Posted by: Timothy Ellis (The Tim)

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

507 responses to “Health Care Open Thread Smackdown”

These comments are paged! This is page 6. Navigate the pages here:
1 4 5 6
  1. pfft

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 249:

    RE: pfft @ 248 – Go back and read the opinion again, particularly the part about throwing out the entire law due to no severability clause and the part about why the court did not issue an injunction.

    If the administration does not appeal that case (and time is running out on that), then they lost on the issue in a case involving a final decision, and that will be binding on them nationwide. That’s why Alaska is not doing anything to implement Obamacare at this time. They don’t have to. It currently is not the law of the land.

    yes it is.

    Judge Hudson, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, declined the plaintiff’s request to suspend the act’s implementation pending appeal, meaning there should be no immediate effect on its rollout.

    Judge Voids Key Element of Obama Health Care Law
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/14/health/policy/14health.html?_r=1

    more judges have ruled constitutional than unconstitutional.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  2. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: pfft @ 1 – Different decision. The one I’m referring to wasn’t even decided in 2010, when that article was written. Also, it’s not like you keep score with the decisions. That doesn’t affect the fact that the government was a party to a lawsuit which threw out the entire act. Until that is stayed, that decision is binding on the government.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  3. pfft

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 2:

    RE: pfft @ 1 – Different decision. The one I’m referring to wasn’t even decided in 2010, when that article was written. Also, it’s not like you keep score with the decisions. That doesn’t affect the fact that the government was a party to a lawsuit which threw out the entire act. Until that is stayed, that decision is binding on the government.

    the healthcare law is in effect. that is a fact. prove otherwise. show me how lost their coverage after they had it government mandated.

    you’re wrong.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  4. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: pfft @ 3 – If you don’t understand the law, don’t try to make claims about what the law is.

    But to answer part of your question, an insurance company is very unlikely to change its coverage as a result of the decision that struck down Obamacare. If a stay is granted (likely), they’d have to change back, so all that effort would be for nothing. That also ignores the time it takes them to make changes.

    But for probably the third or fourth time, Alaska is not making the changes required by Obamacare.

    Also, I’d note that apparently the US Government doesn’t agree with you, and have asked the judge to clarify his opinion.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/49060220/Motion-to-Clarify

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  5. pfft

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 4:

    RE: pfft @ 3 – If you don’t understand the law, don’t try to make claims about what the law is.

    But to answer part of your question, an insurance company is very unlikely to change its coverage as a result of the decision that struck down Obamacare. If a stay is granted (likely), they’d have to change back, so all that effort would be for nothing. That also ignores the time it takes them to make changes.

    But for probably the third or fourth time, Alaska is not making the changes required by Obamacare.

    Also, I’d note that apparently the US Government doesn’t agree with you, and have asked the judge to clarify his opinion.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/49060220/Motion-to-Clarify

    look on the right, it’s still the law.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

    so far the latest ruling was to uphold obamacare. the score is 3-2 in favor of it being constitutional.

    “Alaska is not making the changes required by Obamacare.”

    who cares?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  6. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: pfft @ 5 – Again, if you don’t understand the law, don’t try to make claims about what the law is. Go to law school and learn about what the effect is of losing a court decision prior to appealing it and obtaining a stay pending appeal.

    BTW, the judge’s response to the government’s motion for clarification should be interesting. If I were the government lawyer that signed that thing I’d be having a few restless nights.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  7. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 6 – I’m going to back off a bit on this issue. I was struck by how little authority was cited by the government in its motion, but there was one Supreme Court case which has language which supports their position. That language is given without any citation of authority, however. Having read a few cases now, I’m not convinced either way. It’s possible a stay pending appeal might not be necessary–but seemingly an appeal would be. And that has not occurred, that I’m aware.

    So, currently I still think the law is out, but it may only take a notice of appeal to change that. In any case, if a notice of appeal is filed, I would think a stay pending appeal would be likely.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

These comments are paged! This is page 6. Navigate the pages here:
1 4 5 6

Leave a Reply

Do you want a nifty avatar picture next to your name, instead of a photograph of Tim's dog? Just sign up with Gravatar, and make sure to use the same email address in the form below. It's that easy!

Please read the rules before posting a comment.

You have 500 comments remaining on this post.

Archives

Find us on Google+