Author Topic: BREAKING>>>>SCOTUS upholds federal Obamacare exchange subsidies in 6-3 vote  (Read 8642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 82,829
One of the things I argued to the Party elitists and Conservative purists (i.e. Laura Ingraham)  who were relentlessly bashing Bush's preference toward Harriet Miers was that she would be a known and predictable Conservative member of the Court for the duration of her tenure.

I know that her consideration was in his second selection (after Roberts was already installed) and Alito has been a good solid choice but my point was that these candidates considered  "brilliant legal minds" by both the Left and the Right often drift into the liberal "Stockholm Syndrome" caused by non-stop interaction with and fawning over by the Liberal Eastern intelligentsia.   It happened to O'Conner, it happened to Kennedy, it happened immediately with Souter and now it's happening to Roberts.   

We could use a few less "brilliant" weenies and more staunch protectors of the Constitution such as Thomas, Scalia and Alito: As I argued would have been the case with Harriet "She's From SMU???" Miers.

Rising through the male-dominated ranks to become Managing Partner of the largest and most prestigious law firm in Texas was a helluva lot more impressive achievement to me than graduating from some Ivy League cookie cutter Law school and using connections to get political appointments.

 :thumbsup:

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 395,713
  • Let's Go Brandon!
I believe Roberts was merely following what he learned in law school from his favorite professor and foremost legal mentor:
Incidentally, I heard someone comment the Republican leadership is secretly pleased with the decision because it means they don't have to come up with some alternative. I think that's probably correct.

Yep...I've heard/read the same..they had no plan.
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,386
  • Gender: Male
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
"Conservatism" and the GOP have mounted nothing, zip, nada ever since this thing got passed.

They have talked, talked, vowed, but produced nothing, as a viable alternative or modification.

They have 16 odd candidates, plus or minus, for book deals, speaking fees, etc. as "former candidates for President," not one of which has put forth a viable alternative to RobertsCare.

I'm curious: The two members upthread who conceded they would probably go onto the program; what would you have done absent ObamaCare?
"God must love the common man, he made so many of them.�  Abe Lincoln

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 395,713
  • Let's Go Brandon!
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/246126-gop-unloads-on-high-court

Anger from Republicans at high court

 By Peter Sullivan - 06/25/15 11:36 AM EDT

Republicans are slamming the Supreme Court for upholding ObamaCare subsidies, questioning the logic that Chief Justice John Roberts and the majority used to spare the healthcare law from a devastating defeat.

“They deserve an Olympic medal for the legal gymnastics,” Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee, told The Hill.

The 6-3 ruling on Thursday in King v. Burwell maintains the power of the federal government to distribute insurance subsidies under ObamaCare. The majority held that the phrase "established by the state" was not intended to limit the subsidies to states that created their own insurance marketplaces, calling that interpretation of the law "implausible."

With the Roberts court ruling in favor of ObamaCare for the second time in three years, some Republicans reacted with anger to the decision, echoing the blistering dissent of Justice Antonin Scalia.

The ruling is “an out-of-control act of judicial tyranny,” said presidential hopeful and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

It "turns both the rule of law and common sense on its head,” added Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), also a presidential candidate.

The court has "vested legislative powers to the executive branch — seriously undermining our Constitution and transforming us further into a nation governed by the rule of rulers," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas).

Republican lawmakers vowed to keep fighting to repeal ObamaCare and said the battle against the law is far from over.

"Today the Supreme Court failed to recognize how terribly flawed President Obama's health care law is for millions of Georgians suffering under the law’s health insurance premium spikes and intrusive mandates,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.). “Despite this action by the Supreme Court I will continue to work with my Senate colleagues to repeal and replace Obamacare.”

Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) linked the ruling to what he sees as broader lawlessness from Obama.

“The Supreme Court’s decision today further reinforces the fact that in President Obama’s America, the law no longer matters,” he said. “The fight is not over. I will continue working to dismantle the President’s takeover of healthcare.”

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said the court battles could continue in other cases, as well.

