12 thoughts on “Legal Myths About ObamaCare”

  2. From the Forbes piece: “Indeed, voters in 2010 changed control of the House in response to anger over Obamacare, but it took two more years to change control in the Senate.”

    I have little doubt that people with accounts over there have already pointed out that the Senate didn’t change back to Republican hands until after the 2014 election.

    I keep seeing silly little errors like this that didn’t used to happen, but now that we have movies and TV shows depicting Senators exercising executive (rather than oversight) power, and news pieces crediting presidents with “passing” legislation, I suppose I should pretend not to be disgusted by it.

    Well, I ain’t gonna.

  3. Yes, the notion that it’s going to continue to survive the myriad court challenges ahead is wishful thinking on the part of the statists.

    Eh, not to jim out on your guys, but this is whistling past the graveyard. If we were operating on proper constitutional law, Obamacare would have already been reversed to the lack of separability of the law.

    2. It’s a truism among lawyers that all one can do when arguing before a judge is give him more reasons to make the ruling he wanted to make anyway. The Obamacare cases to date bear this out.

    3. W’dya mean court challenges? How about the Administration choosing not to enforce its signature piece of legislation?

      When I asked earlier, “What Obamacare?” , I heard from many members of this forum who purchase health insurance on the individual market and have been at the receiving end of the worst of it. But hasn’t this thing been delayed and extended and modified, of course when it serves the aims and purposes of the present Administration? Has this thing really been implemented, or say, is the business mandate a matter for “after the next election.” Again.

      Yes, people are feeling pain from this thing, and I hear ya, but we are not anywhere feeling the pain of this thing fully implemented and fully enforced because the Administration is not quite ready (after the next election!) to inflict that amount of pain.

      Given the current freestyle administrative government and the seeming lack of standing for people to issue challenges, and the inability to compel the executive to fully implement laws let alone enforce their provisions, and given the make-the-rules-up-as-we-play-the-game ‘tude, is there such a thing as Obamacare anymore?

      1. Selective enforcement and implementation really does justify the label “Obamacare” in my view.

        1. The idea is that the ACA cannot be repealed because it is an entitlement that too many people depend on and you cannot take free stuff from people . . . ever.

          The President as issued numerous taunts, er, challenges to the political opposition (cough, Ted Cruz, cough) on that basis.

          How about campaigning for President on the platform of preserving Obamacare — as it stands. Medicaid extension, not perfect and not without its “out year” fiscal burden, but to extend Medicaid to a few million people straddling between poverty and doing OK, we can live with that. The provisions that people with preexisting conditions “get insurance” — yeah, we can handle that with some manner of “assigned risk pool” system. The birth control drugs on which many regard as a matter of conscience not to have to fund. We are going Libertarian by OTC -ing those medications, making that point moot.

          All the other waivers, extensions, can kicking, and excuse making, my platform is to codify that into law, freezing Obamacare into its current barely implemented form. 30 million remaining uninsured — you had 8 years to deal with this, and we are not going to do a second (comprehensive) health care reform. Our plan to deal with this is incremental market-place based reforms (medical savings accounts plus catastrophic insurance, which is kinda, sorta, the direction Obamcare is headed).

          See that was neither scary to voters nor that hard to do nor that politically painful . . .

      2. “I heard from many members of this forum who purchase health insurance on the individual market and have been at the receiving end of the worst of it.”

        That reminds me, I need to read through the benefit changes for my plan this year.

  4. It breaks my heart but I have to disagree. The chief justice of land has already passed on two opportunities to overturn this thing. If the SC didn’t overturn it then, they’re not gonna do it now.

    The only way this gets fixed is in the legislature. Indeed that was the plan all along. The Dems set this thing up to fail figuring after that they could get single payer through, but they didn’t count on losing Congress.

    1. Assuming that Roberts wasn’t being blackmailed, I think he’s probably learned his lesson. He let it live because he thought the voters would take care of it in 2012. There are plenty of opportunities for him to rectify his error going forward.

Comments are closed.