Rep. Lipinski: Supreme Court Decision Doesn't Change Opposition to Obamacare

Congressman Dan Lipinski (IL-3), statement about his continued opposition to the Affordable Car Act, which the Supreme Court upheld Thursday.

The only House Democrat from Illinois to vote against President Obama’s Affordable Care Act in 2010, Rep. Dan Lipinski (IL-3) said the Supreme Court ruling upholding the act hasn't changed his mind. 

In a statement released Thursday, Lipinski explained why he is still opposed to Obamacare.

“More than two years have passed since I voted against the health care law because it is unaffordable, cuts Medicare, does not do enough to lower the soaring cost of health care, and would allow federal funding for abortion,” Lipinski said. “The details about the law that have emerged in the meantime have only added to my concerns, and I have continued to work to fix the many problems with it. The Supreme Court’s decision does not change my opposition to the law or my dedication to changing the law. As I said at the time of my vote, there can be no doubt that our health care system is in serious need of reform. Today, that remains the case. The soaring cost of health care is a very serious problem, and is among the biggest contributors to the budget deficits our nation faces. Amid the partisan reactions to this news, we should remember the real problems with our health care system and the need to address them in a sensible and fiscally sustainable manner. The court’s decision may divide us, but the need for high-quality, affordable medical care unites us all.

Lipinski was the only House Democrat from Illinois to vote against the act in 2010. His vote hinged on the cost of the act and a provision that allowed for the funding of abortions, according to an article published in the Chicago Tribune in March 2010.

Last year, Lipinski won the Democratic primary by voters in the 3rd District. In response to a Tribune election questionnaire, Lipinski said the Affordable Care Act included many provisions he supported, but he could not vote for an act that, in sum, he called "deeply flawed."

At the time of his primary campaign this year, Lipinski said he did not favor repealing the act without making major changes to the county's health care system. At the time, Lipinski told the Tribune he felt it leave the country "with a system in dire need of improvement and little chance of action in a gridlocked Congress."

Richard Grabowski, of Hometown, who won the Republican primary for the 3rd District seat in March said the Chief Justice John Roberts had this to say about the Supreme Court's ruling:

"It was a smart decision in the way it was done, otherwise it would have opened Pandora's boxes," Grabowski said. "By the way he thought it out and looked at what the Constitution said, [Chief Justice John] Roberts put it back into the hands of the states. It’s no longer a federal mandate.  By what Roberts stated in his decision, he passed it back to Congress to tax and defund Obama-care. The only downside is that ordinary taxpayers will look at this as a defeat, but it’s up to the Congress now to repeal and defund it. It’s a positive."

OakLawnGuy June 29, 2012 at 12:02 PM
Holding down (or, preferably, diminishing) the cost of health care is not something that can be built into any health care reform acts. It's a separate issue and needs to be addressed as such, in the same way Massachusetts is addressing it now, years after Mitt Romney's very similar healthcare reform he pushed through as Mass. governor.
Russ Petrick June 29, 2012 at 02:18 PM
I'm all in favor of people having health care. I'm more in favor of them getting it like anything else in life, work for it. I'm tired of supporting lazy, uneducated low income people who'd rather have things handed to them. The worst part of all this, I worked hard to get a good education and get into a career I've had since 1983. The best part is my retirement except for 3% of it is paid by employer as are my benefits. Now my benefits will be taxed ( or call it what you'd like ) so these same lazy uneducated people can have medical insurance. Many things in life are privileges which if you want them , you work for them . Big screen t.v.s, cell phones etc. are not necessities, they are benefits. Benefits of hard work, why should anyone who is on welfare have the same things I have if they're not willing to work for? I didn't get any assistance putting my son through college, or buying my house I worked extra to that. My dad told me as a kid the definition of success is not the type of car you drive or the size of your house, it being self sufficient and not counting on the government or others to survive . Obviously a lotta people's parent's were as wise as my dad.
ken crosby June 30, 2012 at 12:00 AM
This is a huge slap in the face for each and every American
Richard L. Grabowski June 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM
In the end it still comes down to the fact that Roberts could have and should have ruled this as unconstitutional. There was no need for chess playing - I admit, I was also one of the many of us who said, "Say it isn't so!" and were looking for the silver lining in Robert’s decision, hoping for a great strategy that the Chief Justice had just played to ultimately reverse this bill to repeal. When it came down to his final decision, he should have flat out ruled it unconstitutional. He damaged our Constitutionally provided freedoms and liberties, he was the referee ruling on the move, not the player – that’s judiciating of our laws, not legislating where the responsibility should lie. Congress voted on this bill, without having read it, it should have never made it this far!!! Don't remove the blame from our congressmen, they're still the ones who CREATED this Frankenstein monstrosity of an unconstitutional bill. When Lipinski voted YES for cloture of this bill, gets national notoriety and virtually a month of national publicity for being the LAST HOLDOUT on this bill, works harder than anyone else to get taxpayer funded abortions removed from the bill (even I applaud that effort), but when unsuccessful, ends up voting NO for the bill - correct he DIDN'T vote for Obamacare. Can you imagine the firestorm that would be ensuing if Dan Lipinski HAD been successful? HE WOULD HAVE VOTED for the Obamacare bill! Without a doubt. Remember this when you vote in November!
Aaron July 14, 2012 at 06:42 PM
Shoulda, woulda, coulda. That's all I hear from people who didn't do anything. Your revolution is over, Mr. Grabowski. Condolences. The bums lost. My advice is to you is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Grabowski? The bums will always lose!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »