The Supreme Court's Ruling Is As Damaging As It Is Historic

IBD Editorials ^ | June 28, 2012 | TOM STEMBERG

[Kaslin]

This week the Supreme Court delivered one of the most consequential and highly anticipated rulings in history — it upheld President Obama's health care law. In doing so, the court — and this administration — dealt a critical blow to free enterprise and ensured that taxes will go up for middle class working families and small businesses everywhere.

This dims prospects for economic growth, while leaving in place the barriers to hiring imposed by the law, like costly, burdensome regulations and pervasive uncertainty.

I've always believed that President Obama's health care law was and is bad politics and bad policy — mainly because the law fails to deliver what we so desperately need: true reform that will actually lower the cost of health insurance and fix a broken system.

Pursuing a drastic overhaul of our nation's health care system — one-sixth of our economy — was bad politics. With over 5 million long-term unemployed, the top priority for this administration should have been getting the American people back to work. Instead, the policies coming out of Washington have been nothing more than a regulatory onslaught on small businesses, the engine of the American economy, making it more difficult and costly for them to survive.

Conventional wisdom holds that it will be extremely difficult for Obama to win re-election with unemployment rates persisting above 8%. To lower that number by Election Day would require creating 200,000 jobs per month between now and then, making the president's lack of focus on a pro-growth jobs policy all the more confusing.

[Fee]

If Obamacare is a tax, then it has a legal problem. The exec branch granted waivers to some and not to others with similar situations, At one point when it became too hot PR wise, the White House put a freeze on all waivers. Problem is the exec cannot do that when it comes to taxes. Only Congress thru defined rules and regs can define tax exemptions, not an exec department. I think the SCOTUS open Obamacare to more lawsuits and legal challenges.

[Nifster]

And Roberts ruled that injunctions could be made against the ‘tax’ penalty before it is even levied——which means it isn’t really a tax. This is one of the absolute worst days my country has ever faced in terms of our liberty

[ClearCase_guy]

Problem is the exec cannot do that when it comes to taxes. Only Congress thru defined rules and regs can define tax exemptions, not an exec department.

There are no rules. Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

We were given Limited Government, but we threw it all away.

[Nowhere Man]

We were given Limited Government, but we threw it all away.

Well, Ben Franklin said, "we've given you a Republic, if you can keep it."

[oyez]

In the course of history, true Republics are rare and short lived and our Republic is now a casualty.

[stockpirate]

I have no respect for the SCOTUS any more, they are just as corrupt as the congress.

[Nowhere Man]

I have no respect for the SCOTUS any more, they are just as corrupt as the congress.

Well, they say we have four boxes:

Soap Box - Well, we are yellig our loudest but it ain't working.

Jury Box - Well, as we saw today, they doesn't work either. B-(

Ballot Box - Well, I pray we prevail in November and we need to hold Romney to his promise. That is our best hope.

Cartridge Box - ??? (Claire Wolfe, pick up the White Courtesy Phone)

Who is John Galt? I am.

[Seeing More Clearly Now]

Obama’s appointment of Sotomayer and Kagan put the stake in the heart of the Supreme Court. They in no way qualify as jurists; they are tools of the international Marxist agenda. Something is clearly affecting the mental function of Roberts; he called it a tax. If that sounds like that claim makes no sense, it’s because it doesn’t. Perhaps it’s the narcoleptic drugs that have dulled his brain (NYT Aug. 1, 2007). Perhaps it was the organized crime gang that got Obama elected. The issue was whether Congress can force the public to buy something. Roberts’ ruling uses the shell game; someone else must have thrown him that nonsense; perhaps a Supreme Court clerk with an agenda.