And Now Our Mission Is Clear

From SCOTUSBlog’s liveblog of the Obamacare decision:

The money quote from the section on the mandate: Our precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it.

And so like any other unjust or intrusive tax, we need to aboliish it.

If this isn’t the call to wake up, organize Republicans and get to the polls to vote airtight straight tickets for conservatives who wijll win, and who will go to Washington focused like laser beams on expunging Obamacare, then nothing is, and this nation is doomed.

25 thoughts on “And Now Our Mission Is Clear

  1. Enh. I can see Roberts’ *legal*, if not moral or ethical reasoning.

    The real message is we need to toss Obama and take the Senate.

  2. The problem, unfortunately, has been “Republicans”. This is what we get when we allow the moderates in and convince us that we “need” to choose the lesser of two evils. One of the very reasons I have not cast a vote for a “Republican” in a Presidential election since 1980. And know we are asked to cast our vote for the guy that was, for all intents and purposes, the architect for this??!! I am literally sick to my stomach about this…

  3. I wonder how Harriet Miers would have voted? Just twisted flash of potential irony that popped into my head in between massive bouts of mental cursing. Repeal the health care tax!

  4. Jurisprudence in action. It’s not a mandate, it’s a tax.
    “We’re only gonna raise taxes on the top 2%, those making $250,000 or more.” – Barack Obama
    Liar. Fraud. Dictator.

  5. Trying to be somewhat positive, I think it is very good that the Court did not uphold this under the Commerce clause. That would have meant there is no limit to federal power, the antithesis of this country’s founding principles. It is now clear, crystal clear that the President has raised taxes, mislead the country about that fact, and must defend his entire program and his presidency on this tax raise.

    It will be difficult to repeal this, but it would have been far more difficult to reverse a court’s decision granting the federal government unlimited power.

    It is now a political question. If the electorate cannot find it within itself to elect those who will get rid of this monstrosity, the electorate deserves what it gets.

  6. I agree with PJ on the significance of the tax vs. commerce authority. The situation calls to mind the old Army adage: “We can’t make you do something, but we can make you wish you had.”

  7. I think this is the best possible outcome. Now the campaign becomes centrally focused: Do you want government health care, or do you prefer the private sector handle it? Romney may have just won the election.

  8. Now for the dark side of the result: If it is not repealed, it will lead to single payer (which as we all suspect is a feature, not a bug to the Administration).

    Insurance companies under ACA must cover everyone, including those with pre-existing conditions who have not previously purchased insurance. Healthy young people will likely opt to pay the tax rather than purchase insurance. When they get sick and decide to purchase insurance, they will still be covered, they will pay the same amount as those buying insurance all along. Couple that with the fact that the tax is paid to the Feds, and then consider how long your average insurance company can stay in business with increased costs, decreased revenue, and ever, ever increasing mandates to cover the stylish ailment of the day.

  9. Romney may have just won the election.

    I’d like to think so, but his little experiment in MA makes the case more difficult. I supported him as the best available under the circumstances, but I agree with George Will that his real problem with the Federal government is that he is not running it.

  10. Now for the dark side of the result: If it is not repealed, it will lead to single payer (which as we all suspect is a feature, not a bug to the Administration).

    Which is true – and has been the subtext of the whole debate ever since the GOP lost the 2008 election.

  11. Next up, the individual mandate to purchase life insurance. It’s so logical, considering the state of Social Security finances.

  12. Next up, the individual mandate to purchase:
    A Chevy Volt
    A light rail pass
    A downtown condo

    What else?

  13. BS, CFL’s…oh wait, they already mandated that…signed into law by the “Republican” Bush, another moderate.

  14. Tarantulas: I enthusiastically agree. Joe and Cindy Sixpack don’t want this law and they’ll ignore their habits of voting for all things government once the Obama Option comes into focus. I’m sending money! Heard on the radio his contributions spiked today.

  15. I wonder how many companies will begin to announce their abandonment of their health care coverage come September when it comes time for people to sign up for coverage for the next year? The timing could be … interesting.

  16. Nerdbert, it is too early to tell for certain, but this may make private health insurers raise rates through the roof. Total compensation for employees, including health coverage, may spike, which will depress the wages of workers.
    This won’t mean a thing to the wealthy, of course. Or to those who are unemployed or too poor to pay the tax.

  17. Roberts’ legal reasoning bewilders me. The plain language of the law says the penalty for not buying insurance is a penalty, not a tax. That was intentional, to get around the apportionment requirement. Roberts says “But they COULD have made it a tax and if they had [and if the tax passed the apportionment requirement] it would have been fine. So it’s fine.” I think your LP skipped a groove right there, Bobby-boy, might want to take another look at that syllogism.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.