Posted on 06/26/2015 11:36:07 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
WASHINGTON — The Affordable Care Act survived another major test at the Supreme Court this week, all but assuring its place in the social safety net, but the legal challenges to the law are far from over.
One of the more significant tests is a lawsuit filed by Speaker John A. Boehner and other House Republicans who contend that the Obama administration is spending billions of dollars without the necessary appropriations from Congress.
The suit filed by Mr. Boehner, in the name of the House of Representatives, is not just a bookkeeping dispute. It involves fundamental questions of executive power and Congress’s power of the purse.
At issue is a provision of the health care law that requires insurance companies to reduce co-payments, deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs for certain low-income people. The federal government reimburses insurers for the “cost-sharing reductions.”
In their lawsuit, House Republicans say the Obama administration needed, but never received, an appropriation to make these payments to insurance companies. As a result, they contend, the spending violates the Constitution, which says, “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Anyone up for finding the “it’s for the chillun” clause in the Constitution?
Can we find another one that can unravel it?
John A Boner is an awfully leaky vessel to put much faith in.....
Many a time I have read on FR that Odunga care SHOULD be ruled unconstitutional due to it originating in the Senate which cannot write tax laws. Anyone know what became of that?
“The suit filed by Mr. Boehner, in the name of the House of Representatives, is not just a bookkeeping dispute. It involves fundamental questions of executive power and Congress’s power of the purse.”
So Boehner is going to set it up so that the supreme court can
rule that it’s unconstitutional not to fund Obamacare.
Boehners a liberal. everything he does is for the good of the state
and against the will of the people.
It would've starved the beast and simplified the rhetoric. Depending on someone else (ie: the courts) was either dumb or a stall because they want to keep Obamacare. They already knew this court is undependable at best, perhaps treasonous and complicit in the destruction of the US.
The only conclusion I can arrive at is anyone who plays nice with the Republican leadership does not deserve our vote. I'd rather have a small minority with a strong, compelling message. With what we have now, majorities have been the worst thing that happened to our issues.
Think about it. Our only salvation is only for parts of the nation and only if the federal government falls apart. That's what getting rid of the Confederate flag is really all about. It's getting rid of any cultural memory of a defense of states' rights against an out-of-control federal government.
Kabuki theater CONgre$$ v. POSOTUS/United Socialist Supreme Court TOTALITARIANCARE? Check$ and Balance$ right?
—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Go ahead CONgre$$. DEFUND. Show us what you’ve got. After all, YOU DID BUILD THIS…
That’s a good question.
But obviously this SCOTUS will make something up and strike down the challenge if it ever got that far.
The only way to change this law is to come up with a new one that works. It could and should look dramatically different than this one, but being able to shop an alternative is key to getting beyond this one.
“The only way to change this law is to come up with a new one that works...”
Yes, and any law revoking SCOTUS-Care must also castrate the power drug companies and the FDA have over the practice of healthcare. Cut this umbilical feeding the high cost of healthcare and healthcare immediately becomes affordable. And almost immediately cures will be found for a multitude of ‘incurable’ diseases/disorders.
It is also way past time that laws can be passed affecting ‘all people’ except certain groups. All legislation should immediately apply to Congress, the Courts, the Executive Branch. NO EXCEPTIONS!
This includes healthcare and retirement benefits (think Medicare, think Social Security).
Here is the other case:
Sorry Johnny, you can’t win this one in court. You funded the expenditures in the cromnibus because you are too much a coward to fight using your authority. The court will tell you that you can simply fund operations daily, weekly or monthly, each time withholding funds for any specific purpose. But you too afraid of the punishment this president will inflict on Americans and heap the blame for it onto you. And you will not fight back.
For hospital corporations, it was a good thing initially, because it took power away from competing private practitioners, and centralized control in the big hospitals/hospital corporations. This didn't decrease costs, and merely shifted money away from the people who actually see patients and give medical care, and gave that money to an expanding administrative bureaucracy. This is why hospital stocks surged after the SCOTUS ruling. But self-interest is often shortsighted, and the hospitals will get stung - big time. This push for centralization of health care was by design, and eventually, when centralized enough, they (the political establishment) will come after the hospitals - and it will be like shooting fish in a barrel.
For pharmaceutical companies, they cut deals with the devil, and then downsized their internal R&D. They'll be OK for awhile, but they will find it harder and harder to sustain their profit margins.
American medicine is in decline, and I am very sad about it.
The Congress can impeach a supreme court member for lack of “good behavior”. Why haven’t they???
If Congress believes the court is acting politically, they can impeach those members that are.
Why haven’t they??
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.