Its been a longtime coming and it still has to go the SCOTUS:
Let the lawyers talk about the law. Us poor slobs want to talk about the myth of a non-political Supreme Court by looking at the politics involved in:
First, John Paul Stevens limited his political considerations to justices retiring:
Instead of High Court justices at the end of their careers lets go back to the beginning.
Every judge is nominated to the federal bench for political reasons. Every liberal is put on the SCOTUS to uphold every law that threatens Roe v. Wade. Most have more than one political agenda. Sonia Sotomayor is there to uphold every aspect of affirmation action. Elena Kagan was put on the SCOTUS specifically to uphold the ACA. God only knows how many political agendas Ruth Ginsburg has going for her.
Rather than slip on the soft soap about liberal and conservative justices working together to uphold the Constitution think about their political agendas. Once you start thinking along those lines you will see that the conservative political agenda most often upholds the US Constitution, while the liberal political agenda most often tortures the US Constitution beyond recognition. Proof: Which side reads things into the Constitution that were never put there by the Framers? Example: The government dictating behavior cannot be found in the Constitution, yet social engineering justified by High Court decisions does just that. The ACA is no exception:
NOTE: Thank God that liberals seldom call for amendments to the Constitution. When they do get an Amendment like the XVI Amendment they read all kinds of crap into it. When they cannot get what they want without an amendment they get what they want through the courts.
In the Old Testament no man could enter the holiest of holy without risking his life. In Socialism government revenue is the holiest of holy.
Ive often said that no Supreme Court will ever vote to deny, reduce, or eliminate government revenues. Overturning the ACA would prove me wrong.
In addition to government revenues, I believe that the Courts only considerations in deciding Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will be purely political government jobs, the education industry, and Wall Street.
Government jobs
I do not know how many government jobs have been created by the ACA so far. I think the IRS alone has hired thousands of new agents. According to Nancy Pelosi 400,000 jobs have been created with many millions more to come (four million is a lowball opener):
No matter the number hired since March of 2010 every one of those people will have to be discharged if the ACA is overturned. Will the High Court do the firing? Will Republicans do it when they repeal HillaryCare II? The politics say no in both scenarios. Thats exactly why the Administration manipulated the number of unemployed so it currently reads 6.4 percent. Overturning the ACA will drive that number even higher than the true number of well over 10 percent.
The truth is: Driving parasites away from the public trough is a good thing for the country. It should have been done when the economy was booming. It wasnt; so Democrats, and the media, are now in position to blame higher unemployment on conservatives, or the Supreme Court, for firing all of those wonderful parasites should the ACA be overturned or repealed. I can hear them saying We brought unemployment down to 6 percent and those meanspirited conservatives ran it up to 15 percent. Blaming conservatives for high unemployment is a variation of Bill Clinton taking credit for the good economy that was forced on him by Newt Gingrich and technology.
The education industry
The fear of firing parasites from government jobs is compounded in the education industry in that higher education relies on a substantial number of their graduates going to government jobs. The reason for higher education subsidies falls apart when there are no government jobs to go to. In short: The ACA is supposed to provide millions of college graduates with high paying jobs in the years ahead. The education industry, more than any other herd of parasites, will take the biggest hit if the ACA is overturned or repealed.
NOTE: There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to be involved in education on any level. The Common Core disgrace is reason enough to get the federal government out of education.
Wall Street
HillaryCare I & HillaryCare II were designed to enrich the insurance industry. Bailing out the healthcare insurance industry with income tax dollars allows the government to bailout Wall Streets absentee owners in perpetuity. Heres how it will work:
In brief: Healthcare insurance industry stocks traded on Wall Street will be called too big to fail; hence, insurance industry bailouts will be used prop up the stock market forever while patient care deteriorates to Third World levels.
If the president wants to witness a refutation of his assertion that the survival of the Affordable Care Act is assured, come Thursday he should stroll the 13 blocks from his office to the nations second-most important court, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. There he can hear an argument involving yet another constitutional provision that evidently has escaped his notice. It is the origination clause, which says: All bills for raising reveornue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills.
XXXXX
What will be argued on Thursday is that what was voted on the ACA was indisputably a revenue measure and unquestionably did not originate in the House, which later passed the ACA on another party-line vote.
Let the lawyers talk about the law. Us poor slobs want to talk about the myth of a non-political Supreme Court by looking at the politics involved in:
First, John Paul Stevens limited his political considerations to justices retiring:
John Paul Stevens says he thinks it's appropriate for Supreme Court justices to factor in political considerations when weighing a decision to retire.
April 21, 2014
Retired Justice Stevens lets the cat out of the bag on politicized Supreme Court
Thomas Lifson
Blog: Retired Justice Stevens lets the cat out of the bag on politicized Supreme Court
Instead of High Court justices at the end of their careers lets go back to the beginning.
