reform law, including the individual mandate. that's the controversial part of the law requiring almost everyone to have health insurance. and it didn't take long for washington lawmakers to react to the landmark decision. >> reporter: as crowds waited outside, the supreme court handed down one of its most important decisions in nearly 20 years. the individual mandate-- the part of health care reform that requires almost all americans to have health insurance or pay a fine, is constitutional. it was a five to four vote upholding the mandate, with chief justice john roberts casting the swing vote. in the end, the majority viewed the penalty for not having insurance as a tax. and reasoned, congress is allowed to impose taxes. >> today's decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the supreme court's decision to uphold it. >> reporter: the vast majority of the law survived, but not all of it. the federal government will not be allowed to pull funding for medicaid from states not expanding their own medicaid programs for the very poor. just as it has for the past two years, the ruling drew fire from conservatives today. presidential contender mitt romney said the law raises taxes, adds to the national debt, without lowering costs. he vowed to replace it if he's elected. >> what the court did today was say that obamacare does not violate the constitution. what they did not do was say that obamacare is good law, or that it's good policy. obamacare was bad policy yesterday, it's bad policy today. obamacare was bad law yesterday, it's bad law today. >> susie: still ahead, we'll look at what's next for the affordable care act: its implementation, and what to expect for health care stocks. "nightly business report" is brought to you by: captioning sponsored by wpbt >> susie: today's big ruling on health care removes one giant uncertainty for businesses and lawmakers. many had put their planning on hold while the justices debated the president's health care law. now they are scrambling to make up for lost time. darren gersh takes a look at what comes next. >> reporter: the takeaway message for employers from today's supreme court decision is "get moving!" any business waiting, or perhaps hoping, the affordable care act would be thrown out now faces some big decisions. beginning with whether to scale back insurance benefits in the next enrollment period to the minimum package required under the health care law. >> you could very easily as an employer say, "i need to kind of ratchet back my benefits. i need to get you accustomed to getting a little less. >> reporter: now that the high court has upheld the individual mandate, many companies will also have to start planning for a surge in the number of employees signing up for health insurance to avoid any penalties. employers will also have to start seriously weighing their options under the law. should they keep their coverage or drop it and pay a penalty to let their employees find coverage through new state health insurance exchanges. >> it is possible that some employers will drop their coverage as a result. and whether they make that decision for 2014 or not, they are decisions that are made annually, so they're a decision that could really be made at any time by the individual employer. >> reporter: many states will also have to ramp up their health care planning. the supreme court ruled states can't be threatened into expanding their medicaid coverage to millions of uninsured americans. at first, the federal government will pick up the entire cost of the expansion, but in a few years states will have to chip in 10%. >> and i think many state officials, as much as they may disagree philosophically with this approach are going to find it hard to resist that kind of level of financial support from the federal government. >> reporter: of course all the uncertainty hasn't been removed. the president's health care law is shaping up as the second biggest issue in the campaign after the economy. republicans already are looking for ways to chip away at the bill's benefits. and as congress looks for ways to cut the budget deficit, republicans are expected to target subsidies in the affordable care act for low- income americans to buy insurance. >> congress is going to have a choice. medicare-- people have been on it for half a century, this thing, they've never seen a check yet. i've always thought it would be much easier to scale back the insurance subsidies than cut existing programs. >> reporter: the insurance industry will also have to get moving. the supreme court's ruling clears the way for 20 million new customers to buy health insurance over the next four years. darren gersh, "n.b.r.," washington. >> susie: we turn now to a healthcare economist and one of the key architects of the affordable health care act. he's jonathan gruber, professor of economics at m.i.t. jonathan, when you look at all of the players in this health care state, whether we are talking about insurers or hospitals, companies, big and small, who do you see as the winners and the losers? >> well, i think we have to start with the real winners are the citizens of america who don't have access to fair insurance today but will. i think when you get to the business sectors, i think that basically the people provide health care, the hospitals, the pharmaceuticals, the medical devices, they're winners. this bill tries to have a balancing effect this law tries a balancing effect withome excise taxes that offset how much they win will you they still win. i think the losers are those insurance companies who really made their money off discriminating insurance markets which will be outlawed. so i think it is a mixed bag for insurance companies, some win, the ones that have behaved and offer good products