Charleston, SC – There’s no doubt that Bobbie Rose was glad to hear the Supreme Court’s decision on the Affordable Care Act this morning. All one had to do is hear the first word out of her mouth after learning of it.



“Amen!” Rose says in response to the 5-4 ruling that upholds the Act, which she calls “one of the most important decisions the Supreme Court will make in our lifetimes.”



It’s a fantastic decision for three key reasons, says Rose, the Democratic candidate for South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District: “First, we have an overwhelming number of citizens in our state who lack adequate healthcare. Second, that high number of uninsured is affecting others; the uninsured were adding to the coverage costs and medical expenses of those with insurance. Lastly,” she concludes, “our current representative’s effort to overturn this needed law has just been stopped.”



Offering details of those three points, Rose offers “One of out of every five citizens in South Carolina is without health insurance because they can’t afford it. This Act provides them with a needed avenue to receive the care they need at a cost they can afford.”



“Their lack of insurance has had fatal results, too,” Rose notes. “Every year, about 300 uninsured South Carolinians die from treatable causes, but are unable to afford treatments. Lack of insurance alone is their cause of death.”



Rose also notes the benefits of the Act to those who already have insurance. “No more ceiling on coverage, no more pre-existing exclusions,” she offers as examples.



She also points out another key benefit of ACA: without it, those with health coverage have been paying the medical bills of the uninsured directly through their own insurance premiums.



The amount uncollected by medical providers from uninsured patients is traditionally added to the bills of those with insurance, for a total annual increase of over $1,000 in individual insurance policy costs to families and employers.



The Act helps us with insurance save quite a lot more in a quite a few other ways, says Rose.



“Just so far in its implementation, it’s already saved senior citizens in our state over $60 million. And over a quarter-million South Carolinians already with private insurance will be getting rebates from their insurance companies this year, totaling almost $20 million back in their pockets.”



Had the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Act, the costs of insurance premiums were projected by experts to increase shortly after the decision. Even hospitals and medical offices would have a tax increase if the Act had been repealed, according to recent reports.



“While my third reason for supporting today’s decision is nowhere near as important as the first two,” Rose says, “I have to say I’m mighty glad to know that Representative Scott’s efforts to remove our right to affordable health care have just been stopped.



“He’s been trying to do this for quite a while, after all, even before the Act passed into law.”



While still a state representative in November 2009, Scott was the primary sponsor of two bills (H 4171 and H 4181) to block the use of the Act in South Carolina, and while it was still under debate in U.S. Congress.



After the Patient Protection & Affordable Health Care Acts passed in March 2010, Scott tried to block it again with a new bill (H 4825).



“He’s continued this fight against our rights to affordable health care since moving on to D.C., too,” says Rose.



Scott’s first bill to U.S. Congress was H.R. 698, which would “deauthorize and rescind funding” for the healthcare act.



“Maybe he forgot he’s no longer in the insurance business, and is supposed to be representing his constituents instead of his lobbyist donors,” Rose says.



Allstate Insurance Company, which Scott represented until winning the 2010 election, sells supplemental health insurance, which is supposed to help with medical costs that ordinary health insurance doesn’t cover. The Affordable Care Act can substantially reduce, if not eliminate, the need for this secondary format of insurance because of the Act’s removals of many policy limitations.



“Those insurance lobbyists are his biggest donors, too,” Rose quickly points out.



Over the last two election cycles, Scott’s received $164,125 in campaign donations from the insurance industry; over $100,000 was donated in this 2012 election cycle alone, making that industry Scott’s top current donor.



“Hopefully,” Roses adds, “Scott will stop spreading that ‘17,000 IRS agents’ falsehood, which was proven false long ago, but which he’s still telling his constituents.”



At a recent Town Hall meeting on May 23, Scott told attendees that the Affordable Care Act requires the IRS to hire 17,000 agents to enforce its law.



He made this claim in his last campaign, too. During a radio interview of August 2010, for example, he criticized the Act by stating it will “create 17,000 new bureaucrats in the IRS(.)”



However, that premise had been proven false five months before the 2010 interview.



In March 2010, a Republican report from the House Ways and Means Committee claimed that the Act would require the IRS to hire 16,500 “agents.” Less than two weeks later, the non-partisan FactCheck described the claim to be “wildly inaccurate” and “partisan.” The Pulitzer Prize-winning Politifact continues to label this claim to be of “pants on fire” invalidity, too.



“Now that this is a closed subject for him,” Rose says, “maybe he’ll start paying attention to this upcoming election!”



In conclusion, Rose adds, “Obamacare – fair, affordable healthcare for all Americans. Oh, happy day!”