# Obamacare is eliminating all those crappy individual policies, so it's really okay, right? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2013, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052 "2013-11-16T12:17:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/101 "2013-11-19T19:19:08Z")
> [@](#): > > [http://www.governing.com/gov-data/ce...tatistics.html](http://www.governing.com/gov-data/ce...tatistics.html) Now, was that so hard? Don’t be afraid to ask, we are here to help! ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/102 "2013-11-19T19:21:01Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Now, was that so hard? Don’t be afraid to ask, we are here to help! Dedicated to fighting your ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/103 "2013-11-19T19:28:41Z")
Very reassuring. When do you plan to start? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/104 "2013-11-19T19:34:48Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > I moved to the US because it was, at the time, an island of freedom in an increasingly statist world (not so much anymore, and getting worse all the time). I hope you enjoy your new life in Somalia. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/105 "2013-11-19T19:37:15Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I hope you enjoy your new life in Somalia. Bet you think that response is witty. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/106 "2013-11-19T19:41:56Z")
And this just in, from your good friends over at Daily Kos: [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1...er?detail=hide](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1...er?detail=hide) Far too much to encapsulate, you pretty much have to read it, and follow the embedded links for citation. TL:DR Not totally fixed, but much, much better. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/107 "2013-11-19T19:47:28Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And this just in, from your good friends over at Daily Kos: > > [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1...er?detail=hide](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1...er?detail=hide) > > Far too much to encapsulate, you pretty much have to read it, and follow the embedded links for citation. TL:DR Not totally fixed, but much, much better. I would read it, since your scintillating summary is so intriguing, unfortunately the link appears broken.☹ ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/108 "2013-11-19T19:48:29Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Bet you think that response is witty. It was an attempt to see how deeply you understand and mean what you say on that topic. I think we have our answer. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/109 "2013-11-19T19:49:24Z")
> **[Obamacare enrollments surging, HealthCare.gov working better](https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2013/11/19/1256749/-Obamacare-enrollments-surging-HealthCare-gov-working-better)** > > This should be the day's leading Obamacare news: enrollements across the country are surging, coming in ahead of projections in states across the ... This is a test, I have nothing further to add, but gotta post it to see if it works. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/110 "2013-11-19T19:54:01Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You mean the supremacy clause? Or the commerce clause, maybe? Perhaps you’re not aware that “states’ rights” is a fiction _and has always been one._ Not really. The Supreme Court did hold that the ACA was not supported by the Commerce Clause but as a tax. I think that will prove interesting when different enforcement mechanisms are needed in the future. When it becomes punitive and no longer a simple tax, expect a new round of lawsuits. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/111 "2013-11-19T20:00:39Z")
So, we should expect some resistance, because some people will do whatever it takes to kill this thing? Thanks for the warning. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/112 "2013-11-19T20:13:04Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Not really. I was asking our friend why he’s opposed to health care being a federal bailiwick but he’s fine with the states doing it. “US constitution” was his only reply, implying he’s a states-righter. > [@](#): > > I think that will prove interesting when different enforcement mechanisms are needed in the future. When it becomes punitive and no longer a simple tax, expect a new round of lawsuits. A better term than “punitive” might be “coercive” - you will do this or face the consequences. There’s plenty of precedent for that in legislation, because that’s how most of it works. If the hook that noncompliance means something one can, with contortions, call a “tax” hadn’t been in there, then the teabaggers and the party-before-country wing of SCOTUS wouldn’t have had an anti-Obama case at all. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/113 "2013-11-19T21:14:05Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > There’s plenty of precedent for that in legislation, because that’s how most of it works. If the hook that noncompliance means something one can, with contortions, call a “tax” hadn’t been in there, then the teabaggers and the party-before-country wing of SCOTUS wouldn’t have had an anti-Obama case at all. Yes, but most federal legislation (according to the Court) complies with the interstate commerce clause. The Supreme Court has held that the ACA does not and survives solely because the penalties it purports to impose are so slight that they are a tax. Imagine for the sake of the hypo that the ACA has a deficiency where people are better off paying the “tax” that buying into it. The system starts to implode. To save the system, Congress proposes increased penalties/taxes to offset the deficiency. Aha! No longer such a slight penalty as to be called a tax. It was increased. It is now a penalty! Back up the ladder we go. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/114 "2013-11-19T21:49:09Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Yes, but most federal legislation (according to the Court) complies with the interstate commerce clause. The Supreme Court has held that the ACA does not and survives solely because the penalties it purports to impose are so slight that they are a tax. > > Imagine for the sake of the hypo that the ACA has a deficiency where people are better off paying the “tax” that buying into it. The system starts to implode. To save the system, Congress proposes increased penalties/taxes to offset the deficiency. > > Aha! No longer such a slight penalty as to be called a tax. It was increased. It is now a penalty! Back up the ladder we go. But that is already baked into the law-- the penalty goes up dramatically in the coming years. Why didn’t the court already take that into account? ---
**Author:** ![Farin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e79b87/32.png) [@Farin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farin)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/115 "2013-11-19T21:56:07Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > But that is already baked into the law-- the penalty goes up dramatically in the coming years. Why didn’t the court already take that into account? I am no lawyer, but isn’t it true that you can’t sue over a tax until you’ve been afflicted by it? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/116 "2013-11-19T22:08:02Z")
> [@Farin](#): > > I am no lawyer, but isn’t it true that you can’t sue over a tax until you’ve been afflicted by it? Yes. But the Supreme Court held that for the purposes of the anti-injunction act (which creates the rule you state), the mandate is not a tax. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/117 "2013-11-19T22:15:34Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Yes. But the Supreme Court held that for the purposes of the anti-injunction act (which creates the rule you state), the mandate is not a tax. 😃 **Jtgain** is making the claim, which I’m asking him to explain, that the court finding is dependent on the mandate being “small”. I didn’t see that in the decision, and I’m wondering what he is talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/118 "2013-11-19T22:19:30Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > **Jtgain** is making the claim, which I’m asking him to explain, that the court finding is dependent on the mandate being “small”. I didn’t see that in the decision, and I’m wondering what he is talking about. The determination of whether something is a tax for constitutional law purposes is a functional analysis, and one of the factors is how burdensome the assessment is. The more burdensome, the more it looks like a penalty and not a tax. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/119 "2013-11-19T22:25:33Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > The determination of whether something is a tax for constitutional law purposes is a functional analysis, and one of the factors is how burdensome the assessment is. The more burdensome, the more it looks like a penalty and not a tax. But my point was that we already know how burdensome it will be in future years, so didn’t the court already take that into account when making its decision? Now, if a future Congress makes significant changes to the [del]penalty[/del] tax, then maybe another case brought before the court? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2013, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052/120 "2013-11-19T22:30:37Z")
Yes and yes, respectively. I think the second sentence was **jtgain** ’s point. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamacare-is-eliminating-all-those-crappy-individual-policies-so-its-really-okay-right/674052.md?page=7)