Posted on 08/04/2014 4:39:36 AM PDT by rootin tootin
During the oral arguments that preceded the recent appeals court ruling against the Obama administration in Halbig v. Burwell, an under-reported yet crucial discussion took place between two of the judges and counsel for the plaintiffs. Judge Harry T. Edwards pronounced himself confused as to why Congress would have concerned itself with what entity ultimately set up Obamacare’s insurance exchanges. Judge A. Raymond Randolph and attorney Michael A. Carvin did their best to enlighten the befuddled jurist:
JUDGE EDWARDS: I’m trying to understand … who cares who sets up the exchange?
JUDGE RANDOLPH: Ben Nelson …
MR. CARVIN: The enactors of the law
JUDGE EDWARDS: Who cares?
JUDGE RANDOLPH: Ben Nelson.
MR. CARVIN: They couldn’t get to 60… Ben Nelson said we are not going to have a Federally run exchange, we are going to implement basic principles of federalism and the states are going to run those exchanges or I don’t vote for it and it doesn’t get passed.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I have friends in Omaha who tell me that after Obamacare passed, Nelson would be openly spit on, mocked, ridiculed, and refused service when he went out in public.
I have friends in Omaha who tell me that after Obamacare passed, Nelson would be openly spit on, mocked, ridiculed, and refused service when he went out in public.
WE can hope
Doesn’t matter why, he voted for it. His intent doesn’t mean squat in the court of law.
His intent doesn’t mean squat in the court of law.
But in this case they are trying to trump plain language with what they think the intent was. To the court, intent IS the point.
Who cares what the law says? Lord Obama and his flying monkeys in the DOJ decides what the law means and what parts if any get enforced. Seriously, how can you pass laws on healthcare, immigration or anything else when it doesnt matter what’s actually in it?
That is not the case when appellate courts are discussing legislation. For these cases, the legislative history and the discussion recorded in the Congressional Record form a vital part of the legal decision. This is why I (speaking ex cathedra from my bellybutton) think that the DC Circuit decision is more valid than the competing and opposite decision by the Richmond Circuit.
Nancy’s eyes might blow right out her sockets if this comes to pass.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered the $100 million in Medicaid funding, also known as the “Cornhusker Kickback,” to Nelson to help win him over* as the 60th vote on the Senate’s healthcare reform bill last December.
But the deal eventually backfired. During merger negotiations with the Senate, House leaders said the “kickback” was an unfair deal struck for Nebraska that was not available to other states and was given only to attract Nelson’s support.
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/82621-obama-healthcare-plan-nixes-ben-nelsons-cornhusker-kickback-deal#ixzz39QMQfuaC Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
yeah too bad so sad for ole Nan
bookmark
-
- Marc Rich - Eric Holder - Bill Clinton -
- Follow the money - ( Marc Rich’s wife to : ) ?
Interesting read. When the Senate needs every single DemonRat to vote on this bill, then every single DemonRat can hold it hostage for their own nefarious or stupid reason. Thus we have the Cornhusker and Louisiana payoffs.
bttt
I SUSPECTED this from the start...that they worded it EXACTLY as it stand because they were having trouble getting their final votes.
That is why judges have to follow THE LETTER OF THE LAW as, we now know, the law would not even exist had federal exchanges qualified for subsidies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.