Obamacare - RIP

[boomerang]

Oral arguments begin tomorrow before the SCOTUS. Will the United States of America be fundamentally transformed? Personally, I think not. There is no authority under the Constitution for mandating the populace purchase something on the federal level. Passed in the dead of night, the bill that needed to be passed so we could find out what's in it, Obama's signature 'accomplishment', will collapse as the core of the legislation is found to be unconstitutional.

Obama loses either way. If it's struck down, his highly touted, much ballyhooed, BFD will be rendered impotent and along with it the driving force behind it, Obama himself. If it is upheld, the Tea Party and the legions of Tea Party sympathizers will vote him out, pinning their hopes on a candidate who promises to dismantle the legislation. Regardless, for many years to come every far-reaching piece of legislation brought forth by the Democrats will have an albatross around its neck with the comparison to Obamacare. When you stick your neck far, far out, there's a chance you might lose it.


Obamacare: The reckoning

 

[Ausm]

LMAO an opinion piece by this asshole Charles Krauthammer

 

[boomerang]

LMAO an opinion piece by this asshole Charles Krauthammer

No, no, no, see you're supposed to voice your opinion on the matter, not call a columnist juvenile names solely because he doesn't share your viewpoints.

The commentary is mine. I'm pretty sure you consider me an asshole so you could start off by calling me one if you wish. That would be better than attacking the author of an article I linked in support of my viewpoint.

I can only hold your hand so much as I'm running low on my state issued hand sanitizer.

 

[Sinsear]

Oral arguments tomorrow; expecting a ruling sometime around june.

 

[radhak]

Asinine logic, supported by a vague and verbose article by a pathological idiot given to regurgitating the thesaurus in pretense of journalism.

 

[Anarchist420]

It will not be thrown out completely. If Dr. Paul does not become President, then Obamacare will never be completely repealed. Romney and Santorum would never repeal it.

 

[ultimatebob]

The "legions" of tea party supporters probably make up 5% of voters at best... and they weren't going to vote for Obama anyway.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm fairly sure that the SCOTUS will uphold the mandate. It shouldn't, but where the Commerce Clause is concerned virtually nothing is off limits. It is THE coercive tool the federal government reaches for when it wishes something that it has no legitimate right to do. It's been done for so long that the concept of Constitutional intent and individual self determination is alien to it. This is where someone comes in and invokes "tyranny" and/or gulag-like conditions elsewhere in place or history. Nevertheless the idea that we can be punished for not doing what we are told by a body which has no inherent power to do so is completely acceptable to the government, which as with all national governments acquires all the power it can and clings to it, and those who think that people need to be "tended" by those who believe in a given agenda. That the government hasn't this power is viewed by the legal profession as a whole as ridiculous. Clearly the government has this power because the government says it has and absurd premises have been used in the past to justify regulation of almost anything. This sits well with many because the mandate is key in a few regards. First, the idea that the government shouldn't be able to punish people for not obeying something which they want strikes them as wrong. We've become sheep, but even sheep have a dominance hierarchy. Yes I am fairly disgusted with those types, but even more with the politicians who didn't even think that there was something undesirable with this course of action. They wanted it and people should do what they are told. There was no need to consider alternatives. Just do it.

Of course there is the need for real reform in health care proper, but this isn't about health care, it's about who is in charge.

Nevertheless, I'm fairly sure that the government and their thralls will ultimately win the day since it doesn't matter what the people want, they will do what they are told because we must. As far as I'm concerned the American Experiment is a failure. We might as well have stayed part of England, something that those who love the government would embrace. They are lesser children of greater sires.

 

[Thump553]

Constitutionally the teabaggers have an extremely weak case, bordering on frivilous litigation.

Politically-with this Supreme Court-they have a much stronger case.

Time will tell whether the Supreme Court applies the law and constitution this time, or goes for a repeat of Bush v. Gore.

 

[Cstefan]

Constitutionally the teabaggers have an extremely weak case, bordering on frivilous litigation.

Wow... I fear for the future of this country.

 

[thraashman]

If the Supreme Court rules strictly on the Constitutionality, the Affordable Healthcare act may be unchanged or partially struck down. If the conservative members do what they've done since they got a majority and rule exclusively politically, then it won't survive. We already know they've ruled against the Constitution several times so it's likely the law is completely Constitutional yet will be struck down.

