home
RSS
No surprise: Reactions to the Supreme Court's decision as expected
June 28th, 2012
07:27 PM ET

No surprise: Reactions to the Supreme Court's decision as expected

It didn't take long for the first reactions to the Supreme Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act to start trickling in. Here's a sampling of how some health organizations feel about the highest court upholding President Obama's controversial health care law:

The trade group that represents health insurance companies - American Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) - says in their statement that "health plans will continue to focus on promoting affordability and peace of mind for their beneficiaries. The law expands coverage to millions of Americans, a goal health plans have long supported, but major provisions, such as the premium tax, will have the unintended consequences of raising costs."

But citing research by other sources, AHIP suggests that the health care law will also increase the cost of health care coverage, by way of premiums, forcing young Americans to buy artificially high premiums and affordable coverage will be less available.

The American Medical Association, describes the court's decision as "historic," one that will benefit Americans for decades to come. 

They title their statement: "Questions about the Affordable Care Act’s constitutionality have overshadowed the law’s progress. With this ruling, that uncertainty has finally been put to rest." And AMA president Dr. Jeremy Lazarus says, "The American Medical Association has long supported health insurance coverage for all, and we are pleased that this decision means millions of Americans can look forward to the coverage they need to get healthy and stay healthy."

Medicaid Health Plans of America, which describes itself as the leading trade association solely focused on representing Medicaid health plans, had this response to the court's ruling: "We commend the Supreme Court for keeping in place key elements of this historic legislation."

But they don't agree with all the provisions saying: "We must reiterate that the ACA-mandated $8 billion annual fee on the health insurance industry in 2014, which gradually increases over time, should be repealed. According to a study by Milliman, Inc., an actuarial firm, approximately one-sixth of this fee will be placed on Medicaid health plans, but because of federal actuarial soundness requirements, will be paid entirely by state Medicaid programs, already financially strapped even without the upcoming Medicaid expansion."

Physicians for a National Health Program  describes itself as is a single-issue organization with more than 18,000 members that advocates for a universal, comprehensive single-payer national health program. Their response to the decision is: "Although the Supreme Court has upheld the Affordable Care Act, the law will not remedy the U.S. health crisis," and "the unfortunate reality is that the law, despite its modest benefits, is not a remedy to our health care crisis."

National Nurses United, the largest national nurses organization didn't think the Affordable Care Act went far enough. Now that the law has been upheld, their say the "court ruling does not end healthcare crisis or the need to continue the campaign for reform," because they say the ACA still leaves some 27 million people without health coverage.

Their statement goes on to say that it "does little to constrain rising out-of-pocket health care costs, or to stop the all too routine denials of needed medical care by insurance companies because they don’t want to pay for it."

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), which represents 60,000 pediatricians, endorsed the law as well as filing three "friends of the court" briefs to the Supreme Court in support of the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, individual mandate and the mandate’s severability from the rest of the statute.

The AAP was pleased with the court's decision, also calling it a historic decision. AAP president Dr. Robert W. Block said in his organization's statement: "Today, the Supreme Court upheld a law that invests in children’s health from the ground up." He said the ACA addresses the "A-B-C" goals that has been the core of the pediatric group has stood for 82 years - "Providing all children in this country with Access to health care services, age-appropriate benefits to meet their unique needs, and high-quality, affordable health care coverage.”

The Family Research Council, a leading social conservative group, vehemently opposed the high court's decision, saying it jeopardizes the future of liberty. According to their statement, "The Supreme Court has today given the federal government unlimited authority to use its tax power to require Americans to engage in specific commercial activity. The obvious implication is chilling: Uncle Sam can make you buy anything, at any price, for any reason." 

Their statement goes on to say: "That's why today, the American dream gave way to a real American nightmare. President Obama's vow about fundamentally transforming the United States of America was fulfilled. The Supreme Court essentially said it cannot articulate any limiting principle on the power of the federal government.

The American Cancer Society's president John R. Seffrin said the Supreme Court's decision ruling preserves critical patient protections for families affected by cancer. He said, “The ruling is a victory for people with cancer and their families nationwide, who for decades have been denied health coverage, charged far more than they can afford for lifesaving care and forced to spend their life savings on necessary treatment, simply because they have a pre-existing condition."


soundoff (20 Responses)
  1. GOPtards

    Because the GOPtards didn't let us have a single payer system, we end up with Obamacare. GOP Idiots.

    June 28, 2012 at 23:56 | Report abuse | Reply
  2. Don Talenti

    I'm one Internal Medicine/Pediatrics doc that most certainly doesn't agree with the AMA, nor the AAP. Both of these have become uber-liberal organizations with a near Socialist agenda.

