tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post33486054159687645..comments2023-10-28T08:02:44.565-05:00Comments on illusory tenant: Obama acknowledges the inevitableillusory tenanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-23054976985546390812011-08-16T17:36:17.933-05:002011-08-16T17:36:17.933-05:00Employment isn't but income is the preconditio...Employment isn't but income is the precondition...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-45612648852085962382011-08-16T14:01:52.307-05:002011-08-16T14:01:52.307-05:00'For example, Wisconsin has no mandate but als...'For example, Wisconsin has no mandate but also a very high rate of insurance coverage relative to other states.'<br />Not for long, and we're starting from the bottom up.Suenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-64768105620719986692011-08-16T13:15:55.924-05:002011-08-16T13:15:55.924-05:00The one I would watch is Sotomayor.The one I would watch is Sotomayor.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-8681820574445205532011-08-16T13:13:16.315-05:002011-08-16T13:13:16.315-05:00However, single payer is a mythical unicorn in Ame...However, single payer is a mythical unicorn in America circa 2011, so I am not sure what your point is supposed to be.<br /><br />The mandate is the mechanism in PPACA to get near-universal coverage and to prevent the free rider problem of people who only sign up for health insurance when they get sick. But there are other ways to get to the same goals of expanding coverage to near-universal levels. For example, Wisconsin has no mandate but also a very high rate of insurance coverage relative to other states.<br /><br />To be sure, as politics, "Obamacare unconstitutional" would be a brutally bad headline for the president. But as policy? The main people screwed by a loss of the mandate are insurance companies. They have lobbyists. They would get to work drawing up a system of incentives or Wisconsin-like subsidies that would accomplish largely the same thing without calling it a "mandate."<br /><br />That is because apart from the mandate, most of the rest of the law -- closing doughnut hole, ending rescission, ending pre-existing condition exclusions and so on -- is so popular that it basically cannot be repealed. (I suppose SCOTUS could strike down the whole law and not just the mandate, but that seems unlikely.)<br /><br />I do think it would make sense for liberal policy wonks to start sketching out what that post-mandate PPACA might look like should Justice Kennedy side with the conservatives on this one. But imagining that the rejection of the mandate will usher in the American people's embrace of a glorious single-payer Medicare-for-all utopia is not that.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11595113265845094240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-84162599423535632582011-08-16T10:55:13.450-05:002011-08-16T10:55:13.450-05:00Sure but employment shouldn't be a condition p...Sure but employment shouldn't be a condition precedent for access to basic, preventative health care in a just society.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-70076296817347247852011-08-16T10:49:57.929-05:002011-08-16T10:49:57.929-05:00However, the single payer system has nothing to do...However, the single payer system has nothing to do with a persons income, which a minimum should include healthcare.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-70500758806995594862011-08-16T10:19:40.846-05:002011-08-16T10:19:40.846-05:00Yes. The same policy arguments that support the in...Yes. The same policy arguments that support the individual insurance mandate provide even more convincing support for a single-payer system. And a single-payer system would present not one constitutional problem whatsoever.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-7996972083954773522011-08-16T10:16:03.996-05:002011-08-16T10:16:03.996-05:00National healthcare was suppose to cover everyone ...National healthcare was suppose to cover everyone and save everyone money. Rather, we got 2700 pages of goobly gook with what appears to be an unconstitutional provision. <br /><br />It would seem to me with all the lawyers we have in Washington that someone could have figure out that the American people would oppose an out of pocket mandate but would support a minimum income mandate without all the other BS. Did they really think people would support a provision that could someday kill them? <br /><br />It also seems to me that National Healthcare needs to be simplified and privatized through 3rd party adminsitrators who can save costs with competitive quoting. It would be a win win for everyone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-80865643439336240992011-08-16T09:56:36.407-05:002011-08-16T09:56:36.407-05:00Thanks. Well Point/Blue Cross was point for the he...Thanks. Well Point/Blue Cross was point for the health insurance oligopoly in drafting AFA/Obamacare. Among other inequities, it forces the middle class to buy really crappy coverage. We need a public option now. We need to move to Medicare-for-all.John Caspernoreply@blogger.com