win. the ones that haven't behaved and tried to make money off discrimination are going to lose. >> susie: and how does the economy come out through all of this. some people say that this new health care law will hurt the economy. your thoughts? >> there is no evidence for that i think in the short term this health care law does not have a huge effect on the economy. i think the real issue is in the long term which is the long-term success of the u.s. economy depends fundamentally on our ability to control health-care cost. and this law starts us down that road. those who would repeal this law would essentially move backyards away from the steps we are making towards controlling health-care costs. >> susie: let's talk about the economic impact because some critics are saying this is going to hurt hiring. companies wig and small that were thinking of hiring might think twice. small businesses actually might layoff people so what do you say to that? >> i say that that is just made up. let's take small business, for example. the only thing this law does to small businesses is give them a new tax credit. that's it. there is no penalties on small business. there are no new charges on small business. there is just a tax credit for offering health insurance. how will that cause them to lay offer people. this is the kind of misinformation that lead the public to not understand this bill. what we need to do now is move forward to an honest accounting understanding of this law. and then let people decide rather than just passing on misinformation like small business will be penalized. >> susie: as today analyzing the sector between politician and analysts, a lot of people the more they heard about the powerful role of the government or some of the cuts, tax cuts or tax hikes and you know other new requirements, they come away with mixed feelings, it looks like there will be a lot of challenges to this law. looking ahead wa, do you think is going to be the future of this affordable health care act will. it be overturned or not. >> i think it will not. but i think fundamentally that is going to depend on the extent to which people have proper information about the law. so for example you look at the comments you just referred to about today. the law does increase tax and cut spending. you know what, it also reduces the deficit. so that part of the goal we're trying to have. part of the goal of the law was deficit reduction. you can't reduce the deficit without reigning in spending and raising taxes and that's exactly what this law does. i think this law does a lot of things. it's complicated but if people understand it they will like it. here in massachusetts we've done this. once it is in place it has got two-thirds public support. because once it's in place you can't put in that misinformation campaign that leads people to understand the benefits it delivers to them. >> it certainly is complicated. there are a lot of opportunities and pressure points. we're going to keep talking about it thank you so much for your time. jonathan gruber, professor of economics at mit. >> dr. scott gotly is a advisor with the food and drug-- administration. doctor, before we talk about the policy let me ask you about the reason behind the ruling today. the court ruled that individual mandate is lawful because congress can collect taxes. do agree with that reasoning? >> well, i think a lot of people were left scratching their heads in washington around the reasoning because the court essentially ruled it wasn't ae a tax and that is what allowed them to rule at all and then they ruled it was a tax. i think it confused a lot of people and continues to confuse them. >> tom: the idea behind this law for supporters is you increase the market of the insured, the goal is-- goal is to lower the growth rate of medical cost, will that happen in your estimation? >> i don't necessarily think so a think a lot of the cost control mechanisms built into the bill are forms of capitation that put an economic incentive on the physicians, if you will, to economize on the use of services. there were other ways to incentivize people into the insurance pool without using the mandate, wthout using a penalty. you could have created incentives for people to get into the insurance market by allowing them to have portable insurance and allow them to be free from getting related and dropped as long as they stay insured. the administration chose to use a stick rather than a carrot. >> tom: you talk about economizing service on the parts of doctors. others say control cost on the part of doctors no more unnecessary tests no more extra test no more $12 aspirin, those kinds of things and that would hold back the out of control costs in health care. >> well, the question is where you place the economic considerations. someone in the system has to think about the economic cost of the health care decisions s it going to be the patient through copays, the physician through forms of capitation where the doctor has a financial incentive to withhold care or a government agency that just price controls and makes decisions about what people should and shouldn't have access to in certain settings. this bill really relies heavily on government agencies to make decision and also forms of capitation which doctors will now have a financial incentive to economize. and it takes the financial consideration, if you will, away from the patient that is based on a philosophical divide between republicans and democrats when it am coulds to health care. >> tom: supporters say the current system or at least the system existed before this reform came into place a coupliers ago was to incentivize doctors on volume. more testing, more medicine, and that drove up costs. >> that's right. the medicare service