# What is your ongoing opinion of the Affordable Care Act? (Title Edited) **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 17, 2013, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561 "2013-01-17T23:21:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 177
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3522 "2015-06-25T14:51:14Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > That’s the sound of thousands of conservative heads exploding. 😃 This was a lucky break for conservatives. Now they can keep pissing and moaning about the ACA and not have to choose between refusing to help millions of constituents who would have lost their insurance or fixing the ACA to help these people while at the same time pissing off the anti-ACA voters. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3523 "2015-06-25T15:51:53Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > That’s the sound of thousands of conservative heads exploding. 😃 “I was praying the pieces wouldn’t fall on me.” - Dylan Yeah, I took a gander at some of the wingnut comments that [Ed Kilgore passed on over at Washington Monthly](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_06/a_moment_of_schadenfreude056271.php). Huckabee calls it “an out-of-control act of judicial tyranny” and, scoring double points for irony, adds, “Our Founding Fathers didn’t create a ‘do-over’ provision in our Constitution that allows unelected, Supreme Court justices the power to circumvent Congress and rewrite bad laws.” ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3524 "2015-06-25T15:55:04Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > It takes 4 to grant cert, but only 3 voted the Fuck Obama line. Which one of the majority voted to hear this silliness just to watch Scalia get apoplectic (again)? But it’s so much _fun_ to see him get like that! I’m betting on Roberts, who has been showing subtle signs of getting fed up with the Court’s crazy uncle. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3525 "2015-06-25T15:56:10Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Subsidies upheld. 6-3 vote. Chief Justice Roberts writes for the Court. Here’s the short version: Roberts: The law is ambiguous and can be interpreted either way, so, as decided in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the IRS has the right to issue its own interpretation. Scalia: What part of “Exchange established by the State” is ambiguous? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3526 "2015-06-25T15:59:22Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > This was a lucky break for conservatives. Now they can keep pissing and moaning about the ACA and not have to choose between refusing to help millions of constituents who would have lost their insurance or fixing the ACA to help these people while at the same time pissing off the anti-ACA voters. Heck, they dodged me. 🙂 I was once interviewed as I got treatment to deal with E.Coli thanks to Obamacare. (Got cured recently, thanks Obama 🙂 ) I told the reporter then that if this had gone the other way I would get involved in politics, and I do not care if Arpaio is the sheriff over here. Even if he would not like to see people like me get involved. I will concentrate now on bringing the wife to the US (very close now, visa is moving along) and then I will get involved to turn Arizona blue in the next election (That is not impossible, the other Clinton won Arizona before.) ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3527 "2015-06-25T16:11:26Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > Here’s the short version: **OOPS - I was reading into the lower-court decision by mistake.** Here’s the “real” short version: Roberts: The law is ambiguous, but the right of the IRS to decide how to apply it “is premised on the theory that a statute’s ambiguity constitutes an implicit delegation from Congress to the agency to fill in the statutory gaps… In extraordinary cases, however, there may be reason to hesitate before concluding that Congress has intended such an implicit delegation." (as decided in _FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp_). That doesn’t apply here, so we’ll interpret it instead - and “state” means “state and Federal.” Scalia: What part of “Exchange established by the State” is ambiguous? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3528 "2015-06-25T16:52:31Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > Here’s the short version: > > Roberts: The law is ambiguous and can be interpreted either way, so, as decided in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the IRS has the right to issue its own interpretation. No, Roberts explicitly rejected applying _Chevron_ here. (OK, I see you picked up on that.) I was skimming the decision fast, but the gist of that part seemed to be that if Congress was going to delegate something this major to a government agency, they’d have done so explicitly - and they would have especially been explicit in their intention to delegate to the _IRS_, which isn’t exactly expert on health care. IMHO, the short version is this, from the end of part II.C. of Roberts’ opinion: > [@](#): > > We have held that Congress “does not alter the fundamental details of a regulatory scheme in vague terms or ancillary provisions.” _Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc.,_ 531 U. S. 457, 468 (2001). But in petitioners’ view, Congress made the viability of the entire Affordable Care Act turn on the ultimate ancillary provision: a sub-sub-sub section of the Tax Code. Or in the immortal words of the Rutles, “Hello, Get Lost.” If that isn’t calling bullshit on the fundamental premise of the plaintiffs’ case, I don’t know what it is. ---
**Author:** ![2ManyTacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/3da27b/32.png) [@2ManyTacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2ManyTacos)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3529 "2015-06-26T04:53:39Z")
I’ve been so fucking giddy all day over the ruling. I especially love that the majority basically laughed the challenge out of court. Thank goodness. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3530 "2015-06-26T05:19:08Z")
