Justice Scalia: Let Them Die

Maybe you missed it, but Justice Scalia today said that letting the uninsured die is a better idea than making it an individual responsibility for those who can afford it to buy health insurance.

Solicitor General Donald Verrilli was explaining to Justice Scalia that the individual responsibility provision (aka "the mandate") is justified given the fact that the uninsured can show up in emergency rooms and get care regardless of ability (or willingness) to pay, shifting the cost to other participants of the market in the form of higher insurance premiums. Scalia, undeterred, dropped the GOP baseline:
GENERAL VERRILLI: No. It's because you're going -- in the health care market, you're going into the market without the ability to pay for what you get, getting the health care service anyway as a result of the social norms that allow -- that -- to which we've obligated ourselves so that people get health care.

JUSTICE SCALIA: Well, don't obligate yourself to that. Why -- you know?

GENERAL VERRILLI: Well, I can't imagine that that -- that the Commerce Clause would --would forbid Congress from taking into account this deeply embedded social norm.

JUSTICE SCALIA: You -- you could do it.
Don't obligate yourself to that? That, Justice Scalia, is the cornerstone of a civilized people. That is the fact that when someone shows up at the emergency room with a chest pain or a broken leg or a head injury, we don't wait to verify insurance or bank accounts before giving them the care that they need. We shouldn't obligate ourselves to that? There is only one other alternative, if we don't obligate ourselves to that. And that is to let people die if they cannot pay for the emergency care that they need.

This is a justice of the United States Supreme Court. This is one of the nine people that decide the fates of all Americans on issues of crucial significance. I'm still in shock. But I guess I shouldn't be. But I am ashamed. For him. For the Supreme Court. For a justice system that allows someone like this to put on a robe.

Scalia doesn't just say it once; he re-iterates it. You could do it, it says. Yes, I guess we could. We could let people die. Because anything is better than making those who can afford it buy insurance, right? Anything, including letting people die. Welcome to "Justice" Antonin Scalia's America.

Yea I heard that but I am still holding out hope I guess that they do the right thing. Maybe false hope. But I think everyone and the press has said it many times before that some of the Justices have what appear to be "special interests" so I guess we should not be so surprised that they too are "bought". The next step if it gets shot down is to push for a single payer system or public option which is what the President wanted to do in the first place and then was put in a corner to compromise with what we have before the court now.

you can see the court dividing itself along party lines.

All of the justices are bought and paid for by whatever party is in office at the time one dies or retires, which makes it a complete joke if everyone knows that, doesn't it? I can't agree that I hope it stands, but I think we would all be much better off with a single payer system and leave SCOTUS out of it entirely.

you can see the court dividing itself along party lines. Originally Posted by ekim008

Yep but we sort of knew that might happen.... sadly.

The Latina mama is leaning towards the conservative side. An Obama appointee and as left as you can get.
http://freebeacon.com/white-house-tr...brand-mandate/

Many analysts have said that the court is likely to overturn Obama’s signature law after conservative members of the court, as well as Obama appointee Justice Sonia Sotomayor, bombarded Verilli with blistering questions over the mandate.

given the fact that the uninsured can show up in emergency rooms and get care regardless of ability (or willingness) to pay, shifting the cost to other participants of the market in the form of higher insurance premiums.

That's the part that chaps my ass in all of this. People just go in, get their care, and walk out. The rest of us end up having to pay more when the hospitals raise their prices and when the insurance company raises their premiums.

That's the part that chaps my ass in all of this. People just go in, get their care, and walk out. The rest of us end up having to pay more when the hospitals raise their prices and when the insurance company raises their premiums. Originally Posted by Missy Mariposa

I second that crap. We have a saying here "that if you are going to have an emergency, don't have it after 5:30". I guess they feel a little better about themselves if they go in after the clinics are closed for the sniffles.

I second that crap. We have a saying here "that if you are going to have an emergency, don't have it after 5:30". I guess they feel a little better about themselves if they go in after the clinics are closed for the sniffles. Originally Posted by nwarounder

are you referring to the gun & knife clubs?