system does do that doctors are paid on volume, not on cost and quality but there are better ways in my view to move doctors towards a system where they are paid on the basis of cost and quality. the problem is that medicare really can do that because it is a political organization in washington can't make distinctions between physicians based on cost and quality. it is politically unpal atthable, too much pushback. >> tom: a lot of of the in the next 18 months to see what will happen in 2014, dr. scott gottlieb with us, a practicing physician also with the american enterprise institution. >> susie: a little later in the program, health care related stocks, do you buy, sell or hold? we get answers from ana gupta of alliance bernstein. >> tom: signs of progress from euro-zone leaders meeting in brussels on the region's debt crisis, helped chop wall street's losses down to size. the dow fell almost 25 points, but the blue chips had been down as much as 176 points. the nasdaq also down 25, the s&p off two. the heads of europe are looking for ways to help both countries deal with their rising borrowing costs. the two-day summit ends tomorrow. >> susie: after the bell, shares of research in motion plunged over 15%. that's after the maker of blackberry reported its first "loss" in eight years. it was also much steeper than expected. on top of that, rim postponed the launch of its next generation of phones. rim lost 37 cents a share in the june quarter. analysts were expecting a loss of seven cents a share. the company also reported a revenue miss. suzanne pratt takes a look at blackberry's fragile future. >> reporter: not long ago, the blackberry was king of the smartphones. it was a wall street status symbol, a cool workplace necessity. more recently, however, blackberries having been fighting a losing war for survival, battling apple's iphone as well as android- supported phones. some experts say the berry is on the verge of extinction, with rim missing the change from smartphone as a business tool to fun accessory. >> i think blackberry has only about a 20% chance of survival past the end of the year. i don't think it's absolutely sure that it's going to go out of business, but the vultures are circling. >> reporter: the one thing that might save blackberry is the release of it's new operating system, blackberry 10. today we learned it won't be out until next year. experts say it needs to be spectacular to save the company. >> consumers have to get a great media experience, great games, great apps and businesses will have to get the type of security and manageability they expect from blackberry. >> reporter: of course, there are those blackberry loyalists, who can't imagine work or life without one, and say nothing can replace it's real keyboard. >> i use it for everything: media, voice calls, communication everything. >> for someone who uses this phone for business, there's always going to be a need for blackberry. so, i don't ever see them going away. there's too many people in the media and entertainment industry that want to keep this phone. >> reporter: even with blackerries declining market share, there are still millions of people worldwide that use them. suzanne pratt, "n.b.r.," new york. >> tom: some hefty losses in the major stock indices were pared back late in the session thanks to some hope about europe. after hitting its lowest level of the day around 2:30 p.m. eastern, the losses were reduced in the final half hour with the index finished down just 0.2% over speculation of more help for europe. volume was steady from yesterday, 682 million on the big board. 1.6 billion on the nasdaq. the energy sector put up the best gain, 0.6%. while technology saw the biggest drop, down 1.1%. among the issues weighing on market confidence today, a new york times report that j.p. morgan's trading loss may be much larger than originally estimated, up to $9 billion dollars. when the bank first disclosed the losing strategy tied to corporate bond derivatives, the loss was originally estimated at $2 billion. j.p. morgan shares tumbled 2.5%. it was the biggest percentage loser among stocks making up the dow jones industrial average. after the closing bell, a warning from ford motor. the auto giant said second quarter losses will be worse the expected in europe, south america and asia. but it still expects to report a profit. shares closed up a fraction, but were down as much as 3.5% after the closing bell. that puts the stock below $9.75 per share after closing over $10. despite the international weakness, ford said it expects good results from its north american business and its credit operations. the energy sector was higher despite a drop in oil prices, falling below $80 a barrel again. today's settlement down to $7,769 returns crude prices down close to its low since october. oil has been falling in rece months as the dollar has strengthened over the european anxieties. global media conglomerate will split up into two companies. one concentrated with entertainment businesses, like television and movies. the other loaded with newspapers and book publishing. rupert murdoch will stay in control of both. shares of the company moved down just a fraction, holding on to much of the gain we saw earlier in the week when we first learned the news cp board would consider a split. shares are just below a four and a half year high. coming up we will look at health insurance stocks after the supreme court upheld the health care reform law. elsewhere, hospital stocks were jumping. with the likelihood of more patients with insurance, hospital operators rallied. h.c.a. gained almost 10.8% to an 11 month high. community health systems gained 8.9% to a new 52 week high. universal health services jumped 8.5%. red arrows across the board