 

[Balt]

I don't see the individual mandate surviving with this particular court. Whether it should survive with any court, I don't know. I would lean towards no.

 

[fskimospy]

Well if Charles Krauthammer says it, it must be true!

(for fun and entertainment go Google for just how many 'worst predictions of the year' lists our good friend Chuck has made it onto)

 

[FoBoT]

if we end up on a single payer system, say in 5-10 years, because this 'mandate' is upheld, what is to stop protesters from going to the doctor 2-3 times a week to overwhelm the system?

if going to the emergency room becomes 'free', can't people that object just show up to the 'free ER' every friday,saturday night to clog it up and deny care to others? in political protest of course. like Occupy Emergency Room. if Occupy Wall Street was a valid form of political speech, wouldn't Occupy Doctor Office be just as valid?

 

[IronWing]

I expect Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas to stick to the party line and try to shoot the law down. Alito and Roberts are a bit of an unknown. As fascists, there is a lot for them to like in this law. However, they also have their political side so they could go either way.

 

[Pens1566]

Fail logic in OP in regards to if it's upheld. Tea Party wouldn't have voted for Obama anyway.

 

[fskimospy]

I expect Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas to stick to the party line and try to shoot the law down. Alito and Roberts are a bit of an unknown. As fascists, there is a lot for them to like in this law. However, they also have their political side so they could go either way.

Unlikely in that order I think. I expect it to be 6-3 with Kennedy and Roberts in favor, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito opposed. On a good day Scalia might join.

This will be a particularly interesting case for Scalia as he has said in the past:

Where Congress has authority to enact a regulation of interstate commerce, it possesses every power needed to make that regulation effective.”

Congress inarguably has such power, but somehow I think Scalia will find a reason to vote against it nonetheless.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

It will not be thrown out completely. If Dr. Paul does not become President, then Obamacare will never be completely repealed. Romney and Santorum would never repeal it.

Yeah right.

 

[Zebo]

Can't wait until this shit is throw back in Obama's face. Maybe then he'll man up this time and do what he should have done the first go...But he's no FDR.

 

[JEDIYoda]

If it is upheld, the Tea Party and the legions of Tea Party sympathizers will vote him out, pinning their hopes on a candidate who promises to dismantle the legislation.

hahahahaaaaaaa....yeah right!!! rofl.....

 

[Cattlegod]

if they repeal obama care then they need to start refusing people treatment at the hospital and let them die. i'm sick of paying higher premiums to pay for slump assess who don't have insurance and get treated anyway and leave me footing the bill.

 

[Thump553]

Unlikely in that order I think. I expect it to be 6-3 with Kennedy and Roberts in favor, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito opposed. On a good day Scalia might join.

This will be a particularly interesting case for Scalia as he has said in the past:


Congress inarguably has such power, but somehow I think Scalia will find a reason to vote against it nonetheless.

That's a very reasonable prediction. Well, except the part about Scalia-I'm sure he will hunt high and low for something to find fault with.

Personally I hope we go to a single payer system, the sooner the better. The government already pays health care costs for 40% of us, tying the rest to employment (or worse for self employed like me, buying solo policies) is absurd, highly expensive and leads to perverse results (witness the latest "religious freedom" debate, where your employer gets to impose their religious choices upon you). Single payer is really the only hope of reducing our health care costs, which are insanely high (and climbing more rapidly) than the rest of the world-with many, many countries having demonstrably superior systems.

 

[jstern01]

if they repeal obama care then they need to start refusing people treatment at the hospital and let them die. i'm sick of paying higher premiums to pay for slump assess who don't have insurance and get treated anyway and leave me footing the bill.

I am with you on that call. Let the bastards with out insurance, cough up a down payment for their hospital service at the time of service. If you are using the ER, then say 25% down should be acceptable, at least the hospital will have some payment for their services.

 

[cybrsage]

Obamacare does not include a seperability clause, so if one portion is struck down the entire law is struck down. They purposefully did not include that which is routinely included in every law. They said that without the entire law, the whole thing fails.

I am not sure if the SCOTUS strike the entire thing down due to the lack of the seperability clause, but they should.

 

[shortylickens]

Part of me wanted to see it go through, just so it could fall apart and Obama could ruin the chances of any president trying again.

Then I remember plenty of past presidents have done similar things and the voting public never freakin learns. Probably best it didnt happen.