Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal refuses to implement Obamacare despite Supreme Court ruling

Yahoo ^ | 6/30/12 | Chris Moody

[Libloather]

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal refuses to implement Obamacare despite Supreme Court ruling
By Chris Moody, Yahoo! News | The Ticket – 18 hrs ago

The Supreme Court upheld President Barack Obama's health care law on Thursday, but Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a possible Republican vice presidential contender who has refused to establish a federally mandated health care exchange in his state, said Friday that he will continue to ignore it.

"We're not going to start implementing Obamacare," Jindal said during a conference call with Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. "We're committed to working to elect Gov. Romney to repeal Obamacare."

**SNIP**

"Here in Louisiana we have not applied for the grants, we have not accepted many of these dollars, we're not implementing the exchanges," Jindal said. "We don't think it makes any sense to implement Obamacare in Louisiana. We're going to do what we can to fight it."

[LibLieSlayer]

Amen!

LLS

[LibLieSlayer]

Our form of government hasn't failed us... the people have... but the brilliant GOD-guided Founders knew this would happen... and they gave us the tools to deal with it... and it is up to us to deal with it. We ***start*** with Nullification and bypassing the sewer of DC. Then we move forward and never stop. There is no reason that a progressive should ever attain office again. Those that elect them and the state in which they reside... should be removed from the Union.

LLS

[matt1234]

Maybe somebody here with better constitutional knowledge then me can answer, but if 2/3rds of the states reject the Obamatax is that not effectively a constitutional amendment?

No. 3/4 of states is required. Read Article V.

[Sudetenland]

"The Supreme Court has taken on the role of amending the Constitution."

They've been doing that since Roosevelt or before, what they did Thursday was re-write the law Congress passed and then passed that revision by judicial fiat. They didnt' just "amend" the Constitution, they ripped it to shreds by arrogating the legislative powers of Congress for themselves, effectively eliminating the separation of powers and establishing themselves as an oligarchy superior to the other branches.

As I have stated previously, The United States of America as imagined and bequeathed us by our Founding Fathers, is no more. Thursday was its death knell.

The only question remaining is whether we will follow the path of rapid decline into the strident socialism of Castro's Cuba and Chavez's Venezuela or the slow decadent slide into the socialism of Europe.

So far, with the type of radicals America has grown, Cuba is looking more likely.

[RightFighter]

The only trouble with this is that it’s really no skin off Obama’s back if states refuse to implement. What those states will be doing is causing their citizens to be taxed to pay for Obamacare without receiving any of the “benefits” of Obamacare. So, for Obama, it’s great if a state doesn’t comply - free money that can be spread around to pay for the benefits for the other states.

[EQAndyBuzz]

States are forgetting one thing. Obama just won big with Arizona. What’s to say the administration doesn’t take these states to court and do the same thing?

[VRW Conspirator]

This is a start to regain that power

I hope so, at least this might keep the federal usurption of power in the national spotlight.

[IMR 4350]

The States that do comply are going to have to raise their taxes.

The way it is right now, people in red states the states most likely to comply, can least afford a tax increase.

[I still care]

Scott (FL) was on Greta last night explaining this. He basically said they (governments) always lie their faces off about this stuff - “Take this money, we’ll pay for it, just play by our rules” - and then once you take it, you realize their methods don’t work, you are left in a hole and the money is not enough and tends to dry up anyway.

[tobyhill]

It's not “despite Supreme Court ruling”, it's because of it he doesn't have to set up exchanges. The Government can't penalize any state for not setting up the exchange because it's an unenforceable Federal Tax, not a state tax.

[TennTuxedo]

If the states opt out and refuse the ObamaCare money, then the federal government can not force the state to do as they want with ObamaCare and they cannot punish the states by withholding any federal funds due to them.

The SCOTUS hooting down the Medicaid expansion threw a monkey wrench into the ObamaCare formula. ObamaCare only works by forcing states to pay for the expansion of Medicaid.

[TennTuxedo]

If the states opt out and refuse the ObamaCare money, then the federal government can not force the state to do as they want with ObamaCare and they cannot punish the states by withholding any federal funds due to them.

The SCOTUS shooting down the Medicaid expansion threw a monkey wrench into the ObamaCare formula. ObamaCare only works by forcing states to pay for the expansion of Medicaid.

[Cheerio]

This is a tax.

AN UNCONSITUTIONAL TAX on inactivity.

The US Constitution only allows for THREE types of taxation - 1) Direct (never used), 2) Excise, and 3)Income tax (16th Amendment).

Chief Justice Roberts just created a new type of tax out of whole cloth and he never bothered to explain where he found this definition.

[robowombat]

What you are describing is called nullification and is a strong assertion of state's rights doctrine. There is a clear potential for a Constitutional crisis unmatched since 1860 emerging here. Jefferson Davis in his exhaustive treatment of state's rights and the right of secession in the first volume of his memoirs of the WBTS opined that the Constitutional issues which were embedded in the causes of the war might well reemerge in the future over another set of issues and circumstances. That day may well be approaching, especially if the Mahdi is reelected.

[Anima Mundi]

0-0-0-0.....Opt Out Of Obamatax
Zero, Null, Nada.
Sear the image of the big O on minds and hearts with a branding iron clarity that turns every Pepsi-fied logo enhanced Obama brand into an ANTI Obama message.May his cutesy big Obama “O” start to be seen with the same gut reaction we have to a swastika symbol.His symbol can work against him. This can be done.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

If Obama is refusing to enforce immigration laws,..then the Governors can refuse to enforce the Healthcare law. Its now a wild west in the U.S.

[WOSG]

“What you are describing is called nullification and is a strong assertion of state’s rights doctrine. There is a clear potential for a Constitutional crisis unmatched since 1860 emerging here.”

Not really, because only a tiny minority would go along with that theory, so it will never get far.

Nobody considers the fact that most people are simply not thinking this way. Few Americans even understand basic federalism let alone would support a pre-CivilWar view of federal-state relations. So it remains a pipedream.

It’s kind of like these crazy ideas for a constitutional convention. Do people advocating it realize that a majority of Americans voted for Obama in 2008? Do they really want a new constitution written by a convention that is 50% controlled by Obama-types? The odds of getting an improved constitution out of that is ... nil.

[Revel]

If the supreme court has no respect for the law then why should the states.