Chica, my take on her is she gave the obligitory for show line of questioning.

She plays the general rule of Democrat Politics. Always maintain your ability to deny, say just enough to fool the masses, then vote as you are instructed.

I know as bloody usual some daft twat will make a crude comment about me being a Limey socialist but...

At least we bloody care about our fellow man. Even the fucking Tories would have voted this bill into law. I'm actually astonished to be fair! At hospital it's a 50/50 fight on this topic. As a new physician and a "hospitalist" it's us v the private practice docs on this issue. Some quite clever private practice docs side with us but unfortunately most tend to side with justice Scalia.

Well, you conservatives got what you wanted! You lot buggered the bill and now you'll proper fuck the poor. The ER will continue to get loads of "cough & sniffle" patients using the triage as a fucking clinic because they can't afford to go to a proper office visit. Erm, because they are bloody skint and have no other option! And, how about all the newly diagnosed cancer patients I'll have to tell sadly they have a stage IV illness that could have been handled much easier if caught earlier!

*Before I get flamed for stating my professional opinion I'd love for the law makers to do a solid three or four months of bloody rounds with me! Then we'll see if they truly think and feel the same way;-)

I'll continue to fight the good fight but it gets fucking hard at times to fight a senseless battle when there is a far better solution.

Liberaldevil, in the USA, we have something that England, and most other Parlimentary forms of Government do not have, a Constitution.

What is the law in England is what a majority in Parliment can agree on at any given moment. That makes issues subject to the petty whims of the moment.

Sooner or later, any Law that out Legislature passes, and our President signs into law, must pass the muster of Constitutionality.

Our Bill of Rights, and the rest of the Constitution, protects us against an over reaching Government.

Many would say that this is an antiquidated system, that such an old document is out of touch. Well, we can change it, but our Founders also made that a very difficult proccess as well. The reason?

So it will not bend to the petty whims of the moment.

So it will not bend to the petty whims of the moment. Originally Posted by Jackie S

"Petty whims of the moment?" You must be referring to the ill fated, ill advised spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq.

That's the part that chaps my ass in all of this. People just go in, get their care, and walk out. The rest of us end up having to pay more when the hospitals raise their prices and when the insurance company raises their premiums. Originally Posted by Missy Mariposa

maybe 10-12 years or so ago...i had around 30 employees and i tried to offer them health insurance....i would pay for their coverage and for those who wished family coverage, they would pay for that as a reduction out of their paycheck

everyone refused, everyone. they were all hands out in the oil patch and they threatened to quit if i did that.

why? because they didnt want to pay for it at all. they all said they could get it free at the emergency room.

with an insurance policy, there was a deductible and single guys didnt even want that, no one wanted it. they would rather go to an emergency room and act as if they couldnt speak english and walk on any bill


for the thread poster:

as far as judge scalia's comment, there is, many times, argument given for argument's sake to flesh out the positions and make clear distinctions. to take any question or comment by a justice as someones position in the throes of a supreme court exchange is quite unfair and rather naive. thats not to say judge scalia is in favor of a nanny state, and yes, it is obivious he would rather see laws more closely geared toward personal responsibility and constitutionally aligned but to say, if left to him, he would leave irresponsible people to die is ridiculous. he was making the point that congress has made messes of things and now the government argues that we have to do this because we have a mess.

Some people would argue its more important to be as free from the federal government as possible than be more comfortable. I understand that as a person who came from a country that has shifted from a monarchy to democracy that brits as a society dont feel burdened by a heavier hand of government than us Yanks. But this is an expansion of POWER and CONTROL over the populous that was not intended. What if Bush and Republicans passed a law saying everyone needs to buy a gun, everyone, because there are bad people out there who can hurt you. So everyone now needs to be armed. Trained and armed. And you have to buy the gun from a gun store in your state of residence and we will offset the cost for the poor with tax credits. Not only would the idea of a 100% armed populous repulse you but the fact that the federal government MADE you buy something would. I have said before and I will say again the only reason people are willing to give up this chunk of liberty is because they think its for a good reason. There are no good reasons to give the government more say in your life than they have already in my view.