By The Tim on March 31, 2010
Talk about health care to your heart’s content, as much as it takes to get it out of your system so the rest of the site can stick to real estate and housing. Note that comments posted here will not clutter up the “recent comments” box on the sidebar.
As of 03/31/2010, health care comments go here and here only.
Posted in Administrative, Open Thread | Tagged administrative, health_open
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.
By Kary L. Krismer @ 249:
yes it is.
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:
0 
0
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:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 2:
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:
0 
0
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:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 4:
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:
0 
0
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:
0 
0
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:
0 
0