for the five most actively traded exchange traded funds. the nasdaq 100 e.t.f. saw the biggest drop, down 1.1%. and that's tonight's "market focus." >> tom: today's ruling on the health care reform law holds the promise of millions of new customers for the health industry, but not all health care companies will be winners. ana gupte is an analyst with sanford bernstein. this law addresses health insurance, how does this ruling do you think affect the business of health insurers over the long-term? >> so the decision, tom, really surprised wall street. the arguments in march this is widely watched by-- the expectation was the individual mandate would be struck down but then along with that very tough individual market reforms, which requires that insurers should guarantee coverage to all regardless of preexisting conditions. and community rating, very, very tough for them to price policies whout any medical underwriting. so in advance of the event, the stocks traded up and the expectation that there would be earning upside from that scenario, and then that does not in fact happen and the supreme court upheld the law, and some of the stocks pulled back. >> tom: you brought two along with you. one you think is best prepared and one worse prepared for the outcome from this reform law. best prepared you have identified united healthcare. unh. what makes you anticipate this company has the business mod told quite frankly profit. >> the united health is a diversified bellwether it is over $100 billion in revenue it has exposure to the commercial employer market which is impacted to the downside f you will, by these exchanges and obama care but is also very nicely levered to the growing government markets of medicaid, which will be expanded post obama care, the dual eligibles which are eligible for both medicare and medicaid, and then the medicare product itself, skinnier-- seniors are aging into medicare elig able, particularly with the demographic. >> tom: like the diversified revenue there i have to move on for the one you said ill-prepared, wellpoint, wlp, just under 30 seconds here, what makes you think this business model isn't ready. >> they have a gate deal of exposure to the commercial marketsing particularly the retail individual market and. they are not growing as well in the growing government platforms that i brought up and then finally despite the blue brands and very strong market share in every local market that they are present in, they have not really played a leadership role in bending and being part of the solution. >> two to watch there on either side. how about disclosure, do you have a position on it. >> i don't have a position. >> tom: anna, covering the insurance stocks with us. >> susie: the restaurant business is one of the toughest in the world. more close than open every year and on average the life span is a short two years. so how does one family-owned and operated restaurant operation in northern california keep expanding? with tonight's "made in america," mike hegedus tells us the secret really is in the sauce. >> reporter: it is that all- american recipe for success; hard wk, quality product, loyal customers and one special, secret ingredient, it's the sauce. it really is. >> my grandmother told me to never, never, never, tell anyone the recipe for the sauce. and if i did, i'd be kicked out of the family. >> reporter: if the sauce is the key then what it has opened is the door to success for everett & jones, arguably the best known barbecue restaurant chain in northern california, five outlets, with this, the jack london square location in oakland, the largest. it is owned d operated by dorothy king-jernegan and her children, four daughters and two sons. business acumen passed, generation to generation. >> consistency, that's the key to having a successful business. >> knowing the history, i love it. >> reporter: it is a history that stretches back to a shoeless family in rural alabama. one that moved to oakland in the 50s, and one that saw dorothy everett, a single mother of eight, open her first restaurant, with that sauce in 1973. it provided a good living and created a desire for something more. >> my mom said to me, "dorothy they are not going to give a black woman that much money." >> reporter: but they did, and after a stint at the haas business school at u.c. berkeley, king-jernegan opened this location; one that includes a music venue, and has played host to a string of sports and entertainment celebrities, contacts and connections that are leading everett & jones to a southern california expansion. >> were expanding to l.a. >> reporter: along with the bricks and mortar, and researching opportunities for their ribs in retail, the everett & jones name is spreading across the u.s. the sauce available in 300 stores, and thanks to the internet, internationally, orders coming in from fresno to france, from roanoke to russia; it seems once they taste it... well. >> my mother always said that word of mouth was the best advertising. >> reporter: particularly when the words taste so good. mike hegedus "n.b.r.," oakland. >> tom: tomorrow on "n.b.r." next stop for foodie craze series, food trucks, and how this trend is parking itself at the forefront of gourmet food. charles schwab c.e.o. walter bettinger joins us with his take on the markets and investor confidence. and s&p chief market strategist sam stovall will be along as we wrap up the second quarter and look forward to wall street's second half. >> tom: susie, we'll see you then. >> susie: good night tom. thanks for watching everyone. we'll see you online at: www.nbr.com and back here tomorrow night. "nightly business report" is brought to you by: captioning sponsored by wpbt captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org