being able to deny coverage once someone gets sick?

    Are you for eliminating children from ever getting insurance due to pre- existing conditions?

    Are you for saddling young adults just starting their careers with exorbitant health insurance costs?

    Are you against leveling the playing field for small businesses in providing benefits to their employees?

    Are you against subsidized preventative health measures that reduce future costs?

    If the PPACA is a government takeover of health care...why are private insurance companies seeing huge profits, complete with hefty executive bonuses? Looking locally, why are South Dakota's hospitals experiencing healthy balance sheets, job creation with way above average salaries?

    And the must ask question for our Governor, Senator Thune and Congresswoman Noem is:

    What's your actual plan for improving healthcare for all Americans?

    These are just some off the top of my head...but then, I'm not a reporter. I'm guessing they will have many more and better questions.

    (Hi Montgomery, Woster, Mercer, Tupper, Lawrence, Ellis, Gronseth, Helene, Heinert, Caudill, Knobe, Hunter, Fier, Dockendorf, Hertz...looking forward to your reporting)

    Bonus snark question:

    Do you really believe that the PPACA has death panels, or do you just rely on Sarah Palin's extensive reading and knowledge to form your opinions?

  73. Steve Sibson 2012.06.28

    "Do you really believe that the PPACA has death panels, or do you just rely on Sarah Palin’s extensive reading and knowledge to form your opinions?"

    They are called "exchanges". The rules as to what is and what isn't covered are determined by the Director of Insurance.

  74. mike 2012.06.28


    I find self imolation reprehensible and your comment even more so. No one should ever with terrible things upon another.

  75. Bree S. 2012.06.28

    The Supreme Court has ruled that Obamacare is a tax. Now it is time to vote out its supporters and repeal the tax.

  76. Jana 2012.06.28

    Bree, so who would you vote in for President? Ron Paul?

  77. Donald Pay 2012.06.28

    The Supreme Court upheld the health insurance mandate, a Heritage Foundation concept that was supported by Republicans up until the date President Obama agreed to introduce the measure. It had been the alternative used by Republicans against Hillarycare. It has been included in Republican Party platforms. It had been the concept passed in Massachusetts that was introduced by the likely Republican nominee for president this year. So what we actually have is the Supreme Court agreeing that the long-standing position of the Republican Party is constitutional. I'm not sure why the Republican Party isn't claiming credit for Obamacare.

    I've notice FOX News is now backing away from the term "Obamacare," fearing it will now becoming wildly popular. Repeal and replace the Republican health care plan? I think that's not going to happen.

    News reports here in Madison, WI, are that the hospitals, doctors, clinics, and medical software companies are ecstatic.

  78. larry kurtz 2012.06.28

    (years of self-induced trauma...don't ask.)

  79. Bree S. 2012.06.28

    The Supreme Court upheld the mandate as a tax, not as an expansion of commerce clause powers.

    I'll vote for the Republican nominee.

  80. Owen Reitzel 2012.06.28

    now its time for our Governor and the legislature (Stace) to step and be leaders. Don't leave South Dakota behind

  81. Douglas Wiken 2012.06.28

    Apparently the federal attorneys arguing before SCOTUS said to not take the congressional anti-tax baggage seriously and if they could not support it under the commerce clause, it was constitutionally supportable as a tax.

    We can now see if the SD Republican establishment will decide that those of us who pay for health insurance will watch them turn down 100% of the care costs for the unrich for three years and then the 90% federal share from then on.

    I do wonder if the GOP preference for forcing the unrich through hospital emergency doors will triumph over the logic of letting Uncle Sam pay for them in a rational way instead of having excess costs added to our health insurance premiums. Voters as well as establishment news people should be asking all politicians the questions Jana asked.

Comments are closed.