Journal Community

Leon said.........
Let me first apologize for my lack of knowledge on “the devil pact” It happened early in Job and I missed the discussion those weeks.
------------------------------
Excuse me Leon, but did you just say that you are studying the biblical story of Job, but you haven't read it yet???

Brad said.....
It's actually a good sign that Ch Justice Roberts will not legislate from the bench.
-----------------------------------------
I think that may be entirely from a POV, Brad. SCOTUS always legislates from the bench in modern America. The trick is to occupy the presidency long enough to place the right people on SCOTUS, but the even trickier part is knowing which is which. Why does the left never have a Judas appointment? Even Jesus could only get eleven out of twelve right. I just wish our side could do half as well.

Greg said......
So a family making 40K a year can't play the medicaid card as you suggest.
-----------------------------------------
Yes they can Greg, the trick is to just not marry and be a "family". Each qualifies independently of the other other while living together in the same domicile.

Everett said…
I disagree that Roberts was being principled. I think he simply caved to the pressure. He has never been a stalwart of principle and he simply couldn't bear the thought of being stigmatized in the beltway circle. He is a fence straddler and always has been.
………………………………………………

Everett, I haven’t had a chance to write-up the whole argument but think about it for a moment. The ACA consists of essentially two major components, well maybe three. One will happen in the public sector paid for by real taxes in the law, and includes a huge expansion of Medicaid. Even if the mandate fell this one would have continued untouched and unabated. The second is to happen entirely in the private sector with all transfers happening within private industry with direct private resources paid directly to insurance companies from the mandate. That is why the Heritage Foundation had fewer problems with it and at one time was even willing to offer it as a compromise. The third part was the new huge government controls.

Now, if the Supremes had killed the mandate they would have killed the less offensive private part along with some new government controls but not the more egregious. The expansion of most government programs, however, would have gone ahead because they didn’t depend in any way on the mandate. The state AGs’ attack on the mandate was in large part because it was the main if not the only weakness they could take on in the courts and it became political. Apples and oranges and a few other fruits were being mixed together as if they were one when in fact they remained quite distinct and would have been affected differently. Indeed, it was so political that soon everybody was equating the mandate with the entire law, a big mistake.

To this day nobody realizes that if Roberts had sided with killing the mandate the more offensive parts of the ACA, namely the hugely increased government controls, would have continued. What I think Roberts saw was an opportunity to narrow the Commerce Clause—with help from the liberals and this should not be underestimated for one minute—and thereby perhaps provide a new legal basis to challenge other parts of ACA, particularly those where the government tries to dictate directly to people and the states.

All in all in my opinion Roberts made a superb strategic move. Sure, I would like to have seen the ACA killed but that was NEVER in the cards, at least not by the Supremes. What they would have killed were the more popular parts that sooner or later would be put back in anyway with more direct taxes. Killing it today based on the SEMANTICS of the mandate in my opinion would have actually been more ideological than what Roberts did. Worse, if put back in with direct taxes instead of the young buying insurance directly, that alone would have grown the government further. I think his play was wise and eminently conservative, with the added benefit that it propped up the Court at a time that it needed it.