The Supreme Court is no longer relevant.
Long viewed as the last bastion protecting the individual from the rapacious powers of the federal government, SCOTUS, in the name of Chief Justice John Roberts, declared themselves meaningless.
If government can compel individuals to purchase a private product under the guise of its taxing authority, even when the government itself argued that the individual mandate was not a tax, then the government can compel individuals to do anything they choose.
The Supreme Court is no longer relevant.
The healthcare decision was a gigantic legal victory for President Obama. The politics will in my view be 50-50. I tip my hat to the legal team of Fox News, which gave by far the most professionally accurate coverage of the decision (I always call them as I see them). There will now be much unhappiness and probably anger from the right against Chief Justice Roberts for his historic vote (along with the court liberals) that kept the mandate alive.
While the decision was a historic legal and legacy victory for President Obama, I doubt the decision will ultimately help or hurt either party.
Americans may recall that President Obama promised, “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan.” While this mandated coverage in the healthcare reform legislation was desired by many people who are willing to pay the cost, there were certainly other medical insurance consumers who preferred their lower cost coverage. However, contrary to the president’s assurance, they were not permitted to keep their preferred lower-cost healthcare plans.
As we wait for the Supreme Court to rule on the Affordable Care Act, I remain hopeful that this is the first step in reining in an unruly progressive state. Should the SCOTUS strike down the whole law — or even just the individual mandate — it is a sign that there is indeed a limit to federal power.
Still, feminist groups on the left have been lining up to defend ObamaCare in the weeks leading up to this decision and to “keep fighting” for the law’s survival.
The GOP cannot spend time discussing the possible overturn of ObamaCare without offering a reasonable alternative.
It should be quite apparent that we are in dire need of healthcare reform, particularly as our population ages. To simply denigrate ObamaCare without providing a roadmap that leads to a much-needed solution would be irresponsible and politically detrimental.
Republicans need to put together a group of people who actually know something about healthcare. They can start by looking back at the recommendations the President's Council on Bioethics under President Bush put together.
Insurance companies will not be driven out of business. They will simply not insure.
Their model has always been passing the costs through and calculating the cost based on the risk.
Mandates on insurance companies can work if we have the stomach for the cost of the mandates, but the higher cost will discourage even more from paying in, which will make the pool even more expensive to stay in.
If the Supreme Court declares the individual mandate in ObamaCare unconstitutional, can it sever the mandate from the remainder of the bill?
If it can’t, the entire legislation is declared null and void. If this is the eventual outcome, Congress must commence from ground zero again.
The optimists on Charlie Rose Wednesday night said it’s likely the vote would be 6-3 to preserve ObamaCare. Turning back the way of life since FDR seemed unrealistic. The war of ideas between centralization and decentralization is supposed to have been settled at Cemetery Ridge. But this is not over. Sen. Mike Lee (R) of Utah said 5-4 turning back the Obama initiative.
Pundits say it is as important as Brown v. Board of Education. It is a good comparison in that yes, what the court rules this week will change America. I felt the best perspective was in an editorial, "Bracing for the Court," in the New York Sun. They compare the challenge today to an appeal to the Supreme Court in 1935 by a family of kosher butchers, challenged the constitutionality of the National Industrial Recovery Act, which was the centerpiece of the New Deal. They appealed to the Supreme Court on much the same grounds as the states are now making their appeal on healthcare.
If the other 49 states want compulsory healthcare insurance, there is no reason why they cannot have it if permitted under their constitutions. However, there is no reason for the federal government to impose ObamaCare on the 26 states contesting its constitutionality.
Without getting into the technical merits of the constitutionality of ObamaCare, clever attorneys can cogently argue both sides of the issue. However, the case for ObamaCare requires an Orwellian expansion of the Commerce Clause which few Americans can understand.
UltraViolet, a group aimed at expanding women’s rights and combating sexism, has launched a campaign in favor of ObamaCare. As UltraViolet puts it, “the big healthcare bill that President Obama signed has a ton of benefits in it that impact women specifically:”
1. Being a woman is no longer a "pre-existing condition."
2. Insurance companies can't charge you more for being a woman either.
3. Having a pap smear still sucks, but at least you don't have to shell out a co-pay for it.
4. You also don't need a co-pay for birth control anymore.
5. Have kids? Or want to? The law helps with that too.
That’s the key word — “specifically.” Too often, women’s groups on the left are focused on negotiating specific benefits for women without considering the larger impact these “advantages” have on the economy and our freedom.