Last week, the Blue State Attorney Generals asked the Supreme Court to grant cert (accept the case) and then expedite the process on ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA.
Today CO joined a 20-state coalition asking SCOTUS to uphold the #AffordableCareAct. Coloradans have healthcare due to the ACA including 700k w/ preexisting conditions & 400k thru Medicaid expansion. The fight to protect Coloradans’ healthcare continues. https://t.co/L6v1irJYUW
ā CO Attorney General (@COAttnyGeneral) January 3, 2020
This is in the backdrop of the 5th Circuit mostly agreeing that 90% of the ACA needs to be thrown out as unconstitutional becuase the individual mandate penalty has been zeroed out and they think that the district court was a little too broad in the severability analysis (save calorie counts on fast food menus etc) but mostly right.
The Blue State AGs are betting that the five judge coalition that upheld the ACA in 2012 in NFIB v Sebelius will uphold theĀ ACA against a far weaker trolling argument in 2020.Ā This is a bet on both actuarial tables as two of the justices (Ginsburg and Breyer) are old and a bet on consistency for Roberts.Ā Four justices are needed to grant cert whichĀ is theĀ court’s agreement to hear a case.Ā The four liberal justices are likely to supply those votes.Ā Five votes are needed to expedite a case.
If this case is grant expedited cert, we should expect a ruling in June.
If not, the case percolates for several more years.
Geoboy
Our son had a very bad knee injury playing high school sports.Ā He had his first surgery in 2011, but require another one in early 2015, the first year that Obamacare came into play.Ā Because Obama and company got rid of the pre-existing condition exclusion, the surgery cost about $2,500 instead of $50,000.Ā Fuck every last entitled asshole who wants to wreck this.
Nicole
I’m sick to my stomach that the new Supreme Court will rule against the ACA, but then again, if they do, they’re probably looking at an even bigger blue wave in November (assuming the Russians don’t steal it all).
I was thinking today about how pissed I was about Mayor Pete repeating the “skin in the game” bullshit about co-payments. Ā As someone diagnosed with cancer three years ago (and recently recurred, eff this effing disease), six-month checkups from a variety of doctors are a part of my existence and will be for the foreseeable future. Ā Each of those comes with a $40 copay. Ā We’re managing, so it’s not too great an outlay, but I have plenty of friends for whom $40 is hard to find (or $80, or $120, depending on the number of 6 month checkups) and I could see them skipping them due to lack of funds. Ā As angry as I am about my own cancer recurring, it was caught fairly early again, as I go in every 6 months. Ā Had I skipped this one, due to it being in December, and money being tight what with the holidays and all?
I am just so fucking angry about people who have never had to worry about their finances where healthcare is concerned talking about “skin in the game.” Ā Eff them. It’s cruel. Ā Eliminating the ACA is cruel.
the Conster
In light of this situation, can someone explain to me like I’m 5 years old how a Medicare4All bill survives SCOTUS (without a Hyde Amendment provision), although the possibility of it passing the Senate is less than the chances of it surviving a SCOTUS review?
David Anderson
@the Conster: Magic would be involved
the Conster
@David Anderson:
Yes, and everyone gets a pony!
catclub
Far too many bets.
catclub
@the Conster: How about this: The Medicare eligibility age is reduced one year, every year.Ā Also, all newborns are now covered by Medicare.Ā Families of newborns can enroll in Medicare for a fee.
In twenty years, it changes to reducing eligibility age two years every year.
Those are all completely constitutional changes to a law that has been on the books for 50 years – with continuous changes.
patrick II
It is also a bet that, if there is a decision against the ACA just five months before the election, Democrats may finally wake up and realize the importance of the Supreme court. Geyer and Ginsberg aren’t going to live forever.
That is one of several Supreme Court cases that are due in June that could turn the election. Roberts, the smartest political conservative, will have to thread several needles, including DACA, not to upset the applecart. There are several more, including decisions about abortion, and the president’s executive privilege. Actually more, I just can’t remember them all. It will be a busy season.
patrick II
@Nicole:
Republicans treat everything as a commodity. If I was giving away $200,000 cars to qualified drivers, everyone would show up with their driver’s license to get one. If I was giving away free chemotherapy to cancer patients no one would run out and get cancer to qualify for their free treatment.
