WASHINGTON -- Is this a great country or what? Not because the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the overall scheme of the president's health care law. That is an ordinary question, no matter how much money was at stake. It is a great country because the workings of our carefully wrought system of government are not predicated on punditry, predictions or polls.
Defying the expectations, Chief Justice John Roberts -- said to be a relentless conservative activist -- joined the court's liberal wing in saving the law by grounding the individual mandate" not in the power of Congress to regulate commerce, but in its taxing power. As I suggested yesterday, the court essentially said that Congress could not require people to buy something in the private economy, but they could fine them if they didn't. The court found that power to fine, in the taxing power of Article I. Now the president will have to figure out a way to make the fines in the law -- which are weak and toothless -- real.
The idea to require all Americans to buy private health insurance was hatched in a conservative think tank, first deployed by a Republican governor (Mitt Romney) and at first opposed in the Democratic 2008 presidential primaries by candidate Barack Obama. But as soon as he had he vanquished Hillary Clinton - a proponent of the mandate -- he privately decided to support it. "I kind of think Hillary was right," he told an aide in the summer of 2008, according to Princeton professor Paul Starr. There were those -- including Starr -- who had publicly and privately warned that the mandate was a risk, but once in the White House Obama and his aides (many, ironically, Clinton veterans) ignored the warnings.
The obvious big political winner, at least initially, is President Obama. Had the court thrown out the core mechanics of the law, his signature accomplishment would have been in shambles. He can take to the campaign trail with the backing of none other than George W. Bush appointee Roberts. His polls were on the upswing and may get a boost. There are troubles down the road. He has to make the fines real. Most people don't like the mandate, no matter what it is grounded on. Republicans and Romney, their presumptive nominee, will make overturning the law their crusade for the campaign, and they will have the polls on their side.
Beyond the political back-and-forth, the 5-4 ruling is an example of the durability of our system, and of Roberts' desires to protect the reputation of the institution as the one place in the country that is above politics. The court is the most essential part of our system of government by the rule of law. It takes the place in our system of faith or royalty as the ultimate arbiter of Truth in the public realm. Roberts understood that, and protected it.
Now it is clear why Justice Scalia went on his rampage yesterday. He doesn't like Roberts' institutional vision of the court.
Follow Howard Fineman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/howardfineman
Ari Melber: The Key Passage From the Health Care Ruling
Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie: Thank God for the Wisdom of the Supreme Court
People just parse the statement differently.
***
The debut report on Fogg’s historical program series has been transformed into a nonfiction book that will be in bookstores this summer. Please visit, “like”, and join our discussion on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FoggEvent
Actually it's all up in the air until the dust settles. If it stays in place it will get alterations and tweaks so congress can their have show and tell sessions for future campaign times.
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/full.html
Great country my skinny butt!
Certaintly, there is a safety net I am missing. What is the plan for that situation?
But you knew that.
People below the poverty level (percentage below decided at each state, BTW) will receive help in the form of rebates or riders, to buy into group pools with the coverage levels they choose.
1) You have enough money to afford health insurance. No fine.
2) You can't afford health insurance. You get tax breaks that are equal to, or greater than, the cost of the insurance you buy. In NO CASE does this end up being less than the amount you pay for insurance, so you lose nothing. Plus, your family is not one accident or disease away from homelessness, from paying medical costs out of pocket.
3) You can afford afford insurance, but choose not to buy it. You're fined in the form of a tax. This is projected to be 3 to 5% of the population, but there are many filthy-rich deadbeats out there - some rich people stay rich by working the broken system (one example: Romney's offshore tax-dodges).
The individual mandate was developed by a conservative think tank. Romney passed the first version of it when he was the Gov. of Mass. Think about the system now: Insured folks pay outrageous premiums to cover those who don't have/can't afford to have health insurance. Overwhelmed ERs are the de facto doctor for millions.
This really is a very good thing for the poor and middle-class.
Roberts ruled in favor of the insurance industry. That was the principle he upheld. Hooray. What a mensch.
Now the conventional wisdom will be that Roberts and the Roberts court are neutral, non-partisan, non-activist...
I'm glad ACA survived, but the ruling only makes me more cynical.
The US is 51% self declared Protestants and not one judge represents half of the country with those religious beliefs.
Conspiracy theory and victim mentality.
Do you follow SP on Twitter?
Replies welcome from those with more than nonsense to share...
But I know you're wrong, for many reasons.
1. Obama never wanted to and never will want to nationalize anything, or even try for a single payer plan. He's no radical; he's not even in the liberal mainstream. I don't know why it's so hard to see that he's a centrist corporatist, and so are most of the dems in congress. Tune out the partisan noise and think about it...
2. Even if Obama and the democrats wanted it, it's politically impossible because of entrenched interests. If ACA did fail, it would be withdrawn not expanded.
3. The insurance industry wrote ACA! It's a gold mine for them. Fail? The only thing they were worried about was losing the mandate in SCOTUS, otherwise they're in love with it. Of course.
NO CANDIDATE, House, Senate, President--NO CANDIDATE spoke of or promised ANYTHING resembling the ACA. NOT EVEN CLOSE.
WE DID NOT VOTE FOR THIS THING. CORPORATE AMERICA SHOVED IT DOWN OUR THROATS, BECAUSE THEY REALLY RUN THINGS.
The rest of it has been a giant PR campaign, conducted especially in the so-called "liberal" press, to fool so-called "liberals" into thinking the ACA has ANYTHING to do with liberalism, and ANYTHING to do with Democracy.
You would never get 300 million people to agree on anything.
And Karl Rove will only allow a small percentage of those 300 million Americans to cast a vote.
This is corporate tyranny. This is a terrible, terrible day for America. The spin around this thing is exactly like the spin during the lead up to the Iraq War, and THIS LAW WILL FAIL JUST AS MISERABLY.