The recent judicial trend seems to be that the signature legislation of President Obama and congressional Democrats is that their effort to seize one-fifth of the U.S. economy from the private sector and empower the federal government to dictate that Americans must purchase health insurance violates what our nation’s founders deemed, “The Supreme Law of the Land.”
It’s not difficult to discern where I stand on the issue.
A second federal judge yesterday not only ruled that a portion of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is unconstitutional, but that because the requirement that all citizens buy insurance is illegal, Obamacare itself is unconstitutional.
In December, a Virginia judge also found that the mandate to purchase health insurance violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The Obama Administration is appealing both rulings, with an expedited review of the Virginia ruling coming in May.
So, now the fate of health care reform will likely rest with the Supreme Court, which could hear and rule on the issue next year.
All of which leaves insurance companies, agents and brokers, health care providers, state legislatures and virtually anyone connected with the health insurance industry – as well as every American citizen – uncertain as to the future of their industry or health insurance coverage.
As it stands, the 26 states* that are part of the case against the Obama Administration are in a sort of “limbo,” as they are no longer forced to adhere to the dictates of PPACA. More than half the country’s states, therefore, no longer feel the weight of Obamacare.
Or do they?
If the Obama Administration can obtain a stay of the Florida judge’s order, then those states will have to continue following the law. If not, then what? An unnamed White House source told reporters that the “Implementation will proceed apace.”
So, should states continue to implement health insurance exchanges, spending possibly millions of dollars and untold man hours and human capital creating agencies and distribution channels to adhere to a law that the Supreme Court might say they never had to follow in the first place?
And what about businesses? I am writing, of course, about the businesses that have not been lucky enough (or well-connected enough) to have been granted one of the more than 500 waivers given out by the Department of Health and Human Services, which was pressured by unions to allow nearly 1 million Americans a reprieve from the law imposed on the rest of us.
What of the other businesses? Should they continue as if the law will, in fact, be upheld? Should they continue with their calculations on how many employees they will lay off in order to fall below thresholds that would put them in a class where they would have to hire a staff attorney in order to comply with the law? Or those businesses that are calculating how many employees they will drop from their health insurance rolls and instead pay penalties laid down by the fed; should they work toward that, or should they continue to find ways to provide the best in coverage to their workers, without government intervention? At what point is the money they are spending attempting to comply with the law no longer an expense, but an exercise not unlike burning money in a fireplace?
Consumers, on the other hand, are left to try to make sense of it all. President Obama’s promise that Americans “can keep your health care” plan obviously only happens IF the law is overturned; with the law in force, none will likely get to keep what they have. What about pre-existing condition laws, which are part of Obamacare? Medicare cuts? Some changes have been attractive, while others are abhorrent. With the latest ruling, it’s an all-or-nothing scenario, and not everyone will be happy.
There will be a lot of posturing during the coming days and weeks. And the posturing will continue into next year, as President Obama will be forced to deal with a Supreme Court ruling on his most far-reaching initiative – and which most Americans do not favor – at the same time that he will be seeking reelection.
The most recent ruling hinges on the “severability” factor of the law. In other words, there is no standard language in the law that states if one part is struck down, the other parts remain in force. Such language exists in virtually every contract in business, from auto sales to cell phone plans to obtaining a library card. But in their haste to pass the law last year in the face of great public opposition and before Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass) was sworn in (you remember him, the guy who won Ted Kennedy’s seat following the senator’s death), the House acted so quickly and with such little concern for accuracy that they neglected to include the severability clause.
The Obama Administration has been adamant over the past year that the mandate to purchase health insurance is the linchpin to the entire law, and without it, the law cannot work. But now, they will have to argue exactly the opposite.
“Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void,” wrote the Florida judge in his ruling. And after a year of saying exactly that, the president must contend that, in fact, he was wrong. In the same way that the Administration first said that fines for not buying insurance were not a tax, then did an about face and said that they were. Courts didn’t buy that flip-flop.
America has endured an administration that has attempted to seize and impose a new system of health care and health insurance against the will of the American people, while it has virtually ignored the need to responsibly address a growing deficit and debt, and the ever-growing number of unemployed Americans and businesses that are struggling to survive these difficult economic times.
In much the same way that President George W. Bush took his eye off the war against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and instead foolishly took us to war in Iraq, so President Obama has taken American on a flight from reality, and instead of dealing with the economic crisis at hand, has used his political might to attempt to change the very fabric of individualism and individual responsibility that make our country great.
It would be nice to be able to wake up and realize that it has all been a bad dream, but I’m afraid that this nightmare is bound to continue.
That’s my take.
*Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
In light of court ruling, is Obamacare nightmare just beginning? via IFAwebnews.com .
No related posts.
Image may be NSFW.Clik here to view.