Every judge is nominated to the federal bench for political reasons. Every liberal is put on the SCOTUS to uphold every law that threatens Roe v. Wade. Most have more than one political agenda. Sonia Sotomayor is there to uphold every aspect of affirmation action. Elena Kagan was put on the SCOTUS specifically to uphold the ACA. God only knows how many political agendas Ruth Ginsburg has going for her.
Rather than slip on the soft soap about liberal and conservative justices working together to uphold the Constitution think about their political agendas. Once you start thinking along those lines you will see that the conservative political agenda most often upholds the US Constitution, while the liberal political agenda most often tortures the US Constitution beyond recognition. Proof: Which side reads things into the Constitution that were never put there by the Framers? Example: The government dictating behavior cannot be found in the Constitution, yet social engineering justified by High Court decisions does just that. The ACA is no exception:
The ACAs defenders say its tax is somehow not quite a tax because it is not primarily for raising revenue but for encouraging certain behavior (buying insurance). But the origination clause, a judicially enforceable limit on the taxing power, would be effectively erased from the Constitution if any tax with any regulatory behavior-changing purpose or effect were exempt from the clause.
Obamacare's doom
By George F. Will, Published: May 2
George F. Will: The next Affordable Care Act challenge - The Washington Post
NOTE: Thank God that liberals seldom call for amendments to the Constitution. When they do get an Amendment like the XVI Amendment they read all kinds of crap into it. When they cannot get what they want without an amendment they get what they want through the courts.
In the Old Testament no man could enter the holiest of holy without risking his life. In Socialism government revenue is the holiest of holy.
Ive often said that no Supreme Court will ever vote to deny, reduce, or eliminate government revenues. Overturning the ACA would prove me wrong.
In addition to government revenues, I believe that the Courts only considerations in deciding Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will be purely political government jobs, the education industry, and Wall Street.
Government jobs
I do not know how many government jobs have been created by the ACA so far. I think the IRS alone has hired thousands of new agents. According to Nancy Pelosi 400,000 jobs have been created with many millions more to come (four million is a lowball opener):
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJKGWEkkE7E&feature=player _detailpage"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJKGWEkkE7E&feature=player _detailpage[/ame]
No matter the number hired since March of 2010 every one of those people will have to be discharged if the ACA is overturned. Will the High Court do the firing? Will Republicans do it when they repeal HillaryCare II? The politics say no in both scenarios. Thats exactly why the Administration manipulated the number of unemployed so it currently reads 6.4 percent. Overturning the ACA will drive that number even higher than the true number of well over 10 percent.
The truth is: Driving parasites away from the public trough is a good thing for the country. It should have been done when the economy was booming. It wasnt; so Democrats, and the media, are now in position to blame higher unemployment on conservatives, or the Supreme Court, for firing all of those wonderful parasites should the ACA be overturned or repealed. I can hear them saying We brought unemployment down to 6 percent and those meanspirited conservatives ran it up to 15 percent. Blaming conservatives for high unemployment is a variation of Bill Clinton taking credit for the good economy that was forced on him by Newt Gingrich and technology.
The education industry
The fear of firing parasites from government jobs is compounded in the education industry in that higher education relies on a substantial number of their graduates going to government jobs. The reason for higher education subsidies falls apart when there are no government jobs to go to. In short: The ACA is supposed to provide millions of college graduates with high paying jobs in the years ahead. The education industry, more than any other herd of parasites, will take the biggest hit if the ACA is overturned or repealed.
NOTE: There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to be involved in education on any level. The Common Core disgrace is reason enough to get the federal government out of education.
Wall Street
HillaryCare I & HillaryCare II were designed to enrich the insurance industry. Bailing out the healthcare insurance industry with income tax dollars allows the government to bailout Wall Streets absentee owners in perpetuity. Heres how it will work:
For some reason, President Obama hasnt talked about this particular feature of his signature legislation. Indeed, its bad enough that Obamacare is projected by the Congressional Budget Office to funnel $1,071,000,000,000.00 (thats $1.071 trillion) over the next decade (2014 to 2023) from American taxpayers, through Washington, to health insurance companies. Its even worse that Obamacare is trying to coerce Americans into buying those same insurers product (although there are escape routes). Its almost unbelievable that it will also subsidize those same insurers losses.
But thats exactly what it will dounless Republicans take action. As Laszewski explains, Obamacare contains a Reinsurance Program that caps big claim costs for insurers (individual plans only). He writes that in 2014, 80% of individual costs between $45,000 and $250,000 are paid by the government [read: by taxpayers], for example.
Bailing Out Health Insurers and Helping Obamacare
8:01 AM, Jan 13, 2014 By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
Bailing Out Health Insurers and Helping Obamacare | The Weekly Standard
In brief: Healthcare insurance industry stocks traded on Wall Street will be called too big to fail; hence, insurance industry bailouts will be used prop up the stock market forever while patient care deteriorates to Third World levels.