Supreme Court Health Reform Challenge: HuffPost Answers Your Questions (VIDEO Q&A)

Legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act finally come to the Supreme Court on Monday, when the public will learn for the first time what the justices ask about President Barack Obama's signature legislative achievement.

For an extraordinary six hours of oral arguments spread over three days, the federal government will square off against 26 states and several private parties over the scope of congressional power.

At the heart of the case is the constitutionality of the law's "individual mandate," which requires virtually every American to purchase minimum health care coverage or else pay a tax penalty. The Obama administration says the mandate falls squarely within Congress's ability to regulate national markets. The challengers contend that the mandate is an unprecedented encroachment on state power and personal liberty.

Huffington Post's Supreme Court Correspondent Mike Sacks and Health Care Reporter Jeffrey Young are here to answer your questions on the law and policy surrounding the Affordable Care Act, from issues before the justices and their ultimate ruling, to what exactly is in the health care reform law and how it's supposed to work.

Watch the previously live segment above.

Sacks has covered the law and politics of the Supreme Court for over two years and is a graduate of Georgetown Law. Young has been writing about the business, policy, and politics of health care for more than a decade at HuffPost, Bloomberg News, The Hill, and other news outlets. He was in the Capitol during the grueling health care reform debate that ended two years ago today when Obama signed the measure into law.

Comments

[1tinsoldierson]

01:21 PM on 03/25/2012

Growth is hard: This week the supreme court will privately debate an issue that affects all United States Citizens, and in compliance with communist/dictator/ruling junta tactics, "we the people" of a free nation, will not be privy to these procedures conducted behind closed doors on our behalf. We may be in sequester a partly to allow the "business as usually side, (doctors and insurance industry), to preserve and continue spiraling health care costs and compensation. We may also be in sequester to allow the argument that over 50+ million Americans and growing, most who work every bit as hard as the fortunate insured, can make their case that: In a National health care scenario, not only will health care premiums be reduced considerably for corporate America and the fortunate ones who currently pay inflated premiums and medical invoices to cover those without health care, but we will be more competitive in a global export/import market against nations that have national systems. Additionally, the doctors will still make gobs of money AND from the mountain of health care funding that will be built when everyone contributes, we can supplement the extensive educational costs that modern medical system requires. Growth is hard.

[LynnTTT]

10:23 PM on 03/23/2012

Everyone should go to Time magazine and read Fareed Zacharia's article. Spells it all out..

[rickwash4]

04:39 PM on 03/23/2012

The new CBO report out indicates just how bad this President and the Dem's either misjudged or intentionally misled the American people. The cost of O-care will be double the original cost. WOW - imagine that!! The private sector can do this better and cheaper - PERIOD!! Everytime the gov't gets involved in these types of situations they run up the costs, paperwork, questionable standards, etc. Medicare/Medicade LY -$95Billion in over and fraudulent payments, SS in the red, no budget by Dems for 3+ years; and don't blame the Repubs!! During the 1st two years this man was in he submitted such a terrible budget that even the Dems defeated it 97 votes to 0!! Obama has no clue on how to run a business, no real world experience, no balancing a payroll, much less running a country. What good is intelligence if there's no common sense, experience, reasoning and ability to get things done.

[mienemutti]

04:58 PM on 03/23/2012

It's the 'private sector' that defrauded the govt. of that 95 billion....and it's the GOPT who wants their masters to continue to get big tax cuts....you know....cause they're the job creators....

Take your cry baby whining and complaining over to Fox Nation....because you're wasting your limited abilities and influence with the people here.....we can think for ourselves....and are very unlikely to give your 'take on things' any serious consideration...except....relative to...
considering the source....

[NoWayMan]

05:04 PM on 03/23/2012

wow.
fox news and the repubs cherry picked that report.
already been debunked for over a week now.

and now you know.

and SS is not in the red.
SS has not contributed one single penny to any deficit or overall debt.
SS runs at a surplus 5 out of every 6 years.

lots seriously wrong in your post.
use the google thingy.

