General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSeveral lawyers on MSNBC today
say that if they had passed this under tax and spend laws and charged a tax instead of the mandate it would be constitutional...as Cuccinnelli (sp) from Virginia said that if the cost of insurance were paid in taxes instead of premiums to the insurance companies, it would be constitutional...wouldn't that be single payer, if we paid our premiums were paid by taxes ?
cindyperry2010
(846 posts)to me but they would not have thought of that
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)so if a plan amounted to an expansion of Medicare to all Americans there would likely
be no reason for the plan to be found to be any different constitutional-wise.
CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)for all are the insurance companies and their paid lackeys in the GOP and DNC.
Whiskeytide
(4,461 posts)... the republicans on the Court find themselves in. The easiest way to strike down the mandate might simultaneously legitimize single payor.
Uncle Joe
(58,365 posts)Thanks for the thread, EC.
EC
(12,287 posts)karynnj
(59,504 posts)It could be that there was a tax and then everyone got a voucher that was used to apply towards their health insurance. (Obviously, single payer is better)
The Wielding Truth
(11,415 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,365 posts)not every American was subject to it, just hazardous duty sailors.
ProfessionalLeftist
(4,982 posts)If that's how it worked.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Single payer is probably the only workable answer. That does not mean that the government has to run the health care or be the only insurer. That isn't necessarily the way single payer works.
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)They have nonprofit private organizations to offer health care. There is competition for tax dollars paid to those health care non profits.
The key is NON-PROFIT. By law, in these countries, they are forbidden to be FOR PROFIT.
That is a big difference.