Greenhut writes: Governor Brown Celebrates ObamaCare Ruling

Not a surprise.

Gov. Jerry Brown is happy with the Supreme Court’s ObamaCare ruling: “Today’s dramatic Supreme Court ruling removes the last roadblock to fulfilling President Obama’s historic plan to bring health care to millions of uninsured citizens.”

That makes sense. The court decided that the individual mandate isn’t really a mandate — but simply a tax. And Gov. Brown believes that the state and the country can pretty much tax its way out of its fiscal problems. Figures, a conservative justice appointed by President Bush, John Roberts, authored the opinion. Conservatives have little principled opposition to big government — they just have different ideas of how that government should be used.

Click to read the full commentary here

Brian Calle on the Health care ruling: a change in the relationship between government and the individual?

June 28th, 2012,

With its decision to uphold most of President Barack Obama’s health care law, the U.S. Supreme Court rationalized that the government cannot force Americans to buy health insurance, but it can tax them if they do not. The Court’s majority opinion ratifies a policy that fundamentally changes the relationship between government and the individual.

The 5-4 decision was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush. The chief justice joined the court’s four liberals.
Article Tab: An opponent of President Barack Obama’s health care law demonstrates outside the Supreme Court in Washington, June 28, 2012, before the court’s ruling on the law.

“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,” the majority said. “Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.”

You may recall that during debate on the Affordable Care Act in 2010, defenders of the bill, from President Obama to Nancy Pelosi, then speaker of the House, denied that the individual mandate amounted to a tax. Now, the Supreme Court majority has decided retroactively that it is a tax.

Click here to read the full commentary

Betrayal on so many levels: The Affordable Care Act and the Supreme Court Decision to uphold the mandate by calling it by another name

John C. Goodman with The Independent Institute pens a piece, “Repeal and Replace” regarding The Affordable Care Act
June 30, 2012,
Townhall

When Barack Obama was a candidate for president, he endorsed universal health insurance, but opposed forcing individuals to buy their own insurance.

As president, he signed into law a bill that violates both of these promises. The Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) gives the federal government the authority to tell every American what insurance they must have, where they will get it and what they will pay for it. Moreover, even as it violates another campaign promise (“if you’re in a plan you like, you can keep it”), the most optimistic estimate expects 23 million people will remain uninsured once the new health reform law is fully implemented.

Now that the Supreme Court has declared the mandate constitutional, what’s next? Mitt Romney says “repeal and replace.” But what should we replace ObamaCare with? Republicans on Capitol Hill are being way too timid. They are endorsing only modest reforms that will not solve the more fundamental problems of cost, quality and access to care.

Click to read the full article