    Only a minority of physicians are AMA members, and the AMA should not claim to speak for the majority of docs in this country. Of course, the media perpetuates this myth, that the AMA somehow represents all docs. I wonder if the AMA and AAP were very right leaning if the media would be so enamored with them.

    June 29, 2012 at 13:18 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bob

      Don, given your statement about the AMA being "uber-liberal with a near socialist agenda" it is clear that your concern is selfishly political rather than being about caring for patients. I have met quite a few physician like you – fortunately you are in the minority. And like you, when things don't go your selfish way, the physicians like you come out of the wood work complaining like little children that your rights are being taken away.

      July 2, 2012 at 13:41 | Report abuse |
  3. Christine Smith MD

    I am a pediatrician and the AAP never asked me my opinion or any of the pediatricians that I know. We are doctors but we are also hard working taxpayers. I do not support Obamacare. The adminitrative people in charge of the AAP have no clue about the working people, their members. We are too busy working to pay your salaries and to pay those taxes that you just love to spend. Just like the AARP and AMA, not representing the people they claim to be representing. What a joke!

    June 29, 2012 at 14:12 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bob

      Christine, like Don, it is clear that your concern is selfishly political rather than being about caring for patients. I have met quite a few physician like you – fortunately you are in the minority. And like you, when things don't go your selfish way, the physicians like you come out of the wood work complaining like little children that your rights are being taken away.

      July 2, 2012 at 13:42 | Report abuse |
  4. drmaryjohnson

    I am a dues-paying member of the AAP and I do NOT support Obamacare. I am appalled and dismayed by the Supreme Court's decision – and what it means for this country. We simply cannot afford this!

    The AAP (almost as bad as the AMA lately in terms of its obnoxious presumptuousness) needs to STOP making public statements/sending out mass e-mails that lead the general public to believe that ALL Pediatricians support this legislation/pseudo-socialist POLITICAL agenda.

    It's NOT all for the children. We've sold their future into indentured servitude.

    June 29, 2012 at 14:14 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bob

      Mary, like Christine and John before your, it is clear that your concern is selfishly political rather than being about caring for patients. I have met quite a few physician like you – fortunately you are in the minority. And like you, when things don't go your selfish way, the physicians like you come out of the wood work complaining like little children that your rights are being taken away.

      July 2, 2012 at 13:44 | Report abuse |
  5. a

    Lest anyone be fooled, prices will only go up with this law. Someone has to pay for the expanded coverage and one can bet it will not come out of corporate profits of the insurance industry. This entire law is a band aid when major surgery is required to fix our broken health care system. It may be the best in the world, but only for those that can pay and pay and pay.

    NATIONAL HEALTH CARE IS THE ONLY REASONABLE SOLUTION.

    June 29, 2012 at 14:40 | Report abuse | Reply
  6. j

    this might start a riot >> http://jakerepko.com/2012/for-the-good-of-whom-exactly

    June 29, 2012 at 19:21 | Report abuse | Reply
  7. J F

    Pediatricians most care that the parents in the families they care for have jobs. That way the children grow up in a stable family unit. The President says Republicans want Down's kids and Autistic kids to fend for themselves. Let's examine the Democrat platform on that subject. They want to abort them.

    June 29, 2012 at 23:13 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bob

      Wow, JF. Seems you have forgotten that your Republican president George Bush was the one that ruined the economy which led to more abortions. Funny how the facts get swept under the rug when you don't get what you want.

      July 2, 2012 at 13:46 | Report abuse |
  8. Ron Dickinson

    I heard Rep. Michelle Bachman say on CNN the day of this decision that insurance premiums for employers had suddenly risen 300% or more.

    I can find no truth to this statement. The NFIB (voice of small business) has no mention of such a trend...and the Chairman of Ways and Means Committee had a survey of Fortune 100 businesses (less than 60 days ago) that says their cost increases in employer-sponsored health care have only risen 5.9% (on average).

    Michelle Bachman was repeatedly found to be a dubious source of fact during the Presidential Primary season and this was often attributed to her decline in appeal as a candidate.

    Does Mitt Romney want her out there representing him and his credibility on health care or any other issue??

    June 30, 2012 at 13:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  9. Jaiver Diaz,M.D

    The AAP may have 60,000 members but members are never asked about AAP official statements, medical or political.
    Only a few in the top, make all the decisions. Many like me left the AAP long time ago when it became obvious the AAP was more interested in political correctness than in scientific facts. Now I am a member of the American College of Pediatricians, where every member's opinion counts.

