Jump to bottom


1 Skip Intro  Jul 22, 2014 8:27:49am

The GOP is using the same game plan they’ve used to make legal abortion unavailable, birth control through employer proved health plans unavailable, money = free speech, corporations = people, so as “people” they have religious beliefs and the right to “donate” their money in a way past generations would have recognized as being bribes.

There’s nothing that’s going to stop them until they make the entire ACA completely unworkable. Then they’ll move on the eliminating Medicare and converting Social Security into a private sector program.

For a minority party they’ve had a hell of a run. If they become the majority party the world as you know it will change literally overnight.

2 Eclectic Cyborg  Jul 22, 2014 8:51:44am

Normally this would be an easy fix. You just pass an updated bill to correct the language, but because said bill would NEVER get through the House, that’s not going to work.

3 Eclectic Cyborg  Jul 22, 2014 8:52:41am

Oh. and $5 says the GOP starts immediately blaming Obama for messing up the wording and thus screwing the poor as a result.

4 Skip Intro  Jul 22, 2014 9:55:38am

re: #3 Eclectic Cyborg

Oh. and $5 says the GOP starts immediately blaming Obama for messing up the wording and thus screwing the poor as a result.

That’s a 100% certainty.

Isn’t there a Nancy Pelosi quote out there somewhere saying something about having to pass the bill to find out what’s in it?

5 ausador  Jul 22, 2014 9:57:13am

Interestingly the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals just reached the exact opposite conclusion today about federal exchange subsidies in a parallel case.

Justice Roberts already had the chance to kill the ACA and he instead sided with the liberal justices more than a full year before the law went into effect. What makes you think he is suddenly going to change his mind now that it would directly effect those already receiving subsidized insurance?

The Supreme Court has heard many cases that argued that some law or act should be be limited or null due to clerical errors in wording. In every case the precedent has been that they should be interpreted based on what the true intent of congress was rather than by the typo.

In this case many other parts of the act reference congresses obvious intent to create subsidized Federal exchanges. This ruling is ridiculous on the face of it and it will be overturned, don’t panic yet.

6 Randall Gross  Jul 22, 2014 10:03:25am
In a second decision on the same issue, a federal appeals court in Richmond on Tuesday ruled in favor of government subsidies for people signing up for Obamacare health coverage. That differed from a decision earlier in the day by a federal appeals court in the District of Columbia that went against the administration.
7 Skip Intro  Jul 22, 2014 10:09:27am

re: #5 ausador

Yes, it will be overturned, and yes, it will eventually make its way to the Supreme Court.

I wouldn’t bet against the Scalia/Thomas wing on this.

8 ausador  Jul 22, 2014 10:35:55am

re: #7 Skip Intro

Yes, it will be overturned, and yes, it will eventually make its way to the Supreme Court.

I wouldn’t bet against the Scalia/Thomas wing on this.

Again, the fact that an act or law has one incorrectly worded sentence does not change its intent if that intent can be correctly construed via the reading of the complete act or law. The Supreme Court has dealt with many such cases over the last 200+ years and has always ruled that Congresses intent when passing the law should prevail over some mistake in wording within it.

I doubt that even the more conservative Justices will really want to stand that precedent on its ear, to do so could be dangerous. If you start letting the use of an incorrect word or some minor typo become the enforceable law of the land where does it end?

That would practically guarantee that many more “accidental mistakes” would suddenly start appearing within the acts and legislation passed by congress. Neither party would ever be able to trust the other enough to vote on any legislation until the “one true and certified legal copy” of a bill had been proofread by committees, inspected by linguistic and legal scholars, encased in glass to prevent tampering, and then safely locked up inside Fort Knox!

9 Skip Intro  Jul 22, 2014 10:40:46am

re: #8 ausador

All I can say is that you have much more confidence in this Supreme Court than I do.

I hope you’re right.

10 TDG2112  Jul 22, 2014 11:29:25am

So, let me see if I understand this right. The Republicans went to court to prevent people in Republican states with mostly Republican representatives from getting low cost Health care. It is a HUGE case and will be on every news station and how around the country about how Republicans have done something to prevent people from getting affordable healthcare.

How else is that narrative supposed to run? There’s an election coming up. Maybe the Koch brothers can advertise this some more saying “look what Republicans did: they prevented you from being a slave (that is, getting care that you need) under Obamacare, isn’t that great?” and see it backfire on them as it did with all the rest of their ACA related advertising.

If they keep this up, Democrats could sweep the House long before the demographics make it a certainty.

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2021-06-05 2:51 pm PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Bucks County Man Indicted on Federal Charges for Assaulting a Reproductive Healthcare Clinic Escort PHILADELPHIA – United States Attorney Jacqueline C. Romero announced that Mark Houck, 48, of Kintnersville, PA, was charged by Indictment with a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which makes it a federal crime ...
1 hour, 51 minutes ago
Views: 62 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 4 •
Indigenous Americans Ruled Democratically Long Before the U.S. DidDemocracy: it was older and more widespread than we thought. At the Oconee site, called Cold Springs, artifacts were excavated before the valley became an aquatic playground. Now, new older-than-expected radiocarbon dates for those museum-held finds push back the origin ...
2 weeks, 4 days ago
Views: 1,357 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2
Tweets: 3 •