Here is McKenna’s statement post-decision:
McKenna: We won on Commerce Clause argument
June 28, 2012 11:37 a.m. • 0 comments
Attorney General Rob McKenna did his best to count victories this morning after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the lawsuit he joined to overturn the Affordable Care Act. And he said other Republicans should drop talk of a wholesale repeal of the law because “that’s not going to happen.”
At a late morning press conference, McKenna insisted the ruling was good for Washington because the court ruled Congress doesn’t have the authority under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause to order people to buy health care insurance. “We achieved our goal” of finding that out, he said.
But he was surprised by the decision of five members of the court to rule the mandate is allowable under Congress’s taxing authority, adding that Chief Justice John Roberts’ determination that the tax isn’t subject to the restrictions of some other taxes was “a bracket buster.”
The state should move ahead with its work to meet provisions of the law, such as the Health Insurance Exchange which will allow individuals to shop for insurance more easilly, he said, and to look for more ways to reform health care.
But other Republicans should stop talking about repealing the law, and instead focus on specific provisions that prove unworkable, he said.
Democrats passed a massive bill with many controversial provisions by pushing it through Congress. “To completely blow it up means we’re essentially doing the same thing, in reverse,” he said.
Besides, the Democratically controlled Senate isn’t going to repeal the law, and Obama isn’t going to sign a repeal, he said.
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/spincontrol/2012/jun/28/mckenna-we-won-commerce-clause-argument/
Washington state Ping
For those who are Constitutional legal scholars, we should work of challenging the “tax” notion in the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. The Constitution recognizes four types of taxes: 1) “Duties, Imposts and Excises,” generally called indirect taxes, which must be uniform throughout the United States (Art. I, sec. 8, cl. 1); 2) capitation, or other direct taxes, which may only be imposed “in Proportion to the Census” among the states (Art 1, sec. 2, cl. 3; Art. 1, sec. 9, cl. 4); export taxes, which are prohibited (Art. 1, sec. 9, cl. 4); and the income tax, permitted by the 16th Amendment, which can be imposed without apportionment among the states. The Constitution does set limits on what can be taxed. I think the Obamacare decision failed to consider those limits. Those who are Constitutional scholars should chew on the Constitutions definitions of tax and the idea that Congress cannot invent new taxes outside of the Constitution's definitions.
Of course, having Congress, the Senate and the Presidency would move things along in the right direction.