Skip to comments.ObamaCare Survives - Electing Romney Just Became Imperative
Posted on 06/30/2012 8:36:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Supreme Court did not save us from ourselves, at least not entirely. That is still up to us, the people.
When the American people elected Barack Obama and large Democrat majorities, the die was cast. ObamaCare was coming. Popular or not, constitutional or not, affordable or not, it didn't matter. They were going to pass it, and then the rest of us could find out what they put in it.
After the Democrats shoved the 2700 pages of ObamaCare down our throats -- and we did find out how expensive, controlling, and coercive the legislation was -- a majority of Americans wanted the Supreme Court to toss it aside as unconstitutional.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court did not deem it a legal overreach by the Democrats. While I would have agreed with the minority (Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy), I respect the decision.
For those of us who originally disagreed with ObamaCare and now disagree with the majority opinion of the SCOTUS, the challenge remains the same as it would have been had the Court ruled otherwise. We need to elect Mitt Romney and House and Senate majorities that will repeal ObamaCare and replace it with free-market, pro-liberty solutions.
In a very real way, the Court just put the responsibility back on the voters to re-establish government of, by, and for the people. In the end, we get the government and policies that go with it that we deserve. So, who will we elect as our representative leaders in November? The importance of this election already historic just grew even greater.
As the nation absorbs and deciphers the SCOTUS ruling on ObamaCare, we thought our readers would find the following excerpts from NRO's analysis insightful. Included is a link to the entire editorial.
Chief Justice Robertss Folly
Posted June 28, 2012, 2:00PM-ET
National Review Online
By The Editors
Rarely has the maxim that the power to tax is the power to destroy been so apt, a portion of liberty being the direct object in this case.
What the Court has done is not so much to declare the mandate constitutional as to declare that it is not a mandate at all, any more than the mortgage-interest deduction in the tax code is a mandate to buy a house. Congress would almost surely have been within its constitutional powers to tax the uninsured more than the insured. Very few people doubt that it could, for example, create a tax credit for the purchase of insurance, which would have precisely that effect. But Obamacare, as written, does more than that. The law repeatedly speaks in terms of a requirement to buy insurance, it says that individuals shall buy it, and it levies a penalty on those who refuse. As the conservative dissent points out, these are the hallmarks of a regulatory penalty, not a tax.
It now falls to the Republicans, and especially to Mitt Romney, to make the case for the repeal of the law and for its replacement by something better than either it or the health-care policies that preceded it Opponents should take heart: The law remains unpopular. Let the president and his partisans ring their bells today, and let us work to make sure that they are wringing their hands come November. Read more.
Deathcare was passed by the reconciliation process, which needs 51 votes. It can be repealed through the same process.
Unfortunately, all we have is the shape-shifting Romney's word that he'll repeal the legislation his policies helped draft.
Go tell it to the Republican Party.
Anything can be filibustered.
Maybe we’re wrong to assume ObamaCare can’t be repealed until Mitt Romney is elected.
If the mandate is a tax, it’s repeal would have to be initiated in the House, where Republicans have a strong majority. And, since it’s a tax, a simple majority in the Senate would be sufficient to repeal it since 60-vote majorities are not required to enact tax-related measures.
Although Democrats have a slight majority in the Senate, Democratic Senators running for re-election this year would be under extreme pressure to vote for the mandate’s repeal, in order to avoid suffering the fate of their former colleagues whose 2009 pro-ObamaCare votes caused them to be defeated in landslide numbers in 2010. It’s not unlikely that four or five Democratic Senators who want to keep their jobs would vote with the pro-repeal Republicans. And that would do it.
John Boehner already has a repeal vote scheduled for the House in about a week. Things will get very interesting, and our side has a respectable chance of winning.
Thank you for your well thought out and reasonable response.
We need to overturn Obama care so badly, we want to elect the man who gave Massachusetts ROMNEY CARE and made it illegal to not have insurance
by electing the man whose halth care plan was the blueprint for Obama care, we will do away with Obama care
Electing the creator of the lightbulb to keep the cave dark is not logical
God Help us!
Hey, sport, got a better suggestion?
God is displaying a very warped sense of humor, sending us Romney to defeat OblamoDeathWarrants. Why couldn’t He have sent us Ronald Reagan II?
because we're a nation that makes people rich by grinding 1 million unborn babies a year into mincemeat and flushing them down the toilet.
If you were God, what would you do?
Reconciliation bills cannot be filibustered because their time of debate is limited by the Congressional Budget Act.
The article is 100% correct: it is imperative that we elect Romney, not just to overturn obamacare, but to appoint justices.
If Obama gets to appoint more justices to high courts, including the Supreme Court, freedom is DEAD.
Its been imperative to elect Romney for a long time.
I kept waiting for Obama to do the One More Thing that would convince some of the holdouts here that we have to get rid of him.
One More Things kept happening but they clung to their imaginary lifeboat.
Maybe this is finally it.
Lets hope so.
Sorry, ain't gonna happen.
First of all, they HATE Mittens with a passion, probably, I'm guessing, cuz many are frustrated "Paul-Bots," who are still "grieving" over their loss
Secondly, they have an IRRATIONAL (why I don't know and NONE has seen fit to try and explain why?) FEAR and HATRED for Mormons.
Moreover, they are living in "Delusional-ville" whereby they think that (provided we take back the Senate and hold the House)--and IN SPITE OF THE DOZEN OR SO RINO'S in the Senate--the Republi-Tards will "Keep Dear Leader in Check,".....
....then in 2016, we can find/nominate a 100% Conservative, dontcha know?
And LAST BUT NOT LEAST, being "REAL" Christians (as opposed to us "Make Believe" ones) they are STANDING ON "PRINCIPLES!"
Of course, they REFUSE to even consider that the way things are going, we will probably NOT have an United States of America as we know it in 2016.
It was a dopey decision. First Roberts ruled that the penalty wasn’t a tax, then he ruled that it was. And he played Twister to come to the conclusion that it was a tax.
Yes, indeed, we will be sooooo much better off with Obama getting a second term, is that your point?!
You like four more years of Obama?
you like heroin instead of crack?
It’s salami slicing tactics. The Communists did it in Hungary and Czechoslovakia to seize power as well.
Conservatives are too sore because they can’t magically resolve every issue in one election, meanwhile the leftists keep building their statist nightmare brick by brick.
They didn’t build the welfare state in 4 years, and it sure as hell isn’t going to be undone in one administration. That’s the truth.
While we’re waiting for God to help us, we have to help ourselves by voting for the only guy who can beat him.
You play the hand you are dealt.
Conservatives couldn’t unite behind one candidate, so we ended up with Romney.
Right now the ONLY choice is Obama or Romney.
Any conservative should consider that a vote not cast, or cast for a third party candidate may be THE vote that helps Obama get reelected. Just remember the Bush v Gore election — 500 votes made the difference!