[rickwash4]

05:29 PM on 03/23/2012

NoClueMan: FOX News reports the news with both sides, but you would not know that since your afraid of real info - can be confusing.
SS is scheduled to ran out in 2034!! OK, not in the red - just won't have any money. Feel better?? Never said SS about the deficit or the debt. Maybe you should learn to read.

[NoWayMan]

04:15 PM on 03/23/2012

here's a quick legislative history of the individual mandate:
http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004182

very easy to see that up until obama said it was a good idea, the repubs also thought it was a good idea. and since this idea started at the heritage foundation (a conservative think tank) its weird how the repubs are now railing against their own idea.

oh, and here is the solid argument as to why its constitutional:
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-03-22/news/bs-ed-health-mandate-20120322_1_individual-mandate-health-insurance-premiums

[mienemutti]

05:05 PM on 03/23/2012

Thank You! ;-)

[rickwash4]

05:31 PM on 03/23/2012

Let the Gov't start with that and it won't end. You'll be told, eventually, what you can and cannot do that affects your health. It's happening in England now.

[NoWayMan]

05:53 PM on 03/23/2012

hey look, a completely fact-free post. can't refute any of it. just scaredy cat mumbo jumbo. especially since even with ACA, our system still won't be anything like England's. so, what they think of their health system (and really, your factless point is easily challengeable) is irrelevant. duh.

personally, I'd love single payer, just like the doctors in this country want.

and if you're worried about govt intervention, you must be seriously mad about what the repubs are trying to do to women. right? RIGHT?

[Davwbaird]

02:26 AM on 03/24/2012

fox is telling you

[Aerin Gael]

04:01 PM on 03/23/2012

The argument against the health insurance mandate is: "Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce does not remotely authorize it to regulate individuals whose defining characteristic is their commercial non-participation."

A person does NOT DECIDE to become old, sick or die but this WILL happen to ALL of us. If a person has not purchased health insurance, when they become old, sick or are dying, the burden of caring for them falls on the state. Commercial non-participation by the individual forces commercial participation by the state. The state can and should reject this burden by requiring all individuals to provide for themselves by purchasing health insurance.

[rickwash4]

05:34 PM on 03/23/2012

The private sector with "some" regulation oversight can do it better and more cost effectively. It's hard to imagine how people can not see the gov't around the world struggling to give everything to everyone. It won't work.

[Aerin Gael]

06:32 PM on 03/23/2012

The health exchanges can be implemented by the private sector. Why are you right wingers STILL fighting the civil war against the Feds? This is YOUR govt of YOUR country.

[Davwbaird]

02:30 AM on 03/24/2012

you are deluded the law private for profit are making profit not giving good return for your money. admin cost are capped and costsare slowly brought.
Medicare works, socialist gov. program.

[show me the money]

03:54 PM on 03/23/2012

My job does not offer insurance, many don't. I would love to have insurance but at age 62, pre existing conditions (cancer) and making $10 an hour, I can't even come close. Without the affordable care act, people like me will never have a chance to get insurance. I am too young for medicare and I have a job so I can't get medicaid. Do any of you who are so against the ACA have any suggestions other than for me to crawl off and die somewhere? (which many have told me) There are millions of Americans who have no opportunity to get health care and never will without a President like President Obama who has the guts to do something that is not popular for the good of all. Most Americans were against the auto bailout too and without his courage, there would be millions more Americans without jobs and insurance. If this act is enforced, it will stabilize and bring the cost of health care down. Massachusetts is the only proof we need.

[tommybellagio]

04:45 PM on 03/23/2012

The COST has not gone down anywhere.. and now the CBO has stated Obama has grossly underestimated the cost.. surprise... adn he took NO steps to fund it... sorry but i think you are betting on a NAG... but wish you well with your current medical issues..

[NoWayMan]

04:59 PM on 03/23/2012

costs keep rising, but not due to the ACA.
Kaiser just wrapped up their huge 2011 survey and found that while costs rose on average 9% nationally, only 1.5% of that rise in cost could be attributed to ACA. and the WSJ, owned by rupert murdoch, verified the findings.

and the claims that the price has doubled have already been debunked.

[dpearl]

05:43 PM on 03/23/2012

The actual report is at www.cbo.gov/publication/43080. You will find that the CBO actually said that the Affordable Care Act will cost $50 billion LESS than estimated last year.

