US Appeals Court Upholds Individual Mandate Healthcare Law
Yesterday, the US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio decided with a 2-1 majority that the mandated minimum coverage provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which requires that a person purchase minimum health coverage or face a modest monetary penalty beginning in 2014, is constitutional under the Commerce Clause. The ruling is significant as it is the first decision by a federal appeals court on the Affordable Care Act.
Judge Jeffrey Sutton, a conservative judge and an appointee under President Bush, was included in the majority decision, making him the first Republican appointee on a federal bench to support the provision's constitutionality. Judge Boyce Martin, a Democrat, joined Jeffrey in the decision stating, "Congress had a rational basis for concluding that the minimum coverage provision is essential to the Affordable Care Act's larger reforms to the national markets in health care delivery and health insurance."
Obama's healthcare overhaul provision was challenged by a lawsuit from the conservative Thomas More Law Center. An attorney for the Thomas More Law Center suggested they are likely to appeal. State officials from Florida , Virginia , and 24 other states are also challenging the individual mandate in a case that was just heard in the 11th Circuit Court of appeals on Wednesday in Atlanta. This case in Atlanta is probably deemed the most important. Whatever the decision, the individual mandate in all probability will go to the US Supreme court for a final decision.
Currently under the ACA, daughters and sons under 26 years of age can receive insurance through their parents' coverage, the donut hole for seniors is closing, and certain preventive procedures, such as mammograms, colonoscopies, and pap smears, no longer require a co-payment or other direct costs. President Obama signed the final version of the Affordable Care Act in March. The final law will eventually add coverage for 32 million people, increasing access to family planning and preventive care.
Media Resources: Los Angeles Times 6/29/11; USA Today 6/29/11; Associated Press 6/29/11; Feminist Newswire 5/111//; Feminist Newswire 2/1/11
5/5/2015 Sen. Reid Promises to Filibuster "Fast Track" for the TransPacific Partnership - Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid has promised to delay efforts to push through the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal until the Senate first deals with two stalled bills that may soon expire.
Reid says that the two measures, an infrastructure bill on highway funding, and reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), are "very complicated issues," that require the Senate's attention "before we even deal with [the Trans-Pacific Partnership]."
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a massive free trade agreement currently being promoted by the Obama Administration, has been heavily criticized by humanitarian groups, environmental groups, and medical groups. . . .
5/1/2015 House Reverses DC Law Banning Reproductive Health Discrimination by Employers - The US House of Representatives voted Thursday night to overturn a Washington, DC, law that makes it illegal for employers to retaliate against employees who use their insurance to cover procedures like in-vitro fertilization or abortion and contraception like birth control pills and IUDs for themselves, their spouses, or their children.
The District's council passed the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act last year. . . .