“We’ll take every action possible in Congress, in the courts, and in statehouses across our country to stop this unworkable and unaffordable law from hurting more Americans,” he said. 
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 83,505
I'm curious: The two members upthread who conceded they would probably go onto the program; what would you have done absent ObamaCare?
If you're referring to my comment above about not having health insurance after my husband's retirement, I intend to find private health insurance. I may have to go back to work to afford it, though.

Offline Carling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,240
  • Gender: Male
Yep...I've heard/read the same..they had no plan.

Untrue.  Just because the media says that doesn't mean it's the case.

http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/chairman/release/?id=78f09718-c5cc-47ee-b4e3-c5d33ecc9545

As for replacing federal subsidies, the GOP was going to be blamed for it had SCOTUS ruled correctly in this case even with a fix.

« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 07:23:45 pm by Carling »
Trump has created a cult and looks more and more like Hitler every day.
-----------------------------------------------

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,641
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
Yep...I've heard/read the same..they had no plan.

They're pleased because they now have a platform to run on in 2016.
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Offline ArneFufkin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,579
Untrue.  Just because the media says that doesn't mean it's the case.

http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/chairman/release/?id=78f09718-c5cc-47ee-b4e3-c5d33ecc9545

As for replacing federal subsidies, the GOP was going to be blamed for it had SCOTUS ruled correctly in this case even with a fix.

I was earlier referring to an intermediary Congressional plan to avert the chaos if the Court ruled the subsides for states with no exchanges were to be immediately invalidated and millions currently with subsidized Obamacare had those entitlements withdrawn and essentially removed from the system.   

Who knows - but if Boehner and McConnell announced a stop-gap measure to fund the subsidies for a short period (i.e. 90 days) while new Legislation was crafted the policy makers like Roberts and Kennedy may have more strictly interpreted the verbiage of the clause.

They could have set up a scenario where they announced "whatever the court ruling in June we will ensure that everyone getting a subsidy will retain that subsidy for 90 days while we craft a plan to put on the President's desk offering an alternative option that provides better care with trusted providers at less cost."   Anything to get out in front of this juggernaut.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 08:35:19 pm by ArneFufkin »

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,641
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
I was earlier referring to an intermediary Congressional plan to avert the chaos if the Court ruled the subsides for states with no exchanges were to be ruled immediately invalid and millions currently with subsidized Obamacare had those entitlements withdrawn.   

Who knows - but if Boehner and McConnell announced a stop-gap measure to fund the subsidies for a short period (i.e. 90 days) while new Legislation was crafted the policy makers like Roberts and Kennedy may have more strictly interpreted the verbiage of the clause.

The exchanges being ruled invalid did not mean that people would have lost their coverage. Contracts and coverage woild have remained in place until the end of the calendar year.
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,641
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
I was earlier referring to an intermediary Congressional plan to avert the chaos if the Court ruled the subsides for states with no exchanges were to be immediately invalidated and millions currently with subsidized Obamacare had those entitlements withdrawn and essentially removed from the system.   

Who knows - but if Boehner and McConnell announced a stop-gap measure to fund the subsidies for a short period (i.e. 90 days) while new Legislation was crafted the policy makers like Roberts and Kennedy may have more strictly interpreted the verbiage of the clause.

They could have set up a scenario where they announced "whatever the court ruling in June we will ensure that everyone getting a subsidy will retain that subsidy for 90 days while we craft a plan to put on the President's desk offering an alternative option that provides better care with trusted providers at less cost."   Anything to get out in front of this juggernaut.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/03/king-v-burwell-a-loss-of-subsidy-does-not-mean-a-loss-of-coverage
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 395,713
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline ArneFufkin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,579
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/03/king-v-burwell-a-loss-of-subsidy-does-not-mean-a-loss-of-coverage

Thanks Luis.   I didn't read it all, but I get the gist.   The immediate apocalyptic outcome predicted by ACA defenders wouldn't have predictably occurred?

Do you think Roberts and Kennedy understood that the sky wouldn't necessarily fall if they ruled correctly on Burwell?   Maybe they don't care.

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47,055
  • Gender: Male
One more thing needs to pointed out here....

If the Court had ruled to overturn the subsidies, Obama and Hillary Clinton...along with every Leftist in the media and who blogs would be pointing out that the average age of the Justices is SEVENTY-FIVE (75) years.

