Entire ACA upheld by Supreme Court

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

there were 4 votes, including justice kennedy, to overturn the entire act.

kennedy wrote the dissent.

Great minds think alike. Scotusblog is the best

What do you think about all the calls, even from conservatives, for Scalia to resign after his segue into political commentary while reading from the bench the other day? He's really getting "out there".

[Riot]

What will Supreme Court Ruling mean for me?

Click on "Upheld", enter your insurance status, income, marital status, number in household, and get the result of how this will specifically affect you:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...means-for-you/

For example: if you are married, are insured through work, and make $75,000 a year, the ACA does the following to you:

Your coverage:

Right now:Your insurer cannot set a lifetime limit on benefit payouts. Any annual limits will be phased out by 2014.

Your insurer cannot cancel your plan after you get sick based on a technicality, or discriminate against your children if they have a pre-existing condition.

You may also be entitled to coverage of preventive services without out-of-pocket charges.

If you are an adult under age 26, and one or both of your parents have a health plan, they may be able to put you on it. If you have adult children you can probably keep them on your plan until they are 26.

Starting in 2014:Insurers can’t discriminate against you for having a pre-existing condition, and can only vary rates within a narrow range.

If the plan offered by your employer doesn’t meet the law’s standards of affordability or comprehensiveness, you can buy a different plan through your state’s exchange. Based on your income, you probably would not qualify for federal assistance to offset the cost of that plan.

If you are in your mid-50's (26 to not Medicare age), single, make about $30,000 a year, and have no health insurance now because you can't afford it, or have a pre-existing condition insurance refuses to cover - which is about 40 million Americans if you count married:

Your coverage:

Right now:If you have been unable to obtain health insurance as a result of a pre-existing medical condition, you may be able to buy it through one of the “high risk pools” the law has set up in each state through the end of 2013. But the premiums in the pools vary and can be high.

Starting in 2014:You will have the option of buying a health plan through your state's exchange with federal assistance. Based on your income, your annual premiums for that plan would be no more than $2,415 to $2,850. Your maximum out-of-pocket costs for deductibles and co-payments would be capped at 30 percent of the total cost.

Insurers can’t discriminate against you for having a pre-existing condition, and can only vary rates within a narrow range.

If you do not obtain insurance coverage by 2014 you will be assessed a tax penalty. The penalty becomes progressively greater from 2014 through 2016, when it reaches full strength. At that point, assuming your current income remains the same and your household consists of 1 uninsured adult, you would be subject to a penalty of about $695. You are exempt from the penalty if the least expensive plan option in your area exceeds eight percent of your income.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

What will Supreme Court Ruling mean for me?

Click on "Upheld", enter your insurance status, income, marital status, number in household, and get the result of how this will specifically affect you:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...means-for-you/

For example: if you are married, are insured through work, and make $75,000 a year, the ACA does the following to you:



If you are in your mid-50's, single, make about $30,000 a year, and have no health insurance now because you can't afford it, or have a pre-existing condition insurance refuses to cover:

I do not see the part about owning a small business (or two) that employs around 30 well paid people that opt in or out of employer provided coverage...would not want to publish that.
This is a shock honestly.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

I do not see the part about owning a small business (or two) that employs around 30 well paid people that opt in or out of employer provided coverage...would not want to publish that.
This is a shock honestly.

What is the actual question about employer coverage? If you have to provide coverage or not? No, employers don't have to provide coverage to employees until they are up around 500 or 1000 employees, I'd have to look it up on healthcare.gov

Your employees that opt out of coverage just will have more options to purchase it privately elsewhere.

Here: Go to this link, and click on the following:

http://www.healthcare.gov/using-insu...ess/index.html

Small Business

Small businesses may qualify for tax credits that make it more affordable to provide health insurance to their employees. They also have some unique rights and responsibilities. Learn more here.

What is considered a small business?
Can I get tax credits for providing insurance to my employees?
Do I have to provide health insurance to my employees?
What should the health insurance I offer to my employees cover?
What should I know when I am looking for health insurance options for my employees?
What health insurance alternatives are available to my employees through the new law?
Do I have to pay more based on the health status of my group?
Can an insurer cancel my small employer plan because one of my employees gets sick?
Do I have to report the cost of insurance in my employees’ W-2 forms?

What is considered a small business?

In general, you are considered a small business if you have up to 50 employees. In some states, this will include you if you are self-employed with no employees. Contact your State Department of Insurance to find out whether this applies in your state.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Riot

Great minds think alike. Scotusblog is the best

What do you think about all the calls, even from conservatives, for Scalia to resign after his segue into political commentary while reading from the bench the other day? He's really getting "out there".

i like scalia's sense of humor during oral argument and his obviously sharp legal mind. i think he went over the line into political commentary in his dissent on arizona. i don't think that kind of dissent helps him persuade other justices and that's all i really care about.

you know what you get with scalia. i don't agree with his judicial philosopy in general but outside of bush v. gore i think his votes are in line with his stated philosophy and aren't overly political. i'd be surprised if he repeats arizona.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

i like scalia's sense of humor during oral argument and his obviously sharp legal mind. i think he went over the line into political commentary in his dissent on arizona. i don't think that kind of dissent helps him persuade other justices and that's all i really care about.

you know what you get with scalia. i don't agree with his judicial philosopy in general but outside of bush v. gore i think his votes are in line with his stated philosophy and aren't overly political. i'd be surprised if he repeats arizona.

Good comments. More fair to Scalia than what I've seen in the press lately. We'll see!