Broccoli

[MrFun]

I would be fine with scrapping the entire law because of the unconstitutional section, rather than expose insurers and the insured to the "death spiral".

In other words, no ransom. The sniper takes the shot.

I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water.

[Dinner]

I agree that if the mandate is shot down then single payer becomes the only option but in the US the opportunity to reform health care seems to only come around once every 20 years so it will be ~2030 before another attempt to reform the system happens.

[kentonio]

I think you might be surprised. The dems should be good for the White house and both houses as long as they don't **** anything up too badly between now and then.

[Hauldren Collider]

Shows what you know about US politics...Single payer has no chance of ever happening. No one would pass such a law, the Democrats are seriously unlikely to ever get the 60 votes needed to pass it. They couldn't get 60 democrats to agree to single payer; they certainly won't be able to now.

And Obama is certainly in trouble come the election, especially if this law gets struck down.

[DinoDoc]

When you ask if people like "Obamacare" ...

I was actually quite specific in the comment you quoted when I mentioned the mandate and not the general rubric of Obamacare.

67 percent believe the high court should either ditch the law or at least the portion that requires nearly all Americans to have coverage.

As Health Care Law’s Trial Approaches, Two-Thirds Say Ditch Individual Mandate

[Dinner]

I was pointing out if you ditch the mandate then you really can't keep things people really like such as the coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.

[DinoDoc]

I was pointing out if you ditch the mandate then you really can't keep things people really like such as the coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.

Keeping the law without the mandate, though, is a difficult task, since insurers say it’s needed to restrain coverage costs.

KEEP OR KILL – Given that reality, respondents in this survey who prefer to keep the law but without the mandate were asked which they’d prefer if that option were not available: keep the law entirely, or kill it entirely. They tipped toward killing it, 52-44 percent.

From the same article.

[MrFun]

[The Mad Monk]

I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water.

THATS NOT A BABY...

[The Mad Monk]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]171434[/ATTACH]

YES!!!

[kentonio]

Shows what you know about US politics...Single payer has no chance of ever happening. No one would pass such a law, the Democrats are seriously unlikely to ever get the 60 votes needed to pass it. They couldn't get 60 democrats to agree to single payer; they certainly won't be able to now.

No-one would pass such a law? Don't be ridiculous, if the Dems make a clear and strong case for it saving the US vast sums of money while also ensuring full coverage then of course they could pass it, they just need to fight for it and not give in to Republican lies and smears. (****ing death panels, I still can't believe so many Americans were stupid enough to believe that ****.)

And Obama is certainly in trouble come the election, especially if this law gets struck down.

In trouble? Sure, that must be why he's currently leading Romney by 11 points in the latest polls..

Incidentally if this law is struck down theres a good chance it'll actually help his reelection rather than harm it. He gets to redraw the battle lines against the GOP on healthcare, and the GOP wouldn't have **** to offer especially now that the mandates they have supported for decades are removed from the table.

[PLATO]

I am a bit confused at why some people say we should only reject part of the law because we would be getting rid of "the good parts" as well. You guys know that Congress can immediately pass "the good parts", right?

[kentonio]

You mean the now Republican led congress which has shown such willingness to pass legislation?

[DinoDoc]

Why should the Court care about that, ken?

[notyoueither]

Basically the individual mandate is horrible anyway (and a republican idea), the bad thing is losing the overall positive effects of getting uninsured people some healthcare. If they strike this down then single payer comes back on the table.

Won't that be ironic, if the Republicans immoral little trick ended up with single payer being enacted.

What is wrong with the German and Swiss systems? Mandated insurance is used in several OECD countries.