    June 30, 2012 at 18:36 | Report abuse | Reply
  10. kelley hyde

    i once asked my cousin, a physics major, why designed-to-fail style laws are put into effect; he said, "its very simple, they are looking for excuses to put as many people in jail as possible". i cant pay for medical coverage, i am told to pay a fine? A fine to a person with no money aint nothing but a jail sentence turned inside out.

    July 2, 2012 at 00:30 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bob

      Wow, Kelly. I spent several years in graduate school studying physics and I don't ever recall studying this one. It does, however, remind me of a recent law in Missouri which requires every abortion doctor at a clinic to be affiliated with a local hospital. Kind of impossible given the current situation. I think it is the republicans that have perfected the kind of laws you speak about.

      July 2, 2012 at 13:53 | Report abuse |
  11. So What's Your Solution GOP Idiots?

    ?

    July 2, 2012 at 09:27 | Report abuse | Reply
  12. Timmy Suckle

    I kissed my way up to VP at a health insurance company. Now I take over $500,000 of your health care dollars for NO VALUE ADDED to your health care. And that’s just me. Now think about how many other VPs, Directors, Managers, etc. are at my company alone. Now multiply that by thousands of others at hundreds of other health insurance companies. From 10 to 25% of your health care dollars go towards administration that adds NO VALUE to your health care. But my company’s PAC dollars will continue to fool you little people into thinking that a single payer system will be bad. Little people like you are so easy to fool. Little people also don’t realize that a single payer system is the ONLY system that would allow little people (as an entire country) to negotiate better health care prices. Little people don’t realize that the Medical Cartels already know that. And that is the reason why the Medical Cartels spend so much PAC money from the hospitals and doctors lobbying against a single payer system. Some little people say that a single payer system would cost you little people more. But if that were true, then wouldn’t the hospitals and doctors WANT that extra money? Yes they would. So why do the Medical Cartels lobby against a single payer system? It’s because the Medical Cartels know it would allow little people to negotiate better health care prices. And that’s what the Medical Cartels are afraid of. Period.
    But us big wigs at insurance companies, hospitals, and pharmacy companies don’t ever need to worry about health care no matter what it costs. We get our health care paid for one way or another by you little people. And we get the little people that work at our companies to contribute to our PACs. And us big wigs say it’s to protect the little peoples’ jobs. But in reality it would be in the little peoples’ best interest to NOT contribute to the PAC. Again, little people are so easy to be fooled. I won’t ever have to worry about losing my job with so many little people being brain washed by the Medical Cartels’ PAC money. Not only that, the Medical Cartels’ PAC money is used to elect so many republicans that will never allow a single payer system. Republicans have always fought against any meaningful health care reform. But that’s what our Medical Cartels’ PACs pay them for. Politicians can be bought so easily.
    Pretty soon the only people that will be able to afford health care is us big wigs. And that’s the way it should be. We don’t want you little people using up the resources when we need them. And once again, I thank you little people for capping my SS tax at the $106,800 level. Now I only pay 1.3% SS tax and you little people pay 6.2%. Also, thank you for extending my tax breaks. I’m using the extra money on my vacation houses.

    July 2, 2012 at 09:28 | Report abuse | Reply
  13. Kathryn Menefee

    The reform doesn't address the underlying reason that healthcare costs continue going up, which is the expensive and inefficient U.S. healthcare delivery system. The consequences of the fee-for-service model put an unnecessary financial burden on patients and employers and raise the overall cost of healthcare. But there are alternative models out there. Direct primary care providers offer high-quality medical care at a capped, transparent price. http://www.whiteglove.com

    July 2, 2012 at 13:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  14. Mariinela

    Because the employers are painyg a HUGE chunk of the bill usually 50% to 90%. It doesn't actually cost LESS, it costs MORE. You just don't SEE it, because they're footing the tab. As to why it doesn't cost the same per person . . . because with an employer, the healthy young employees pay the same as the old sick ones, they AVERAGE the rate. So the rate for an employee might be $500 a month (and the employer pays $300 of it). When the healthy young employee shops around and buys private coverage, it might cost them $125 a month less even than their share. But when the old sick employee shops around, it might cost THEM $1200 a month. Health insurance, after all, is ONLY sharing of cost . Everyone pools their money, and the claims are paid out of the pool. The more claims that get submitted, the more the rates have to go up.

    September 13, 2012 at 20:48 | Report abuse | Reply
  15. icons designs

    This message, is matchless))), very much it is pleasant to me :)

    November 2, 2012 at 16:12 | Report abuse | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Advertisement
About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.