—
The two congressmen representing the region – one Democrat and one Republican – shared a similar negative opinion of the decision reached by the Supreme Court concerning the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
On Thursday, the high court upheld the constitutionality of the law’s individual mandate, which requires citizens to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty, when determining the case of National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius.
Chief Justice John Roberts, along with justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, ruled that the mandate is legal under Congress’ ability to lay and collect taxes.
Four judges dissented.
Rep. Mark Critz, D-Johnstown, and Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Hollidaysburg, issued statements outlining their opposition to the ruling.
“I disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision on the individual mandate, which is why I voted to repeal it – and it is still my opinion that Congress should act swiftly to repeal the tax on medical devices, and the Independent Payment Advisory Board – an unelected board of bureaucrats who could cut benefits for seniors on Medicare,” Critz said.
Critz was not in office when Democrats, led by President Barack Obama, enacted the legislation. He has frequently spoken out against parts of the act.
“I opposed the health-care bill when it passed, but it would be wrong and irresponsible for Congress to go backwards and allow insurance companies to deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, to kick young adults off their parents’ health insurance plans, or to re-open the ‘doughnut hole,’ which will force seniors to pay more for medicine,” Critz said.
“The Supreme Court has given us guidance, and it is our responsibility to work together in a bipartisan fashion going forward.”
Shuster and all other Republican House members voted against the bill in 2010. He since has maintained a steadfast opposition.
“Despite the court’s ruling (yesterday), ‘Obamacare’ is still a job killer for the American people. Millions of American families will lose their current health-care coverage and be forced into new government-run health-care programs,” Shuster said. “Families should be able to make their own choices in health care, visit the doctor of their choosing and receive the health care they feel is best. Those decisions should not be made by bureaucrats in Washington.”
Rob Gleason, a Cambria County resident and chairman of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania, concurred with Shuster and put the decision into the context of the ongoing presidential campaign.
“While we are extremely disappointed in (Thursday’s) ruling, the Supreme Court decision sets the stakes for the November election. The only way to save the country from Obamacare’s budget-busting government takeover of health care is to elect a new president,” Gleason said.
“Under Obamacare, President Obama’s signature legislation, health-care costs continue to skyrocket, and up to 20 million Americans could lose their employer-based coverage.
“Meanwhile, a panel of unelected bureaucrats now has the unprecedented authority to come between elderly patients and their doctors. Obamacare is simply wrong for America and wrong for Pennsylvania. We need market-based solutions that give patients more choice, not less. The answer to rising health-care costs is not, and will never be, big government.”
Click here to subscribe to The Tribune-Democrat print edition.
Click here to subscribe to The Tribune-Democrat e-edition.



