Will the GOP Respect the Supreme Court on Health Care - or Anything Else?

The Republicans in Congress have allegiance to only two things -- protecting the 1% and waging ideological warfare at the expense of everything else. As a result, we're now witnessing what appears to be the remarkably precipitous decline of our country's ability to govern itself -- something unimaginable only a few years ago.

Now that the Republicans have all but officially decided they're opposed to making new laws to respond to the country's problems, what will they do about the laws we already have? The Affordable Care Act (ACA) will be an important political test case for how far the GOP will go.

Political opponents of the law have been successful in getting their ACA challenge before the Supreme Court. But will the Republicans comply if the Court declares the law constitutional--even if the 1% doesn't like the decision?

The reason to ask today whether the Republicans will support the Constitution and the Court in the future is because of their unwillingness to do anything in Congress that doesn't serve their political goals.

Take this week -- the Republicans won't put money in the pockets of working families by extending the payroll tax reduction. They are for raising taxes on everyone who works for a living even though the Republicans pledged (to one guy, Grover Norquist) to not raise any taxes, in any way, ever. But now they're happy to take away money from people struggling to make ends meet. The Republicans also say they won't extend unemployment benefits for people who don't have a job through no fault of their own.

The GOP's new brand of extremism keeps getting worse. In the months leading up to the deficit reduction deal last summer, the Republicans abandoned the bipartisan tradition of routinely extending the debt ceiling -- something essential to responsible governing. While the House Republicans campaigned on jobs as the top issue in the 2010 elections, they've spent more time trying to take away women's health care than actually creating jobs. Meanwhile, while it used to be customary not to attack a president while our nation is at war with another country, the Republicans have relentlessly attacked President Obama from day one, beginning with absurd questions about whether he was born in this country.

This is why it's worth asking today whether the Republicans in Congress will respect a Supreme Court decision if they don't like it. If they don't, there's a lot more at stake than one hugely important court case.

 

Comments

[rkmerriman]

10:13 AM on 12/08/2011

What bothers me most about the articles I read here on the Huffington Post is the outright lies the authors (such as this one) tell without a challenge. First one needs to remember what a lie is. If what you are saying is intended to create a false impression in the mind of the person reading it or hearing it, then it is a lie no matter what words you use. Take this statement "The Republicans in Congress have allegiance to only two things -- protecting the 1% and waging ideological warfare at the expense of everything else." This indicates of course that all Republicans are part of the 1% and democrats are not. This is an outright lie, many of the 1% are democrats likely more than half of the 1% are democrats! Take this statement "the Republicans won't put money in the pockets of working families by extending the payroll tax reduction" Another outright lie! The Republicans want to pay for this with spending cuts the democrats want to pay for this with a tax increase (on "ONLY" the rich of course). I could go on and on with these lies but I am limited to 250 words, so I must stop. Safe to say this entire article by Mr. Rome is a self serving misleading attack on Republicans and has basically no truths in the entire rant.

[RUKidding0]

10:49 AM on 12/08/2011

Your points are, of course, well taken, but they ignore two fundamental realities.

First, this site makes no pretense of being objective. It is a purely partisan site whose entire purpose is to support leftist causes and social democracy.

Second, we in America are long past any reasonable expectation of truth in any form in politics - from either side. The ONLY issue is how deep you need to dig to find the lie.

If you are looking for honesty in politics, I'm afraid that you will be looking for what the meaning of "is" is for a vary long time.

[rkmerriman]

05:06 PM on 12/08/2011

You are correct of course there "is" (no matter what the meaning is) no honesty in politics, I for one do not understand why we voters put up with it. A simple e-mail to every politician that states, you lied about this therefore I will not be voting for you again! If everyone did this and meant it the lying would stop because everyone knows a politician would kill their mother rather than lose a voting bloc. Thanks for the help I run up against that 250 word limit from time to time when trying to get my point across. F&F

[RUKidding0]

10:50 PM on 12/07/2011

Normally, I would disregard this article as the self serving and disingenuous whining and blaming it largely is, but it indirectly raises a generally unacknowledged and critical issue.

While the Tea party Revolution would be more than content to reach its political end of dismantling the social democratic state and restoring freedom to all Americans through democratic means, it is not limited to business as usual means, because freedom is fundamental and democracy - especially social democracy - is not.

Everyone should be aware of the fact that our freedom need not be constrained by tradition, current law, or any interpretation of current law by SCOTUS or the executive branch. The Tea Party Revolution has many non-violent extra-democratic means available to it to bring social democracy to its knees.

Rome's comment, "... Republicans abandoned the bipartisan tradition of routinely extending the debt ceiling ..." illustrates the fact that even minor democratic means can have very large and disruptive consequences - and this was just a shot over the bow of the social democratic ship of state. The social democratic state is fragile and wholly dependent upon the cooperation of its citizens and their acceptance of its legitimacy.

All that the disbelieving need consider is what effects 30 - 50 Million freedom demanding Americans can cause by unleashing a carefully selected series of extra-democratic measures in their pursuit of freedom from the tyrannical collectivism of our social democratic state that has lost its legitimacy.

[hfearless]

07:53 PM on 12/07/2011

I believe their decades long fight against Roe V Wade gives you an idea of how they respond to a SCOTUS loss.

[Yan Tan Tethera]

04:33 PM on 12/07/2011

"Meanwhile, while it used to be customary not to attack a president while our nation is at war with another country, the Republicans have relentlessly attacked President Obama from day one, beginning with absurd questions about whether he was born in this country."

Really now, after what we saw in 2003-2008, the Democrats are not in a position to lecture anybody about the deference due to a President's foreign policy.

[greeneyes51654m]

07:32 PM on 12/07/2011

Absolutely.

[vidtrainer110]

08:15 PM on 12/07/2011

President Bush got plenty of deference in the lead up to the Iraq War. Most Dems were willing to give W the benefit of the doubt and vote in favor of the war resolution. That is far more deference in just one instance than Reps have ever shown Obama. I admit the atmosphere got worse after it became obvious that there were no WMD, that they exaggerated their claims about the "threat" and that the engagement itself was a disaster. Add to that his response to Katrina and his cynical mismanagement of the government, is it any wonder that he started taking fire.
Have you ever heard anyone claim in their camp say that Obama should be exempt from criticism because we are at war? I have never heard anyone in their administration make such a statement. Bush officials on the other hand were always beating that drum. I think the whole proposition is absurd. It doesn't mean you are less patriotic to criticize a President when you think they are making mistakes. Most likely, the opposite is true. Most who criticize want the best for our country whether conservative or liberal.

[goldfox]

04:24 PM on 12/07/2011

It would seem the country is reaching a new stage in the maturity of our government where we will no longer need a two party system. Since the Republicans have ceased to respect the concept of negotiation and compromise required to operate a democracy, it may well be that now is the time for our citizens to abandon them entirely and instead look to select their preferred Conservative or Liberal representatives currently giving voice within the Democratic Party. If we as a Nation continue to permit the GOP sabotage of the US government, we will deserve the destructive consequences that history tells us will certainly follow.

[blackraisin]

04:10 PM on 12/07/2011

SCOTUS case should be interesting.