[DJBrunner]

02:36 PM on 03/23/2012

Mike & Jeff,

While the option to cover one's kids until they're 26 is now in place...are parents now forced to provide coverage if their kids don't get their own, either by choice or circumstance?

[GrafZeppelin127]

02:53 PM on 03/23/2012

No.

[jordan2]

03:04 PM on 03/23/2012

Students whose parents are retired or deceased are already screwed. In anticipation of the new law being passed, rates have already skyrocketed for those students.

I know because my daughter, age 20, and a college student is unable to find affordable coverage.

All of my Congressional reps have confirmed with me that this group of people were not considered when the bill was written because the focus was on covering this age group whose parents had insurance.

This MIGHT could be resolved with a program similar to Healthy Kids in Florida by extending the eligibility age from 19 to 26 for full time students who are having to work their own way through school. She was on that program for quite a while. It's based on income so it's not free for sure, but it was reasonable.

Quite a few people here have referred to me to various options but they were all dead ends. I am a 65 year old disabled veteran so none of my coverage works for my daughter.

[retiredfemale]

11:56 PM on 03/24/2012

You sure she doesn't qualify for under your VA?
She should as well as get assistance with college if you are 100% disabled. My kids did because thier Dad was a disabled Vet. Call your Vet Center and ask.

[ravatar252]

02:25 PM on 03/23/2012

Repeal all of it, replace it with something that will not crush our rights, or the economy. Don't care how many coats of happy paint the Adm. slaps on this, its still wrong.

[gaydood]

02:31 PM on 03/23/2012

as u just learned if the mandate is found UC and repealed, it might affect SS and mediicare

[ravatar252]

03:45 PM on 03/23/2012

Bold talk from an Obamacare cheerleader. Your pointless point is tiresome, aside from being moot.

[tommybellagio]

04:47 PM on 03/23/2012

that is a stretch.. you are not forced to pay for either one.. and you are not fined for nto having them.. you need to fact check..

[celeritas]

02:36 PM on 03/23/2012

No one loses a right, whatsoever. It helps the economy; private insurance companies have been crushing the economy for over 20 years -- wanting more of the same is just nuts. It is right, not wrong, and long long over due. Access to health care for all is not happy paint, it's rational, responsible governing by and for rational, responsible people.

[ChasG]

02:41 PM on 03/23/2012

Fanned.  Well said.

[ravatar252]

03:44 PM on 03/23/2012

See by the clear light of day, and not the rose colored glasses, you may have been blinded by the shiny happy paint. I do not agree with your assessment.

[1mjk]

02:20 PM on 03/23/2012

Before health care reform- insurance companies would not pay for your health care if the illness was "a pre-existing medical condition." Insurance companies would not accept you for coverage (and where possible would end your coverage) if you had diabetes, cancer, asthma or any other medical condition. Eliminating this exemption is the most important part of the health care reform.

[gaydood]

02:26 PM on 03/23/2012

i think if u get a job, most with pre exisitng can be covered, now

[ChasG]

02:19 PM on 03/23/2012

If the mandate goes down, then it could be replaced with a federal healthcare tax, since there is no constitutional question about the federal government's authority to levy taxes.

[gaydood]

02:32 PM on 03/23/2012

would that require levistation? that would never get passed?

[ChasG]

02:39 PM on 03/23/2012

The current congress would not pass it, that's for sure, my good friend. Vote Obama and Dems across the board in 2012; get involved in local primaries.

[lovetostudy]

03:18 PM on 03/23/2012

This has to be the most important issue of our time. The ripple effects are so far reaching.

[ChasG]

04:52 PM on 03/23/2012

fanned

[show me the money]

02:16 PM on 03/23/2012

What most of you don't know, because you don't bother reading things before you get up in arms about them is that the bill left a way out of buying insurance and not have to pay the penalty.
The clauses are:
Part A Waiver of Criminal Penalties
Taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
Part B Limitations on Liens and Levies
1 The secretary shall not file notice of lien with respect to any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section
2 Levy on any such property with respect to such failure

So, you haven't lost any choices. You can simply not buy the insurance but you can no longer go to the emergency room and get free treatment. There is help from the government for low income people to pay their premiums so there is no excuse not to have insurance and hospitals and doctors will enforce it. This should drive down the costs of health care. When Romney endorsed this same plan (it was called the Wyden/Bennett bill) in 2009 on ABC news, they endorced a tax code endorsed fine which included losing your personal exemption, keeping your refunds and denying you a drivers license. Look it up, Romney endorses Wyden/Bennett individual mandate bill if you don't believe me.

