Thursday Afternoon Thread: UPHELD

SCOTUS Opinion

By mistermix June 28th, 2012

Here’s the guts of it from SCOTUSBLOG:

In Plain English: The Affordable Care Act, including its individual mandate that virtually all Americans buy health insurance, is constitutional. There were not five votes to uphold it on the ground that Congress could use its power to regulate commerce between the states to require everyone to buy health insurance. However, five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power. That is all that matters. Because the mandate survives, the Court did not need to decide what other parts of the statute were constitutional, except for a provision that required states to comply with new eligibility requirements for Medicaid or risk losing their funding. On that question, the Court held that the provision is constitutional as long as states would only lose new funds if they didn’t comply with the new requirements, rather than all of their funding.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2012/06/28/scotus-opinion/#comment-3391140

DISQUS was INSANE the better part of this morning. Whatever, DISQUS, whatever!! SHEEEEEEESHHHHH!!!

Anyway!!! Oh HAPPY DAY!!!

So since the ruling didn’t go the way that majority of the village and GOP thought, now the meme is going to cling to the SCOTUS calling this a “tax” on the middle class and all the tweets and statements of the GOP are all including this line almost verbatim.

What I think is funny is that last night Romney was talking all tough he went so far as to say he bet it was gonna be a tough night in the WH. My bet, tonight is gonna be a tough night for Romney.

HA. Even FoxNews has to show POTUS speech and he’s listing every thing the ACA does and is explaining exactly how the ACA will help everyone…and Fox can’t turn it off…BAM!!!

These mofos are sick as hell!

Former GOP Spokesman: ‘Is Armed Rebellion Now Justified?’
Lansing attorney does not like Supreme Court Obamacare ruling

The former spokesman for the Michigan Republican Party sent out an email that said armed rebellion was justified over the Supreme Court ruling upholding Obamacare.

Matthew Davis, an attorney in Lansing, sent the email moments after the Supreme Court ruling to numerous new media outlets and limited government activists with the headline: “Is Armed Rebellion Now Justified?”

more here
http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/17151

A look back at what Romney and the 2012 GOP field said about the now controversial Chief Justice who wrote to uphold most of the Affordable Care Act

Mitt Romney may have had to mince words over the last year when explaining his support for his Massachusetts health care plan and his opposition to “Obamacare.”

However, the Republican 2012 presidential nominee has been quite clear of his support and respect for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts who wrote the decision upholding most of the president’s health care plan on Thursday.

First, consider Romney’s campaign website.

From the Courts & The Constitution section the campaign says:
“As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. These justices hold dear what the great Chief Justice John Marshall called “the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected”: a written Constitution, with real and determinate meaning.”

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2012/06/what_does_mitt_romney_think_ab.php

Oh…all those emoprogs and so-called experts that talked shit about the Solicitor General, calling his argument “horrible”, “incompetent”…..well, the Solicitor General just has one question for y’all:

Rand Paul’s situational principle

By Editorial Board, Published: June 27

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-Ky.) came to Washington on the wave of the tea party movement to limit big government. “I think a lot of things could be handled locally . . . the more local the better, and the more common sense the decisions are, rather than having a federal government make those decisions,” he said during his 2010 campaign. So how to explain his spoiling a move to give the District autonomy over its own tax dollars by — and this is really rich — injecting the federal government into local affairs?

We thought we could no longer be surprised by congressional hypocrisy when it comes to the nation’s capital, but Mr. Paul’s willingness to turn his back on his supposed libertarian principles and devotion to local rule is truly stunning.

A bill that would give D.C. officials the ability to spend local dollars — we repeat, locally collected, locally paid tax dollars — without congressional approval was pulled from consideration this week after Mr. Paul introduced a set of amendments that would dictate to the city policies on guns, abortions and unions. “The last senator I would expect it from,” said Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), telling us that she has never seen so many amendments offered at one time by a single member to restrict D.C. rights. Ironically, Ilir Zherka, head of the advocacy group DC Vote, said that Mr. Paul initially had been seen as a potential ally for the District because of his views on small government.

Mr. Paul told The Post’s Ben Pershing, “I think it’s a good way to call attention to some issues that have national implications. We don’t have [control] over the states, but we do for D.C.” In other words, “I am doing this because I can” — not exactly the argument one expects to hear from someone who has railed about federal intrusion. As Mr. Zherka pointed out, Mr. Paul’s brief for small government is not whether the federal government has the power but whether it should use it.

