SUPREME COURT RULING UPHOLDS OBAMACARE,
ENCOURAGES MASSIVE CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE,
INSURANCE COMPANIES REJOICE
June 30, 2012
Yesterday, and by a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court barely upheld Barack Obamas misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. While the Court rejected Congress having any power to enforce this individual mandate under the Commerce Clause, it did uphold the mandate as a tax. The funny thing is that, when this Act was passed, both Barack Obama and those in Congress voting for it swore up and down it was not a tax. Yet, the Supreme Court just said it was a tax; and being a tax, could stay in effect.
Its Not a Tax, Its a Tax
“The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the Court’s majority opinion in National Federation of Independent Business et al. v. Sebelius. He continued, “Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness,” he concluded. (See http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf) Chief Justice Roberts was the swing vote here, supported by Justice Stephen Breyer, and of course the three female Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, who never saw a Nanny-State law or regulation they didnt love.
The dissent ripped into the majority opinions reasoning. In a few cases, the dissent wrote, this Court has held that a tax imposed upon private conduct was so onerous as to be in effect a penalty. But we have never held-never-that a penalty imposed for violation of the law was so trivial as to be in effect a tax. We have never held that any exaction imposed for violation of the law is an exercise of Congress taxing power-even when the statute calls it a tax, much less when (as here) the statute repeatedly calls it a penalty. When an act adopt[s] the criteria of wrongdoing and then imposes a monetary penalty as the principal consequence on those who transgress its standard, it creates a regulatory penalty, not a tax. Child Labor Tax Case, 259 U. S. 20, 38 (1922).
We agree with the dissent, its not a tax, its a penalty. Regardless of who is right, the law is unconstitutional, immoral, and absolutely counter-productive to its stated objectives.
ObamaCare Has Never Been About Health
It is simply about power and control, and enriching the big corporations with money from those people who can ill afford it, all while delivering a very inferior disease-care service loaded with drugs. The health-insurance companies love Obamacare! After all, they helped pass it. More customers forced against their will into a failing disease-care system.
Unfortunately, very well-intentioned people have been lured into supporting this Government Healthcare because they think it will help others, especially the downtrodden. It wont. It will harm, injure, and kill millions! And anyone who thinks otherwise, either doesnt care or is na .
Among other things, the law requires 159 new government agencies to be created in order to handle the workload. This is yet another heavy cost to burden taxpayers.
Leaving aside the immorality of forcing individuals into a healthcare system they neither want nor would use, ObamaCare will never achieve its publicly stated goals. Never.
Its About Massive Government Control Over Our Lives
Make no mistake, this legislation, which the U.S. Supreme Court just upheld in its idiocy, is a massive extension of government control over our lives and our health.
As the Dissenting Opinion remarked, The Government was invited, at oral argument, to suggest what federal controls over private conduct (other than those explicitly prohibited by the Bill of Rights or other constitutional controls) could not be justified as necessary and proper for the carrying out of a general regulatory scheme. … It was unable to name any. As we said at the outset, whereas the precise scope of the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause is uncertain, the proposition that the Federal Government cannot do everything is a fundamental precept. See Lopez, 514 U. S., at 564 ([I]f we were to accept the Governments arguments, we are hard pressed to posit any activity by an individual that Congress is without power to regulate). Section 5000A is defeated by that proposition. (emphasis added)
The U.S. Constitution enumerates those powers to be enjoyed by the Federal government. All others, not so enumerated, are reserved to the States and the people. There is a reason for Federal governmental powers to be shackled like this. The Founders knew that government power grows with time, inevitably. If government can do anything, then it will do everything. It will become tyrannical. The Constitution simply does not permit the Federal government to involve itself in any way in healthcare. Period.
The Supreme Court has demonstrated this week that it knows less about the Constitution than did a college student living 100 years ago.
One Silver Lining
One silver lining, though, can be found in the Courts decision that the Federal government may not force the States to either implement the law or lose Medicaid funding. This ruling means that all citizen efforts at the State level to prevent the implementation of ObamaCares health exchanges will get a considerable assist.
So Whats Next?
The Supreme-Court decision hasnt provided a clear end to the health-care debate. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) just announced that the House of Representatives will vote on repealing the health-care law soon after its July 4th recess.
Rep. Cantor sets the floor schedule in the House and specifically said that the House will vote on the repeal during the week of July 9th. This, Cantor promised, will clear the path for patient-centered reforms that lower costs and increase choice.
So, there will be a concerted challenge in the House to repeal this odious and unconstitutional legislation.
Moreover, the voters are going to be very angry at the polls this November; and, so, this Court ruling might very well backfire on Obamas re-election chances.
State nullification is an approach, lately popularized by author Thomas E. Woods, Jr., that posits the power of the States to nullify unconstitutional laws. Throughout the history of the United States, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution has been offered as one of the important checks and balances against Federal tyranny.
In this context, then, the Tenth Amendment Centers Executive Director Michael Boldin recently commented: The Supreme Court says the federal government cant force you to do something through a mandate, but it can tax you for doing nothing in order to encourage you into doing something. Sounds like Orwellian doublespeak to me. But the bottom line is that the federal government has no enumerated power to create a national health care system in the first place. The entire notion of federal health care is unconstitutional, even if you buy into this tax malarkey.
His Center and many others are urging State nullification of this unconstitutional law. So, regardless of whether or not Congress acts in a few weeks time to repeal ObamaCare, many States (26 after all sued the Federal government over ObamaCare) may now proceed down this path.
Massive Civil Disobedience?
Like the salt tax that Mahatma Gandhi successfully protested in India through massive civil disobedience, this illegal and immoral tax cries out to be protested and repealed. Most Americans are solidly against this legislation. Those who arent are the ones who hope to pick the pockets of those who would be forced to pay. Some are calling for Americans to not even comply. It will be interesting to see if civil disobedience comes back into play in the U.S.
Take Action Now
While the Courts decision is being described as a political victory for Obama, the clear losers are the American people. And even though many call this disease-care legislation by its nickname, ObamaCare, both political parties can claim credit for its passage since members of both parties pushed for its individual mandate.
The probability is that when Congress reconvenes to consider repealing ObamaCare, it will really result in nothing more than a reconstructed ObamaCare meant to look acceptable to the voters but essentially offering the same great expansion of Federal power over Americans.
So what to do now?
Renew your pressure on your Congressional delegates. And demand that Congress truly repeal the ObamaCare monstrosity!
Simply put, you and I must continue an uncompromising fight for health freedom.
As we all know, or should know, health-care costs have skyrocketed, especially recently, due to increasing government interference into that market. With the Courts decision, that interference will increase even more.
Unfortunately, too many people have forgotten the simple lesson that true health will come from freedom, not coercion. It is time to allow a true free market in health care, while at the same time getting the Federal and other government attack dogs to back down from their assaults on natural health care, supplements, and other alternative treatments that free ObamaCare would push aside from the marketplace.
Do not allow this government decision to discourage your commitment to fighting for liberty. Contact your Congressional representative today, asking him or her to vote to repeal this unconstitutional law. Act Now To Repeal Obamacare – http://act.thenhf.com/7135/repeal-obamacare/