Does the Supreme Court even understand the healthcare reform law? Has the nine-member Court and the lawyers that argued before it failed to grasp a basic point about the law's mandate for individuals to obtain health insurance? Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar in an article, Individuals Can Comply With Obama Insurance by Buying Skimpy Insurance; Did Justices Understand?, in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune offers this observation:
A possible misunderstanding about President Barack Obama's health care overhaul could cloud Supreme Court deliberations on its fate, leaving the impression that the law's insurance requirement is more onerous than it actually is.
During the recent oral arguments some of the justices and the lawyers appearing before them seemed to be under the impression that the law does not allow most consumers to buy low-cost, stripped-down insurance to satisfy its controversial coverage requirement.
In fact, the law provides for a cheaper "bronze" plan that is broadly similar to today's so-called catastrophic coverage policies for individuals, several insurance experts said.
Robert L. Abell
www.RobertAbellLaw.com
Comments