They would have a HUGE issue screaming that the next POTUS would probably nominate 3 to 4 justices.  Especially if they are in the White House for 8 years.  They would say the nastiest things about the concentration of 'power' in the hands of NINE judges in black robes.

....that it would be imperative for the Democrats to get off their asses to vote.

Now, instead we have a sort of honeymoon with the supposedly Conservative court. 
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - David Burge (Iowahawk)

"It was only a sunny smile, and little it cost in the giving, but like morning light it scattered the night and made the day worth living" F. Scott Fitzgerald

"Hello Darkness, my old Friend...stood up too fast once again! Paul Simon 2024.

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 54,289
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Thanks Luis.   I didn't read it all, but I get the gist.   The immediate apocalyptic outcome predicted by ACA defenders wouldn't have predictably occurred?

Do you think Roberts and Kennedy understood that the sky wouldn't necessarily fall if they ruled correctly on Burwell?   Maybe they don't care.

The problem is that it isn't their job to consider consequences!  They are there to simply interpret what the law says!  John Roberts has now twice re-written law! He should be impeached for doing so but I won't be holding my breath!
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 395,713
  • Let's Go Brandon!
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/246171-gop-grapples-with-obamacare-defeat

GOP grapples with ObamaCare defeat

 By Peter Sullivan and Sarah Ferris - 06/25/15 02:59 PM EDT

Republicans are back to square one in their fight against ObamaCare now that the Supreme Court has upheld the subsidies at the heart of the healthcare law.

GOP lawmakers in both chambers of Congress had been crafting plans to roll back pieces of ObamaCare in the event that the Supreme Court ruled against the law in King v. Burwell.

But with the high court on Thursday delivering an emphatic, 6-3 ruling in favor of the administration, those legislative proposals are moot, forcing Republicans back to the drawing board.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) vowed Thursday that Republicans will “continue to fight tooth and nail to repeal” the Affordable Care Act.

“Today’s decision doesn’t change the fact that ObamaCare has been a disaster for the millions of hardworking American families who have seen their health care costs skyrocket or lost their insurance entirely,” he added.

But the court’s ruling leaves Republicans with limited options, with President Obama certain to veto any legislation that scales back his signature domestic program.

Conservative Republicans are now focusing on using the process known as reconciliation to repeal the law with just 51 votes needed in the Senate, instead of the usual 60.

But the reconciliation process is fraught with difficulty for the GOP because it cannot be used to make policy changes that add to the deficit.

The official scorekeeper for Congress last week estimated that repealing ObamaCare root and branch would increase the deficit by more than $300 billion over a decade — illustrating the challenge ahead.

While Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Thursday that no decisions have been made yet about using reconciliation to dismantle ObamaCare, it appears to be the party’s last chance to pursue repeal before the next president takes office in 2017.

“It’s probably the only tool left in our toolbox right now,” Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.), said of reconciliation, adding with a laugh, “I mean, we could vote against it again.”

“We'll do everything we can under reconciliation, again subject to the Byrd Rule,” said Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas), the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee. The rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), limits how reconciliation can be used in the Senate.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) split from more conservative members and said he wants a narrower use of reconciliation that includes measures Obama might actually sign.

“I certainly would favor the repeal of ObamaCare, but he's not going to sign that,” Cole said. “And it's not going to make any difference because he's never on the ballot again. To me, it makes more sense to put something that Democrats won't support but he might sign on his desk.”

Cole mentioned measures the president has signaled support for, like making wealthier beneficiaries pay more for Medicare, which is known as means-testing, and imposing reductions in Social Security payment growth through what is known as Chained Consumer Price Index.

Westmoreland, in contrast, said he supports using reconciliation, but only if Republicans don’t try to dilute their reforms by trying to compromise with the administration.

“If our goal is just to get something that he will sign, I mean, I don’t know that that’s going to be anything that will help anybody,” Westmoreland said.

“We need to make sure that we put something in there that would help the American people, whether he signs it or not,” he said.

Other Republicans have less faith in reconciliation as a strategy and see few options for scaling back the law until they succeed in winning the White House.