[gaydood]

02:19 PM on 03/23/2012

so i dont gotojail and bunk with a big dood named bruno? thx

[anelder]

03:44 PM on 03/23/2012

But of course they will go to the ER and being who we are they will not be turned away. Once more personal selfishness results in others paying their way.

[gaydood]

02:13 PM on 03/23/2012

looking forward to your report next week !!!!!

[gaydood]

02:07 PM on 03/23/2012

rofl yes we are all glad u didnt pick... !!!

that was awsumm !!!!!!!!!!

so if the mandate is UC, then it could really mess up SS amd medicare?

[neatsandy64]

07:14 PM on 03/23/2012

of course it could as medicare is a nat healthcare. if the other is made unlawful, then the repugs are going to go after medicare. I dont think SS but it will medicare. For any of you who are against this who is willing to give up your medicare??? A single payer ins who has a basic policy and if you want more such as B-C-D for medicare you pay extra it is our choice. But if you have a single payer policy with millions of people paying a premium look how the costs will go down. Your not going to be paying hundreds of dollars a month for your ins, your actual wages would most likely go up since your employer doesnt have to factor that into your wages, wangle with the ins co for your ins plan, etc.I pray it goes thru as an x-agent I know how private ins works. Most people dont realize you are one serious illness or accident away from losing everything. I have seen it happen. Your life time limit isnt all that great even if it is a million dollars, that million dollars is usually for the whole family, one person could use it all with a serious illness. The voucher system that repugs want to put medicare in is a very bad idea.

[tadyer2336]

02:06 PM on 03/23/2012

Our legislators throats were well lubricated for the ramming. cold hard cash to alleviate their states money problems and total exemptions for some states, 2 religious groups being exempted and several unions that the fed will pay for those select union employees.

what religions health premiums that will be paid by GOVT you ask ?

amish and muslim. because they state its against their religion to buy into capatilist flim/flam.

amish are true Socialist and Muslims are for a muslim controlled society ( sharia law )

[williamg]

02:15 PM on 03/23/2012

Obamacare allows religious exemptions.

[gaydood]

05:06 PM on 03/23/2012

the prezzz say hes calling it Obamacare, and i bet he read yur post !!!!!!!!!

yeah you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[anelder]

03:53 PM on 03/23/2012

Another unsubstantiated fear monger heard from.

Sharia law, "For most American Muslims, sharia represents a private system of morality and identity, primarily focused on marriage and divorce rituals," .This is precisely what both Catholics and Jews have when they follow their religious rules in tandem with the law of the land. These people did not want to live under the rule of religion in their lives, otherwise they would have stayed where they were.

[Deschris]

02:06 PM on 03/23/2012

Do all of you ignorant,insipid,teapublicans who are attacking President Obama and the democrats know that McConnell,Ryan,Cantor,
De Mint,McCain,Romney,Gingrich,Boehner,Bachmann,Palin and the entire republican congress have excellent health insurance and care paid for by you?It's called congressional care,ex governors and speakers care.Just though I will let you idiots in on a secret. Obama Cares is here to stay for the rest of us and single payer is coming in his next term,just watch.

[celeritas]

02:45 PM on 03/23/2012

Nope, they don't, and it doesn't matter how many times they hear it, it is their constitutional right to be as willfully ignorant as they want.

[anelder]

03:56 PM on 03/23/2012

Hooray for single payer, it's coming.

Don't chastise me but I don't think congessional health care is paid for by the taxpayer. I mean isn't their program just an ordinary employer provided insurance plan? I will stand corrected gladly if wrong.

[SETexasLib]

04:16 PM on 03/23/2012

You don't have any idea who their employer is, do you? How do the monies get into that pot that pays for their pla? ROTFLMAO.