By Yaël Ossowski | Florida Watchdog

TAMPA— The kindling that has been fueling partisan debates and sparking protests during the past three years has finally met its fate in the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled that the national health care law is constitutional, likely sparking new debates before the 2012 presidential election

The Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama‘s landmark legislation signed in March of 2010, was ruled constitutional by the nation’s highest court Thursday morning, one of the most highly anticipated events that will likely dominate political factions in the election season.

All measures adopted by the Congress were upheld by the court, including the provision requiring insurance coverage and the expansion of Medicaid.

Young adults under the age of 26 also will be allowed to stay on their parent’s health care plans.

The law, which required health insurance coverage for all Americans, faced its first legal challenge from the state of Florida, which filed a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services, reponsible for carrying out the law, in September 2011, eventually joined by 25 other states across the country.

The historic decision, forever known to future citizens as Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services, will likely become the hot topic during the election season to come before the November general election.

“If the health law is upheld, that’ll be a large amount of vindication for the president, but he’s not going to campaign too much on the unpopular parts of it,” Frank Torres, a political analyst for Central Florida News 13 in Orlando, told Florida Watchdog last week.

“He’ll talk about keeping children on health plans and no denials for pre-existing conditions—but he definitely won’t be touting the individual mandate.”

Some senior citizens say that upholding the bill has further clouded the president’s efforts in his first term.

“This bill is anathema to seniors, it is a bad piece of legislation,” said Jim Martin, chairman of 60 Plus, a Arlington, Va.-based nonprofit organization of senior citizens dedicated to limited government and low taxes, according to their website.

Martin told Florida Watchdog the group was created as an alternative to the American Association of Retired Persons, which Martin labeled as a “liberal institution” that “lied to its members” about the size and scope of the national health care law.

“Senior citizens said we didn’t want it and were vehemently opposed to it at the time,” Martin told Florida Watchdog.

“They’re right now cutting parts of it — they repealed the Independent Advisory Board, they repealed the $28 billion tax on medical devices — wheelchairs if you will.”

“Clearly this is a higher tax on seniors. A lot of Democrats are joining Republicans to repeal these bad provisions,” Martin said last Friday in Miami.

“By a 14 to 1 margin, seniors were saying “don’t pass this bill.”

Florida Gov. Rick Scott told reporters in a conference call on June 20 that he expected the court to rule against the measure.

“Every government program in the world overpromises, runs out of money, doesn’t promptly pay providers —hospitals and physicians — which means it’s more difficult to get care,” said Scott.

The governor has yet to make a public statement on the ruling as it stands.

“The Obama administration has no concept of what insurance is or should be,” Robert Sanchez, director of public policy at the James Madison Institute, a nonprofit free-market think tank in Tallahassee, told Florida Watchdog before the ruling was announced.

“Insurance is supposed to be about pooling risk. Allowing people to opt in or out is going to warp the entire idea of that.”

“The Medicaid obligation that states will have to pick up is going to squeeze out a lot of money used for other purposes. By tying the hands of the states with these future obligations, the federal government is giving Florida, among others, an offer they can’t refuse — literally,” said Sanchez.