Governor Pat Quinn says the Supreme Court ruling on health care means Illinois can move forward with implementation of key provisions under the federal law. The governor says Illinois will go along with the expansion of Medicaid. Quinn also says lawmakers need to resume work on setting up an insurance exchange.
The Supreme Court's decision to uphold nearly all of the Affordable Care Act may move the debate to the presidential campaign trail. But it shifts much of the burden of implementing the law to the states.
States are actually responsible for the lion's share of getting people without insurance covered under the health law.
Shock, dismay, relief, confusion — all those emotions played out Thursday when the U.S. Supreme Court announced its 5-to-4 decision to uphold almost all of President Obama's health care overhaul.
The ruling, with shifting majorities on different provisions and multiple dissents, covered close to 200 pages and provoked initial confusion. Both Fox News and CNN got it wrong, reporting at first that the individual mandate had been struck down. But when the dust cleared, the law labeled derisively by Republicans as "Obamacare" was largely intact.
Medical providers are still processing today's long U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the federal health care law. They see positives and negatives in the coming expansion of health care. Doctors and hospitals agree getting health coverage for more people is a good thing.
Now that the Supreme Court has decided that the Affordable Care Act can stand, it's time to think about what the law actually means for your medical coverage. The requirement that everyone buy health insurance (the individual mandate) has gotten all the attention, but there's a lot more to the health law. So let's review the changes the law has already wrought and those that still lie ahead:
Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee for President, said the Supreme Court's health care ruling highlights why it's important to defeat President Obama in November.
Romney vowed that if he's elected, he would replace the national health care law with legislation that would allow patients to keep their doctors and ensure coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. Both of those provisions are contained in the existing law.
He did not mention the individual mandate, which is similar to one in a Massachusetts law that he signed while he was governor.