A spokesman for Mr. Paul e-mailed us a reminder that the District is not a state but a federal jurisdiction: “Efforts to change that have failed, and until it is changed it is not only the prerogative but the duty of Congress to have jurisdiction over the Federal District.” What we don’t get is how someone who raises the banner of a movement inspired by a time when Americans were ruled without representation could be so unsympathetic to the rights of D.C. citizens who are in the same position.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rand-paul-grabs-the-chance-to-dictate-to-local-government/2012/06/27/gJQAmRqi7V_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop

Four Reasons Why The Court’s Decision To Uphold Obamacare Is Good News For The Economy

By Travis Waldron on Jun 28, 2012 at 10:37 am

The Supreme Court today upheld the Affordable Care Act, the health care reform law signed by President Obama in 2010, ruling 5-4 that the law was constitutional. Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justices Sonya Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Elena Kagan on the opinion. The individual mandate, the requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance or pay a fine, was upheld as legal under Congress’ taxing ability.

Health care reform isn’t important just because it expands access to quality, affordable care, but also because rapidly rising costs and the fact that 30 million Americans don’t have insurance are weighing down the American economy. Here are four reasons why the Court’s decision is good news for the still-struggling economy:

1) Obamacare will reduce the deficit. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2011 that Obamacare will reduce the federal deficit by $210 billion over the next decade. The law is expected to save about $1 trillion over its second decade, according to other CBO analyses. The CBO found that repealing the law, as Republicans attempted to do in 2011, would increase the deficit by $230 billion over the next 10 years.

2) Health care costs for young Americans won’t skyrocket. More than 3.1 million young Americans have insurance thanks to Obamacare. Without the law, the cost of acquiring an equivalent health care plan would have risen dramatically at a time when young people are still struggling with the effects of the Great Recession.

3) Millions of jobs will be created. Health reform will help create roughly 4 million jobs over the next decade, according to a 2010 Center for American Progress report, by reducing the cost of health care and making it cheaper for businesses to hire. The law will create between 250,000 and 400,000 jobs a year, and they will be spread across sectors: according to the study, the law will help create more than 200,000 manufacturing and 900,000 in the service sector by 2016.

4) It will be cheaper for employers to provide health care. American businesses are under tremendous pressure thanks to rising health care costs, and these costs are often passed on to customers (one study estimates that each car sold by General Motors contains $1,200 in built-in health costs). The ACA, however, will make it cheaper for businesses to provide care, and not just by reducing the cost of care. Small businesses are already receiving tax credits contained in the law to help insure their employees, and it has already offered more than $4.7 billion in reinsurance payments to companies that are providing health care to retirees who aren’t yet eligible for Medicare.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/28/505510/four-reasons-why-the-courts-decision-to-uphold-obamacare-is-good-news-for-the-economy/

People Hate Romney’s Medicare Plan

by BooMan
Thu Jun 28th, 2012 at 02:05:31 PM EST

Here’s some more good news for Mitt Romney on health care:

Democracy for America commissioned a poll late last week asking 900 registered voters from across the country their views on healthcare and the Republican voucher program. The poll responses are listed below [the margin of error is +- 3.5%.]
Do you support or oppose turning Medicare into a voucher program?

Support 15%
Oppose 57%
Not sure 28%

Do you support or oppose Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan to reform Medicare for seniors?

Support 26%
Oppose 33%
Not sure 41%

Do you support or oppose privatizing Medicare?

Support 25%
Oppose 53%
Not sure 22%

If Mitt Romney endorsed a plan that turned Medicare into a voucher program, would you be more or less likely to vote for him, or would it not make a difference?

More likely 13%
Less likely 42%
No difference 42%
Not sure 2%

The only one winning more than Charlie Sheen is Mitt Romney.

http://www.boomantribune.com/

Names of every Democrat who does not walk out should be plastered on every blog, on facebook, twitter and every other social media.

The Repubs need to stop. I hope DWS ignores this bs.

Reince Priebus ‏@Reince
.@Dwstweets do you condone frm White House political director and DNC Exec Director @patrickgaspard comments today?

Like button gone again. sigh

Justice Roberts is brilliant and always has been brilliant. The conservatives can go stuff it.

If you look at Mitt’s campaign website.
As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS LOL and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. These justices hold dear what the great Chief Justice John Marshall called “the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected”: a written Constitution, with real and determinate meaning.

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution

I think that will be changing soon lol