ACA passes SCOTUS test - Summary
Well, there is wrong and there is wrong. I was wrong in my presumption that the Supreme Court would strike down the mandate to buy insurance. They did not, but found it permissible only in that they felt it could be classified as a tax i.e. there really isn't a mandate to buy insurance, just a mandate to pay a tax if you do not. So, for those poiliticians (the cowards) who found this legislation acceptable only in that they could say they did not pass a tax increase, the Supremes just squashed their talking points. The provision that was (surprisingly I thought) struck down was the backdoor requirement that states expand medicaid or risk losing all medicaid funds. Medicaid is expected to pick up a good portion of the 'newly insured' post 2014. Most all states still likely will adopt this, so the legal restriction is likley more precedent setting than eventful.
However, some of what I was concerned about occurring as a result of the ruling did come to pass. I'm not going to be specific, as I want to act on this event.
Here are some good brief commentaries from NPRs health blog.
Health Law Survives with Ropbert's Vote
Cokverage of the ruling itself
High Court Ruling Shifts Action to the States
Comments on the struck down provision.
"I think almost no state in January 2014 wants to be in the position of having to explain to the rest of the country why its poorest citizens can't get any coverage,"
Health Care Law Upheld: Now What
Nicely lays out the current and pending key provisions of the law.
And for the complete wonks, here is the ruling itself.
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS ET AL. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL
I have not read this through yet myself - I'm supposed to be on vacation and it was all I could do to sneak in commentaries on the ruling via my cell phone while at part of the Cape Cod national seashore yesterday, until my wife took the phone away that is. I look forward to reading this later and will comment as appropriate.