—So if this is true, then it is GOOD news.—
And the quotes below, from this site are also good news:
“The court ruled that the mandate is unconstitutional under the Constitution’s commerce clause, but it can stay as part of Congress’s power under a taxing clause. The court said that the government will be allowed to tax people for not having health insurance. “
“It actually settles nothing. By shifting the debate to the tax arena, and with a four-justice dissent, the decision guarantees only that the broader fight over a suitable national health policy will continue,” said Richard Saltman, a professor at the Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University. “In effect, the court decided this was too hot to handle. The focus will (has already) shift back to the political arena, where a deeply divided electorate will have to decide which policy path they want the country to pursue.”
This is not being reported accurately according to the quotes above. It means they DID strike down the mandate but said that if they want to levy a tax, that’s ok. If true, good luck with that. ;-)
Mandate, Tax, what’s the difference? If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.
The way FNC and was talking it sounded like it might be that, but I am pretty sure the SCOTUS just renamed the mandate a tax, which would make the above just empty words because it keeps it intact without changes.
After all that was the Obama legal argument and not a bad one if you consider how targeted tax credits work.