Reuters reports that the US Supreme Court has ruled 6 - 3 in favor of the nationwide availability of tax subsidies that are crucial to the implementation of President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law, handing a major victory to the President. It marked the second time in three years that the high court ruled against a major challenge to the law brought by conservatives seeking to gut it. "Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them," wrote Chief Justice Roberts, who added that nationwide availability of the credits is required to "avoid the type of calamitous result that Congress plainly meant to avoid." The ruling will come as a major relief to Obama as he seeks to ensure that his legacy legislative achievement is implemented effectively and survives political and legal attacks before he leaves office in January 2017.
Justice Antonin Scalia took the relatively rare step of reading a summary of his dissenting opinion from the bench. "We really should start calling the law SCOTUScare," said Scalia, referencing the court's earlier decision upholding the constitutionality of the law (SCOTUS is the acronym for the Supreme Court of the United States).
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday June 25 2015, @05:37PM
My employer and my insurance company both blame Obamacare for the increases. Hmmm . . .
And you believe them? Hmmm, we need to get the mental health provisions into Obamacare, Stat!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 25 2015, @05:58PM
Do I believe them? Yes and no. No, I don't believe that they can justify the increased rates. But, I most certainly believe that they can rationalize the increased rates by blaming Obamacare. And, it's working - the rates have been jacked up, and I have little choice but to pay them! Five years ago, I had an option to just drop the damned insurance, today, the law says I don't have that option. Obviously, the rates can be increased by 10, 30, even 100% at the insurance company's whim, each and every year. If I were getting the subsidy, the near-term pain would be masked, but what about five, or ten years from now, when gubbermint turns the subsidies off?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 25 2015, @05:59PM
Mine has not gone up since Obamacare, for the first time ever.
So there's the opposite anecdote for you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 25 2015, @06:20PM
> Mine has not gone up since Obamacare, for the first time ever.
I went from paying $550/month with a $5K deductible and a 30% co-pay to $300/month with a $2K deductible and $10 office-visits and $10 diagnostics.
Former plan was through my employer, later plan was a "gold" plan bought through my state's exchange website.
(Score: 1) by Squidious on Friday June 26 2015, @01:17PM
We are paying the same price as two years ago for much better coverage. No subsidies and complaints here, either.
The terrorists have won, game, set, match. They've scared the people into electing authoritarian regimes.