Opinion | Worried by Judge’s Ruling on Health Law
To the Editor:
Re “Health Care Act Is Struck Down by Federal Judge” (front page, Dec. 15):
If the Supreme Court majority from several years ago holds, the district court decision holding the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional will be overruled. And, if the midterms are any indication, the judge may have given Democrats a winning campaign issue in 2020.
That said, even after a long career studying health policy, I just don’t understand why elected Republicans insist on acting against the interests of their constituents and their states. Why do they want to deprive people of affordable health insurance?
Medical care can be the difference between life and death or between chronic disability and continued productivity. But it is expensive. So, we need insurance to help pay for it. Our elected officials should be making coverage more secure and more affordable, not less so. It’s good for us as individuals and our society.
American health care is the most market-oriented and most expensive in the world. There is much room for improvement. That is what our elected officials — even Republicans — should commit themselves to. And what we should demand of them.
Stephen M. Davidson
The writer is professor emeritus at the Questrom School of Business at Boston University.
To the Editor:
With a Texas judge’s ruling in favor of 20 states that sued to abolish the Affordable Care Act, the Republicans may have finally gotten what they wanted, after trying more than 50 times to do the same without success in Congress. President Trump and the Republicans are delirious with joy at this early Grinch Christmas present, whereby millions of people, especially the ones with pre-existing conditions, might be left with no health care coverage.
The Democrats should let the Republicans explain their actions to the voters. This is their Brexit; they got what they wanted, and now it’s time to face the possible consequences. Instead of rushing out to appeal this decision in court, the Democrats should focus their energies on a true legislative solution, namely “Medicare for All.”
Sometimes it takes a crisis to come up with a solution. This is one of those times.
To the Editor:
Re “What the Lawless Obamacare Ruling Means,” by Jonathan H. Adler and Abbe R. Gluck (Op-Ed, nytimes.com, Dec. 15):
I was called upon by members of Congress to counsel them as the Affordable Care Act was being developed in 2009-2010, so I have a vested interest in seeing its legislative survival. I have written extensively that health care is a right for us all, and the Affordable Care Act goes a long way in reaching out to achieve this goal.
So to read Judge Reed O’Connor’s opinion is far from soothing, since it takes legal analysis to a level far lower than what would be expected for a sitting federal court judge. His analysis is flawed to its core for the reasons Mr. Adler and Ms. Gluck articulate. Most important, as they conclude, this decision reflects deficient legal reasoning that is intended to support a political agenda.
To preserve health care as a right in our nation, let’s hope the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals concurs in the authors’ reasoning and that Judge O’Connor’s decision is reversed.
Miles J. Zaremski
Highland Park, Ill.
The writer is a lawyer.
Source: Read Full Article