“Ultimately, we’re going to need a Republican president to repeal and put something else in place,” Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) said.

“When you have a Barack Obama in the White House, you know that no matter what reasonable package is sent to him, if it includes anything that adjusts ObamaCare in any sane direction, he’s going to veto it. That only sets up the same dynamic that we’ve had.”

"We’ve already repealed ObamaCare what, 40 plus times. I’m not sure repeating that process one more time is going to clarify for people our respective decisions.”

Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) said Republicans might be more likely to use reconciliation for tax reform now that their chances at winning changes to the Affordable Care Act have been diminished. 

“I think next steps, whatever they are, really do need to include the ballot box and 2016 election,” he said.

“Obviously, I don’t see any other court challenges coming in the next 18 months, so we’re probably done with the court as a remedy,” he added.
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) vowed Thursday that Republicans will “continue to fight tooth and nail to repeal” the Affordable Care Act.

Ooh... the drama...


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
“We'll do everything we can under reconciliation, again subject to the Byrd Rule,” said Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas), the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee. The rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), limits how reconciliation can be used in the Senate.

THE Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) Exalted Cyclops of the KKK?

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 83,505
Elections have consequences, not the least of which is judicial appointments.

Offline Carling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,240
  • Gender: Male
Elections have consequences, not the least of which is judicial appointments.

I hope the "Take My Ball Home" crowd who sat out 2012 because "there is no difference between GOP and Democrats" are happy with themselves.
Trump has created a cult and looks more and more like Hitler every day.
-----------------------------------------------

Offline mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 83,505

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 82,829
Elections have consequences, not the least of which is judicial appointments.

You mean Roberts?

Offline Paladin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,476
  • Gender: Male
Quote
Yep...I've heard/read the same..they had no plan.
Untrue.  Just because the media says that doesn't mean it's the case.
http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/chairman/release/?id=78f09718-c5cc-47ee-b4e3-c5d33ecc9545

Interesting contribution, Carling. But did you note the sponsors? I doubt anything that threesome would offer would be much better than ScotusCare.

I would also like to point out, and this for me is most irksome, everyone seems to assume the government has the Constitutional authority to impose "health insurance" of any kind on the American people. Uh, no, despite the lemming like movement to do so. ScotusCare may be altered, but what seems like a universal assumption such a program is acceptable is what needs to be changed.
Members of the anti-Trump cabal: Now that Mr Trump has sewn up the nomination, I want you to know I feel your pain.

Offline Carling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,240
  • Gender: Male
You mean Roberts?

How in the world was Kagan allowed to rule on this case?

But yes, take your ball and go home, don't vote for the GOP candidate, then whine on the internet and blame the "GOPe" for anything that goes wrong.  That approach is really working well, isn't it?

How many Republicans voted for ObamaCare? 
Trump has created a cult and looks more and more like Hitler every day.
-----------------------------------------------

Offline Carling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,240
  • Gender: Male
Interesting contribution, Carling. But did you note the sponsors? I doubt anything that threesome would offer would be much better than ScotusCare.

I would also like to point out, and this for me is most irksome, everyone seems to assume the government has the Constitutional authority to impose "health insurance" of any kind on the American people. Uh, no, despite the lemming like movement to do so. ScotusCare may be altered, but what seems like a universal assumption such a program is acceptable is what needs to be changed.

The PCA has some flaws, but it's a workable blueprint, and at least it's been allowed daylight instead of being hidden until being voted on by congress.

It boils down to this.  I trust Hatch more than I trust Pelosi.  The fact that they published this bill online should mean something, right?  At least we can read it, debate it, and try to improve it.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 12:25:23 am by Carling »
Trump has created a cult and looks more and more like Hitler every day.
-----------------------------------------------

Offline evadR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,190
  • Gender: Male
Totally expected. Americans still believe that obamacare is something good, and the SCOTUS is not going to take it away from them.

The media will do any required damage control.

It's an interesting thing to watch this country fall apart. Not joyful, but absolutely interesting.
Yes, and at an exponential rate.
Amazing.
If you think it can't get worse, just wait til tomorrow.
November 6, 2012, a day in infamy...the death of a republic as we know it.