One for the history books
One useful thing about the Supreme Court's decision to uphold Obamacare is that it clarifies and accentuates the importance of November's election ("Health law upheld," Friday). If you think Obamacare is another entitlement America can't afford, you may vote for Mitt Romney, who has promised to repeal it. If you think the act's benefits are worth their costs, you may vote to reelect President Obama.
Considering the outsize role personality and innuendo play in politics, it's heartening that this decision offers the nation a stark ideological contrast. It is a great opportunity for Americans to assert the importance of their voices. 2012 will be one for the history books.
Now dig into health-care costs
Now that the legality of the health-care act is settled, the next major step should be a comprehensive, bipartisan investigation of all issues that contribute to health-care costs. This should include HMOs, and insurance, drug, and medical-device companies — all with shareholders who must be satisfied — and also for-profit hospitals and doctors whose monetary return must be satisfied, as well as that of all ancillary personnel. This is a very complicated issue that does not allow the government time to dawdle.
Desperate move by Roberts
The Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare was the most unjust decision since the Dred Scott ruling. Chief Justice John Roberts, in desperation to avoid having the court be accused of being political, decided to change water into wine by spinning a penalty into a tax.
Next up, single-payer system
The Supreme Court's decision on the Affordable Care Act looks like a mixed blessing. Chief Justice John Roberts has earned the gratitude of the health-insurance corporations by upholding a popular but only partial reform of our health-care system. The ACA does little to reduce the high cost of that system. We, the insurance-premium payers, still have to support the insurance companies' bureaucracy and bottom line.
The battle for the real solution to the high cost of medical care, which already exists for government officials and for Medicare recipients like me, is single-payer, like Social Security.
A defeat for democracy
Simply put, the Supreme Court's upholding of Obamacare is a victory for socialism and a defeat for democracy in the United States.
No longer a derogatory name
The Affordable Care Act was frequently derided by Republicans as "Obamacare." However, many once-derogatory names take on new meaning with time. "Obamacare" may likely give this administration another term in office, as well as an honored place in the history books.
Subjects, not citizens
President Obama, the Democrats in Congress, and now five justices have fundamentally changed what it means to be an American. We are no longer citizens; we are subjects.
The difference in November
Obama Cares. Mitt Romney doesn't.
What is wrong with our Supreme Court? What is it that makes intelligent justices find things in the Constitution that aren't there and ignore things that are there? It's dysfunctional. It's inherently dysfunctional because of the number of 5-4 decisions on our most important issues. It's morally dysfunctional because some judges do not follow the Constitution they swore to uphold. This makes it even more important that we elect a president who will appoint judges who will follow the Constitution.