archer52 on November 26, 2012 at 3:12 PM

First – and I will go to my grave saying this – the mandate to force the individual into a contract with another non-consenting party against their wills is unconstitutional. End of story.

But for argument’s sake, let’s say your analysis of Roberts’ decision is correct. And let us also presume that the law itself is so massive and flawed that it will collapse of its own weight, and that legal challenges on other aspects that come up will be affirmed.

HOWEVER, this presupposes that we have a Congress, an executive branch and judiciary that is interested and willing to follow the rules that the Founders laid out. The past 4 years have shown time and again that this is not the case. We have elected officials who rule, but do not govern.

They will circumvent or ignore the Constitution at every opportunity. I’m afraid that in a sane world your analysis may be right but we are no longer in that world.

The Federl government are no better than common thieves that steal your wallet from your dresser at night.

Well, some people shoot thieves dead.

Tyrany is here…the government has granted unto itself powers not given by the people.

God’s Laws apply to everyone…thou shalt not steal.

Do not fund it.

rbj on November 26, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Then he won’t sign it and we will have a ‘government shutdown.’

When the government shuts down, the Executive Branch (that’s Obama) decides on which of the mandated spending programs the ongoing tax revenues coming into the Treasury will be spent.

The last one to be cut would be Obamacare. Which means it won’t be cut, no matter what.

Game over, at least on that front. We could have done it with Harry Reid still Majority Leader in the Senate, but not with Obama in the WH.

First, the SPC is not in the business of restricting our electoral stupidity. Roberts attempted to explain that over and over, and we still get mad at him from not stopping us from offending again. Like a serial killer leaving a note saying “stop me before I kill again.”

It isn’t their job. Their job is narrow. To make sure they don’t get in the way of the intent of the voters, which is illuminated by their representatives, legally elected (or not), passing laws on their behalf.

Vetting stupid harmful laws from “good” laws would be a slope nobody wants the SPC to go down.

So, what to do? Let the stupid, harmful, damaging legislation to go through. THEN, when it actually harms a citizen, slap a limitation on it that basically cripples it into extinction or makes the legislators redo the law- this time in the light of day and in front of everyone.

This is what happened. You can parse it to death, but Roberts is no fool nor progressive. He is trying to ride down a very thin rail. His first attempt in getting us to recalculate our decision was to put it out there for Romney and Obama do debate. I’m sure Roberts is as disappointed in our selfishness as many of us are.

However, here is the rub I’m waiting for. If the States- now given power by Roberts in his decision- refuse to go along with exchanges, then how does the IRS get around the letter of the law. They can try. But that will end up in court and they will lose.

Then there is the concept of equal protection and treatment under the law for all citizens. If one State operates an exchange and another does not- thus harming the citizens in the non-participating State- is that constitutional.

I’ll argue no. And I’m sure there will be more than one SPC judge who will agree.

Obamatax is a nightmare that may not ever be solved without major rework. Roberts knows this. Obama’s people are just charging ahead, with no idea where they are going or what they are doing, hoping it all clears up in the end.

It probably won’t.

I agree that such plans are the right way to go,economically.