Washington (dpa) – The US Supreme Court heard the first arguments Monday in a challenge to President Barack Obama's signature health care overhaul law, as Republican presidential candidates used the opportunity to attack the proposal that is sure to be a major issue in November's presidential election. The nine Supreme Court justices first heard procedural arguments about whether they can hear a challenge to a law whose main provisions will not go into effect for several years. The arguments revolved around an obscure 19th-century tax law that could keep the justices from ruling on the case until after the law goes fully into effect in 2014 and the first fines under the law are paid. The Obama administration and the law's opponents agree that the law should be reviewed by the court now. However, a lower court had ruled it could not weigh in on the case until after 2014, forcing the Supreme Court to decide on the matter. Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum appeared on the steps of the US Supreme Court after arguments concluded. Calling the law among “the most fundamental issues of the day,” Santorum said he was the best Republican candidate to take on Obama over his health care reforms. Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney instituted similar reforms while governor of Massachusetts and is, Santorum argued, in no position to challenge Obama in the general election over health care policies that conservatives believe give government too much control over personal decisions. “This is the most important issue in this election,” Santorum said. “There's only one candidate who has a chance of winning the (Republican) nomination that can make this a central issue.” Still, Romney appeared before supporters in San Diego in front of a banner reading, “Repeal & Replace Obamacare,” and pointing to “promises made that have not been delivered.” Obama pushed for the law to help the estimated 30 million Americans without health insurance and address the resulting problems and soaring costs in a country that is among the few wealthy nations that do not offer such coverage to its citizens. The law, supported by Obama's Democrats and rejected by most opposition Republicans, was designed to achieve nearly universal health care coverage – a goal that has long eluded past presidents. To reach that goal without forcing the government to directly pay for or manage most health care, it requires most Americans to purchase their own insurance if they do not receive it from their employers or existing government programs. It also requires insurance firms to cover patients with existing medical conditions – applicants they might have turned down in the past because of the expense. The case is considered to be such a landmark that some court watchers had queued up outside the court for days to get a seat in the chamber. The court was devoting nearly six hours to arguments over three days, instead of the standard one for most cases. The case raises key questions about the role of the federal government and its relationship with states and citizens. In a day of procedural questions, lawyer Robert Long, who was appointed by the court to argue the issue of whether the case can be heard now, presented arguments that the court should not yet weigh in on the health care law because it should be considered a tax and be subject to the 1867 Anti-Injunction Act. Questions by the justices appeared pointed towards the likelihood that they would choose to address the matter now. On Tuesday, the court will get to the heart of the legal challenge of whether the government can require citizens to purchase health insurance. Obama's effort to rein in soaring health care costs and address the millions of uninsured has become a political as well as legal hot potato ahead of presidential elections. Republicans object to the law, and all of the party's presidential hopefuls have vowed to work to repeal it, even though former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney enacted similar legislation in his state that has been described as a model for Obama's measure. Legal challenges to the 2,700-page health care law have largely centered around the mandate that requires citizens to purchase health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty of 3,000 dollars per year. State governments have also argued the measure violates their rights to regulate the industry. BM ShortURL: http://goo.gl/cgOyw Tags: Health Care, Supreme Court, United States Section: Features, Health, Latest News, North America