Anyone have any comment on the President’s statement in response to the ruling? He made two odd claims: 1. That health care is now a right for all under ACA. 2. That ACA is here to stay. The first says directly that we have universal health care, the second strongly implies that single payer ain’t ever gonna happen. Obamacare is at least as permanent as Medicare. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3531 "2015-06-26T05:27:16Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > It takes 4 to grant cert, but only 3 voted the Fuck Obama line. Which one of the majority voted to hear this silliness just to watch Scalia get apoplectic (again)? > [@RTFirefly](#): > > But it’s so much _fun_ to see him get like that! > > I’m betting on Roberts, who has been showing subtle signs of getting fed up with the Court’s crazy uncle. Nah. I’m thinkin’ Ginsberg, that little minx… ---
**Author:** ![rsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/839c29/32.png) [@rsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsa)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3532 "2015-06-26T06:04:18Z")
Roberts using Scalia’s previous words in the majority opinion. What a hypocrite to do a 180 in his dissent. > [@](#): > > …the words of a statute must be read in context and with a view to their place in the overall statutory scheme. > [@](#): > > A provision that may seem ambiguous in isolation is often clarified by the remainder of the statutory scheme. [Graphics from “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell” on MSNBC 06-25-15] ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 9:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3533 "2015-06-26T09:39:02Z")
> [@rsa](#): > > Roberts using Scalia’s previous words in the majority opinion. What a hypocrite to do a 180 in his dissent. Yeah, I’m going with “Roberts is totally fed up with Scalia.” Clearly the hostility is mutual, but Roberts is doing a better job of expressing it in a more civil manner. Not surprising, given that Scalia’s basically going senile, and Roberts isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3534 "2015-06-26T11:32:29Z")
Looking back, was this case even worthy of the Court? Basically you take four words out of a 900+ page law which are in conflict with the intent of the law and other parts of the law and declare that the entire law hinges on those four words. I think this is right there with the “this court has no jurisdiction because it has yellow fringe on the flag” nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3535 "2015-06-26T11:32:36Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Anyone have any comment on the President’s statement in response to the ruling? He made two odd claims: > > 1. That health care is now a right for all under ACA. I think it’s a philosophical point, and not necessarily one codified into law (though I’m sure Obama would like it to be). > [@](#): > > 1. That ACA is here to stay. > > The first says directly that we have universal health care, the second strongly implies that single payer ain’t ever gonna happen. Obamacare is at least as permanent as Medicare. I believe ACA proponents (including Obama, most likely) believe that universal health care would be an improvement on the ACA, and would be seen more as such then as a removal-and-replacement of the ACA. So the ACA can be “here to stay” even if it is ultimately “improved” into UHC. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3536 "2015-06-26T11:39:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The first says directly that we have universal health care, the second strongly implies that single payer ain’t ever gonna happen. I don’t see why. Nothing in the ACA needs to change; just add a public option for health insurance that is cheaper and with better benefits than private insurers. They will disappear in short order, and we will have _de facto_ single-payer health care. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3537 "2015-06-26T11:41:31Z")
And that can be as simple as a phased expansion of Medicare eligibility. That was almost part of \*this \*bill until Lieberman’s puppetmasters made him oppose it. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3538 "2015-06-26T11:56:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think it’s a philosophical point, and not necessarily one codified into law (though I’m sure Obama would like it to be). > > I believe ACA proponents (including Obama, most likely) believe that universal health care would be an improvement on the ACA, and would be seen more as such then as a removal-and-replacement of the ACA. So the ACA can be “here to stay” even if it is ultimately “improved” into UHC. Except that the President has constantly referred to ACA as universal health care. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3539 "2015-06-26T11:57:30Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > And that can be as simple as a phased expansion of Medicare eligibility. That was almost part of \*this \*bill until Lieberman’s puppetmasters made him oppose it. You won’t see more Democrats in Congress than you saw in 2008 for the rest of your lifetime, so if it didn’t happen then it won’t happen in the future with a less Democratic Congress. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3540 "2015-06-26T11:58:15Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Except that the President has constantly referred to ACA as universal health care. I don’t believe you without multiple cites (for “constantly”). Please check them thoroughly – I certainly will. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/3541 "2015-06-26T12:03:55Z")
ACA is universal _access_ to health-care insurance. Close enough for now. > [@adaher](#): > > You won’t see more Democrats in Congress than you saw in 2008 for the rest of your lifetime, so if it didn’t happen then it won’t happen in the future with a less Democratic Congress. So you tell us your guys are going to \*continue \*to make reflexive, replacement-less opposition to ACA, for any reason or none, the center of their agenda no matter how support for that view continues to shrink (it’s already a minority position). Your first statement does not follow from that premise. And can we list that among your election predictions? 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561.md?page=176) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561.md?page=178)