Not everyone needs a $200,000 car. People with cancer need to see a doctor.
TomatoQueen
On a related topic, some of us have been screaming about the proposed rulemaking in SSDI/SSI policy that will do damage to recipients who have Continuing Disability Reviews because medical improvement in their cases is expected within X period of time. This category screws people to begin with, and the proposed rule will make the situation worse. The comment period for the proposed rule has been extended for two weeks; whether this will helpĀ advocates for claimants make their case is unclear, as the rule has been pushed for by a newer deputy commissioner (it’s another topic, but we’ve not had many of those until now and the masks are starting to drop). But it is a chance for the public to speak up, be loud, and maybe ACLU can take it up. Details in the fog of bureaucratic language here: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/FR-2019-11-18/2019-24700/summary
Nicole
@patrick II: And I don’t really buy the “but but but if it’s all covered people will OVERWHELM medical facilities with unimportant issues” because I haven’t seen the case made that the cost of potential overuse of facilities would be greater than the cost incurred right now by people not going to the doctor until a minor situation becomes a very major, and very expensive one.
artem1s
I would think that Roberts would prefer this. The longer he draws this out, the more likely he will get the idiot appointees of Dolt45 to to the line and not ruin his legacy.Ā At this point he may have to settle for worst justice since Taney, rather than worst ever. But if he is very, very lucky and Nancy can keep the investigations going, we may get to find out who settled Kavanaugh’s debts.Ā And then Roberts will only be the second or third worst Justice ever.
Snarki, child of Loki
If the Deplorable Five (‘lawless’ John, StripSearch, Token, Kav, and Squi) decide to shoot down the ACA, we can always count on GOPcare!
Here’s how it works: for a low, low monthly fee, noneĀ of your usual healthcare expenses are covered, BUT when that terminal diagnosis shows up, GOPcare kicks in!
What you get:
1. INsANeLy powerful firearms.
2. MASSIVE amounts of ammo.
3. A map to GOPers in your area, for “sharing”.
What’s not to like? You get expedited entry to Valhalla, also, too.
WhatsMyNym
@Nicole:Ā Just went to a Ear, Nose & Throat specialist (ENT).Ā Took 2 months to get the first appointment – that was with a referral. Ā No way they’re going to waste time on somebody who doesn’t have actual symptoms.
And they charge extra to stick that scope up your nose!
Bill Arnold
@Snarki, child of Loki:
That’s brutal. I haven’t had the nerve to type it up, and your version is very very good. It’s also true.
burnspbesq
Iām briefly in health care no-manās land while my COBRA paperwork is being processed. Iām getting a look at what being uninsured is like, safe in the knowledge that Iāll get reimbursed for most of it.
Being uninsured really blows.
catclub
@Snarki, child of Loki: I see what you did there.
rikyrah
@Geoboy:
I know that’s right.
rikyrah
@Nicole:
I get tired of that bullshyt too.
rikyrah
@TomatoQueen:
Mayhew,
can you write a post on this?
janesays
The thing is, the five justices who all ruled previously to save the ACA are all still on the court – the reason why it is Democratic AGs trying to fast track this to SCOTUS is because they believe right now is their best shot to get a favorable ruling. In the event RBG passes and the orange fucklord gets to pick her replacement (a frighteningly real possibility), we’re completely screwed. Counting on Roberts to be consistent on this law is probably our best hope. It’s going to wind up before SCOTUS eventually anyway, and it’s extremely unlikely the court will shift in our favor before it does, but it could definitely shift against us if given enough time.
Another Scott
@artem1s:
Thanks for the reminder that there’s lots of apparently squirrely financial stuff in Kavanaugh’s background.
Grr…
Cheers,
Scott.
Another Scott
TheHill:
So far, so good.
Cheers,
Scott.