From Laurie Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations:
Political pundits will now argue the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court decision and the likelihood that Republican opponents to the health reform law will be able to overturn it through legislation. But perhaps it will now be possible for an HIV-infected individual in Mississippi or Alabama to have access, at taxpayers’ expense, to the same level of care as the U.S. government supports for comparable individuals in Johannesburg.
Yup. Unless the governors of those states decide that they would prefer to have Third World conditions. Which they might.
By the way: let’s start calling it Obamacare now. As more people reap its benefits, we might as well reap the credit.
Author: Jonathan Zasloff
Jonathan Zasloff teaches Torts, Land Use, Environmental Law, Comparative Urban Planning Law, Legal History, and Public Policy Clinic - Land Use, the Environment and Local Government. He grew up and still lives in the San Fernando Valley, about which he remains immensely proud (to the mystification of his friends and colleagues). After graduating from Yale Law School, and while clerking for a federal appeals court judge in Boston, he decided to return to Los Angeles shortly after the January 1994 Northridge earthquake, reasoning that he would gladly risk tremors in order to avoid the average New England wind chill temperature of negative 55 degrees.
Professor Zasloff has a keen interest in world politics; he holds a PhD in the history of American foreign policy from Harvard and an M.Phil. in International Relations from Cambridge University. Much of his recent work concerns the influence of lawyers and legalism in US external relations, and has published articles on these subjects in the New York University Law Review and the Yale Law Journal. More generally, his recent interests focus on the response of public institutions to social problems, and the role of ideology in framing policy responses.
Professor Zasloff has long been active in state and local politics and policy. He recently co-authored an article discussing the relationship of Proposition 13 (California's landmark tax limitation initiative) and school finance reform, and served for several years as a senior policy advisor to the Speaker of California Assembly. His practice background reflects these interests: for two years, he represented welfare recipients attempting to obtain child care benefits and microbusinesses in low income areas. He then practiced for two more years at one of Los Angeles' leading public interest environmental and land use firms, challenging poorly planned development and working to expand the network of the city's urban park system. He currently serves as a member of the boards of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy (a state agency charged with purchasing and protecting open space), the Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice (the leading legal service firm for low-income clients in east Los Angeles), and Friends of Israel's Environment. Professor Zasloff's other major activity consists in explaining the Triangle Offense to his very patient wife, Kathy.
View all posts by Jonathan Zasloff
“Yup. Unless the governors of those states decide that they would prefer to have Third World conditions. Which they might.”
‘Might’?
It’s pretty clear that a lot of GOP governors look at Third World kleptocracies with envy.
Yes - I definitely think the lowest income folks in the country are just about to get tossed under the boss. This Supreme Court clearly has taken a stand against the transfer of any wealth to “undeserving” poor people.
Please keep comments terse and avoid extra words. Like the redundant “undeserving” in your second sentence, which suggests there is some other kind of poor person.
There are “deserving” poor in this country: those with political clout. Okay, that may only be a few hundred thousand Hasids, but they do exist.
point, set and match.
“Tossed under the boss:” droit de seigneur?
LOL - it was a long day. I shall refer to that as freudian slop.
Obamacare it has been. Obamacare it is. Obamacare it will always be. For better or worse.
I always thought it was an honorable handle.
Obvious libertarian response: Doesn’t this just mean that the U.S. Government is overspending on HIV-infected South Africans?
Obvious Progressive rejoinder: As long as there are problems remaining in the world, American taxpayers are not paying enough!
Let’s call medicare Johnsoncare.
Let’s call Social Security FDR security.
And by all means, let’s call it Obamacare.
They will rue the day they named what will ultimately be everyone’s health care after the first black president.