Senators request Live TV Coverage for health care ruling

From the article:

... "In a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts, the senators said the court should be aware of the great interest Americans have in the outcome of the case. They also noted that millions of citizens would be able to view what only a few could see from the court's limited public seating." ...

Senators request live TV for health care ruling - BroadcastNewsroom

Since it affects everyone in the country, that makes sense to me.

Supreme court decisions are not read or performed by someone at the court, they are passed out in printed form.

I guess they could televise the passing out of the printed decision.

Originally Posted by Jim5506

Supreme court decisions are not read or performed by someone at the court, they are passed out in printed form.

Pretty sure they have proceedings when they hand down a decision. Printed copies are available for credentialed media but as it is with everything on the courts it has some element of ceremony to it.

So this is how it works.

Judges go into the courtroom, fan out in order of seniority.

The media sits in the satellite room (?) and they will get the copies of the ruling afterwards, but the opinions will be read by the justices first I believe.

It's all over now. I'm going to have a tough decision to make in November now. Scary.

Originally Posted by Orrymain

It's all over now. I'm going to have a tough decision to make in November now. Scary.

Orry,

The decision is easy for me. Since ObamaCare passed, my Health Insurance has almost doubled. Now that it has been confirmed, exactly where will the billion dollars come from to run it?

Jim

I don't know. My concern is for the low income folks being required to have insurance. While there is provision for those over the 133%, what about those right at the poverty line? Where are they supposed to get the money for a premium? I think I read something about Medicaid, but I just don't see how that is going to work. I can't believe I am being forced to vote for someone I really do not like, but I am feeling like I have no choice now. Like I said -- scary.

Just a few hours after the decision was announced, this NBC poll has got to hurt!


Do you think the Supreme Court made the right decision?

32 % Yes 79,824 votes

60 % No 151,251 votes

8 % I'm not sure 21,028 votes

The poll should be: who are you going to vote for in November!

People like almost everything in the health insurance law except the penalty for not having insurance. They want everything they see in the shopping mall but they don't want to pay for it. Nothing unusual there.

- Trip

Trip,

I disagree. Most people don't want to be forced to pay for someone else's tattoo removal. Why should 60 year old women be forced to pay for birth control and the Government forcing the Catholic Church do anything certainly violates the alleged seperation of Church and State.

On the other hand, Health Insurance Companies have (somewhat) brought this upon themselves by dumping ill people they should have continued covering.

There are some very good points to the 2,700 page law that Nancy Pelosi said "We have to pass it so we can find out what's in it ..." and if that's how our elected officials are going to run this Country (run us) that's nuts.

Jim

Originally Posted by Trip

People like almost everything in the health insurance law except the penalty for not having insurance. They want everything they see in the shopping mall but they don't want to pay for it. Nothing unusual there.

- Trip

My only concern was the constitutionality of the law.

Obama clearly said this wasn't a tax. The SCOTUS basically rewrote the law to say that it was for the sole purpose of upholding the law. Actually it wasn't even the SCOTUS, it was CJ Roberts.

It's interesting because if the individual mandate is indeed a tax, revenue bills need to originate in the house and the ACA did not.

So now this ruling basically says that the Government can force you to buy anything, penalize you if you don't, and call it a tax.

Let's say the Government wanted to reclaim the OTA spectrum. Easy way to do it - mandate that everyone get pay TV service then shut off OTA. If you don't subscribe to pay TV? Sorry you'll pay a fine... sorry I mean a TAX.

The USPS becomes unprofitable, even with the 70 year pension funding mandate removed. How do we fix it? Shut it down, mandate that everyone get a computer, broadband and e-mail. Don't have one? Pay a fine, call it a tax and call it a day!

Ryan, I agree 100%.

In broad terms, now the law-passers could mandate solar cells on every American home owners roof. It would create a genuine market for that sector of the failed 'green energy' industry. Being forced to purchase a solar cell roof or the choice of fines and / or jail time, what would the average Citizen do?

Jim

Originally Posted by n2rj

My only concern was the constitutionality of the law.

Obama clearly said this wasn't a tax.

Won't disagree with this, but will agree it was stupid to do, because it was plain-as-day obvious it was a tax. Just trying to avoid the "T" word for political purposes.

So now this ruling basically says that the Government can force you to buy anything, penalize you if you don't, and call it a tax.

Nothing about that is unprecedented. By that logic, I am being forced to have a child and pay for the additional goods and services that go with having a child, and since I have no children, I am getting taxed extra. I get to choose between having one or more children and paying more in taxes.

- Trip

<----- Has universal health care. Is happy



(How much did it cost me last time I went to the doctor or hospital.... Nothing!)




I do actually have health insurance... to pay for the ambulance costs! (Yes, thats a serious statement)

(and others also do have actual health insurance... mainly to help with things like dentistry and optical - which arent strictly covered under Medicare. - I have problems with neither of those. And there are some incentives to use private providers for high income earners)

Its been only three days since ObamaCare was confirmed and I should have guessed: my monthly premium is going up next month $140.00. That's another $1,680 per year. I need to revise Post #7 above: since Obama took office my Health Care Insurance rates have almost tripled.

What happened to Obama's promise that our rates would go down?

Originally Posted by Trip

Won't disagree with this, but will agree it was stupid to do, because it was plain-as-day obvious it was a tax. Just trying to avoid the "T" word for political purposes.

In a nutshell, yes. The "political purpose" was that the President didn't want to say that he was raising taxes or enacting a new tax on the middle class, and that the healthcare bill was not a tax increase.

It's not that obvious that it is a tax. Roberts was pretty much the one calling it a tax. The liberal justices tried to uphold it based on the commerce clause, and the conservative justices tried to strike it down.

This doesn't address the issue that it was a tax (revenue bill) that originated not in the house, which is unconstitutional. There's a reason revenue bills don't originate in the senate.

Nothing about that is unprecedented. By that logic, I am being forced to have a child and pay for the additional goods and services that go with having a child, and since I have no children, I am getting taxed extra. I get to choose between having one or more children and paying more in taxes.

- Trip

This is pretty much unprecedented. From the moment you are born you are now obligated to buy a product or face a tax. There hasn't even been anything close to it.

Originally Posted by Fringe Reception

Its been only three days since ObamaCare was confirmed and I should have guessed: my monthly premium is going up next month $140.00. That's another $1,680 per year. I need to revise Post #7 above: since Obama took office my Health Care Insurance rates have almost tripled.

What happened to Obama's promise that our rates would go down?