Supreme Court upholds Affordable Care Act

This seems to have gone under, particularly with the other big Supreme Court decision. But the Supreme Court has upheld parts of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) once again.

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court saved the controversial health care law that will define President Barack Obama's administration for generations to come.

The ruling holds that the Affordable Care Act authorized federal tax credits for eligible Americans living not only in states with their own exchanges but also in the 34 states with federal marketplaces. It staved off a major political showdown and a mad scramble in states that would have needed to act to prevent millions from losing health care coverage.

[...]

"Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them," Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. "If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter."

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/25/politics/supreme-court-ruling-obamacare/index.html

Additionally, Paul Krugman has written an op-ed about Obamacare, largely in favour of it, and claiming that it has done a lot of good in the relatively short time that it's been live. Claiming that it 1) has insured many more people than have ever had insurance in the US before 2) those covered have a high level of satisfaction with their plans 3) premiums are far lower than was expected and low by historical standards 4) growth of health spending has been slowed 5) it has not cost jobs, on the contrary there have been increases in jobs every month 6) it had no negative effect on the deficit and repealing it would.

Put all these things together, and what you have is a portrait of policy triumph — a law that, despite everything its opponents have done to undermine it, is achieving its goals, costing less than expected, and making the lives of millions of Americans better and more secure.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/paul-krugman-hooray-for-the-aca.html

So, a couple years in, what's everyone's opinion?

My opinion is, it came in under-budget and despite the glitches, it's been a reasonably successful extension of a policy that other states have had for years (Massachusetts) or decades (Hawaii).

It's been a definite improvement over what came before, even if it could be better.

I don't take stock in anything Krugman says. He was an economic disaster for this country and made Bernanke seem like a genius, and I'm not sure he has sound understanding of economics but that's just me.. I have definitely noticed rising costs in some areas while others haven't been affected. Also, a lot of doctors aren't taking "obamacare", as is their right. I haven't seen anything that definitively shows a positive or a negative impact yet, other than giving more people basic healthcare. As far as larger lines, I haven't seen that either but I don't go to doctors that take Obamacare.

Originally posted by psmith81992
I don't take stock in anything Krugman says. He was an economic disaster for this country and made Bernanke seem like a genius, and I'm not sure he has sound understanding of economics but that's just me.. I have definitely noticed rising costs in some areas while others haven't been affected.

Krugman's generally been pretty bang-on in my experience. Stuff like austerity was a disaster in other countries, while meanwhile us, who skewed closer to Krugman, did fairly well.

I haven't seen anything that definitively shows a positive or a negative impact yet.

If you aren't one of the previously uninsured, that's about as it should be.

Nothing's worse for you, but things are better for millions with either plans they couldn't get before, or crap-plans* replaced with good plans.

*Ones with such a low cap that they aren't good for much more than a broken limb.

Krugman's generally been pretty bang-on in my experience. Stuff like austerity was a disaster in other countries, while meanwhile us, who skewed closer to Krugman, did fairly well.