“I predicted that the insurance mandate would be thrown out, and that the dems would then use the loss of revenue as an excuse to move closer to gopvernment run health care a la canada.”
Many dem activists (or at least those who consider themselves liberals rather than ‘progressives’) originally opposed the bill, seeing it as an insurance industry give-away, and had to be brow-beaten and bribed into supporting it. The chief argument used to sway them was ‘we know it’s no good, but we will fix it later.’
As you said, this was never intended to be the final version of the bill. Although, between its unpopularity and the dems fading electoral prospects, it seems unlikely the planned ‘fixes’ will ever be implemented.
In my own wishful thinking, this is a great opportunity for the Supreme Court to remind Congress that they only have the powers outlined in the Constitution, and no others. In the perfect scenario, their ruling would be broad enough to unravel many previous federal power grabs. But that might be TOO MUCH wishful thinking.
i agree, and that new justice, what’s her name? the one that looks like jabba the hut? she will only vote for whatever side claims the most power for the government.