It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It's the judiciary's Nixon-to-China: Chief Justice John Roberts joins the liberal wing of the Supreme Court and upholds the constitutionality of Obamacare. How? By pulling off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time. He managed to uphold the central conservative argument against Obamacare while at the same time finding a narrow definitional dodge to uphold the law -- and thus prevented the court from being seen as having overturned, presumably on political grounds, the signature legislation of this administration.
That's Roberts, philosophical conservative. But he lives in uneasy coexistence with Roberts, custodian of the court, acutely aware that the judiciary's arrogation of power has eroded the esteem in which it was once held. Most of this arrogation occurred under the liberal Warren and Burger courts, most egregiously with Roe v. Wade. More recently, however, few decisions have occasioned more bitterness and rancor than Bush v. Gore, a 5-4 decision split along ideological lines. Roberts seems determined that there be no recurrence with Obamacare. Roberts' concern was that the court do everything it could to avoid being seen, rightly or wrongly, as highhandedly overturning sweeping legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.
How to reconcile the two imperatives -- one philosophical and the other institutional? Assign yourself the task of writing the majority opinion. Find the ultimate finesse that manages to uphold the law but only on the most narrow of grounds -- interpreting the individual mandate as merely a tax, something generally within the power of Congress.
Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
I'm not against the concept per se, but I'm against the way it's implemented. I am not against the government implementing programs to help people who need it.
First of all, it's the government meddling in things that it shouldn't be meddling in.
In short, it's telling people that they have to get health care, and they have no choice but o pay for it one way or another. If you don't pay for it, you will be fined.
That's nothing more than extortion.
And the problem is that it's forcing people to do this.
And I don't see why people are okay with that.
And yes, I feel the same way about car insurance.
People shouldn't have to be forced to pay for something they don't want.
And most people just don't want this.
Basically, it's the government bullying people into submission.
And the real reason? When you trace the money, somebody will get rich off of it. Which is what this is really all about. It's not about helping people, it's all about the government increasing it's power and helping the rich people get even richer.
Because let's face it, it will hurt a lot of people because a lot of people just can't afford it.
If a person is making only $1,500 dollars, a fine or a payment of several hundred dollars is a big hit out of their paycheck.
And to top it off, many more people who will be paying into it will never benefit from it.
These are my issues with it.
This is not truly for helping people.
It's just another scam by the rich to get even richer.
So I will no longer call it the United States Of America, but the Looted States of America. It's supposed to be a government for the people and by the people, not just a select few elitist snobs who care nothing for anybody else but their own interests.
Not a well thought out statement, there is Romneycare and no one seems to like that either. Why do you think a lot of people on the right don't care any more for Romney then they do Obama.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It's true. People don't like change. But I suspect that if it were "McCainCare" or "BushCare" or even "RomneyCare", the same people protesting it so strongly now would be the ones who would support it 100%...
The political "game" is in the forefront, and stronger (and more apparent) than ever! Politics is a game. If your "team" makes a point, you celebrate. If the opponent makes a point, you whine and complain. Sadly, that's the landscape of the American voting public today.
Originally posted by michael1983l
Why would any civilized person complain about making primary healthcare available to all instead of just those that have the cash to pay for it?
How can a population of a developed nation like the USA complain about paying extra taxes for this when their current government invests more money in war than all other nations combines accross the globe?
Originally posted by havanaja
reply to post by michael1983l
THis is a reply to “EVILSADAMCLONE” who commented: “...And to top it off, many more people who will be paying into it will never benefit from it…”
In any insurance plan, the is the whole point of 100% participation is that the individual cost goes way down and one is PROTECTED FROM UNPREDICTABLE MISFORTUNE. Cnsider oneself lucky if nothing happens to you…but if it does, then you’re damn glad you have insurance, otherwise your’re out on the streets. Are you complaining about auto insurance, too? and business owners will get more productivity and less missed sick days.
reply to post by michael1983l
Why would any civilized person complain about making primary healthcare available to all instead of just those that have the cash to pay for it? How can a population of a developed nation like the USA complain about paying extra taxes for this when their current government invests more money in war than all other nations combines accross the globe? Just saying.
reply to post by michael1983l
Why would any civilized person complain about making primary healthcare available to all instead of just those that have the cash to pay for it? How can a population of a developed nation like the USA complain about paying extra taxes for this when their current government invests more money in war than all other nations combines accross the globe? Just saying
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Hope4peace
Because the gov't doesn't need to have this much control over our lives. If they want to reform health care, then please god, do it. Just don't sit there and tell me that I HAVE to have insurance, or the IRS is going to penalize me. That's the part that pisses me off. God I wish they WOULD overhaul the health care industry, just don't shove the gov't down my throat as part of it.