Healthcare at the high court

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 14:59, November 17, 2011 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Item |author=Los Angeles Times editorial board, |source=Los Angeles Times |date=November 16, 2011 |url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-health-20111116,0...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) Los Angeles Times editorial board
Source Los Angeles Times
Date November 16, 2011
URL http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-health-20111116,0,4240404.story
Quote
Quotes-start.png Judge Laurence Silberman (a Reagan appointee) ruled that the individual mandate is constitutional because it regulates the way people pay for their inevitable participation in the market for medical care. In addition, he wrote, the mandate is a critical part of the new rules Congress created for the insurance industry, which are designed to expand coverage and stop insurers from discriminating against people with preexisting conditions. As the Supreme Court has previously decided, Congress can intervene in local, individual decisions when necessary to support a legitimate regulatory regime for interstate commerce. Quotes-end.png


Add or change this opinion item's references


This item argues against the position Act should not have been passed on the topic Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.