Obamacare

June 28, 2012

Like wow. Really.

Only a few people – in the professional Commentariat at least – seem to have expected SCOTUS to approve the thing, and I don’t know that anyone predicted that Roberts rather than Kennedy would be the one to save the mandate.

Heck, I wasn’t too happy about the mandate. At least without a strong public option. If the Feds want us all to have insurance, the Feds should be the ones to provide it. Or at least give us an alternative to dealing with the private market. My secret fantasy was that the Court would overrule the mandate but sever it, leaving in place a system so totally non-viable that in a couple of years we’d have to go all the way to Single Payer.

I knew the Wickard v Filburn defense wouldn’t work – no conservative worth his salt would pass up an opportunity to slap down an extention of federal power based on the Commerce Clause; but instead the Chief Justice found the mandate acceptable as a tax. It does make sense, I suppose; it’s only through the tax system that the mandate is to be enforced, just like here in MA where we already have a basically similar system (which the governor who signed it is running full tilt away from).

Well, true small-c conservatives do believe in precedent, so it shouldn’t be so surprising that the CJ would follow in the footsteps of Justice Owen Roberts, the famous “Switch in time that saved the Nine.

Nothing to add at this point; maybe after I’ve read what the experts say I’ll come up with something coherent on the subject.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Obamacare”

  1. Carty Says:

    “My secret fantasy was that the Court would overrule the mandate but sever it, leaving in place a system so totally non-viable that in a couple of years we’d have to go all the way to Single Payer.”

    Not unlike, perhaps, voting for Nader in 2004. You didn’t do that, did you? We all deserve some room for our fantasies.

  2. Kenny Likis Says:

    Allogenes, I think I just caught on whose blog this is. A little slow on the uptake.

    For what it’s worth, I never wavered in my hope that the Supreme Court would decide the act could stand. I really believed it had to be constitutional. I will confess that were it a 5-4 decision, I thought it likely the decision would have struck something down.

    The idea that the four dissenting judges were unamimous that in their belief that the whole legislation should have been struck down is, in the language of Scalia, mind boggling. Pathetic. I give Roberts credit for taking a higher ground than his conservative colleagues.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: