Unlikely. The right has been much more respectful of the court on this issue. When Bush got slapped by the court he simply said he disagreed and moved on. I really doubt you will see Romney for example go after the SC in any campaigning. Obama would have. To the left the entire credibility of the court hinged on this. They already were attacking over CU.
Karma. The right created an entire strategy based on the Warren Court and alleging judicial activism when they were, I dunno, de-segregating schools. Let's not pretend the modern conservative was a big friend of the SC until recently.
Fair enough. I think I'm being equally harsh on both the right and left here. I just think it is beyond dispute that at this stage in history, the right is much more accepting of the court's rulings than the left.
The court has a conservative majority. Duh. That is really a non-point. But you are absolutely right that the republicans had plenty of time to fix healthcare and refused to do it, and they're throwing tantrums now that Obama came along and actually had the balls to get it done.
Right, when he didn't have the house/senate anymore. Obama was the first who was willing to use his political credit to knock it out.
It's a tax that we have to pay to private companies. makes sense..... you liberals should be more scared than you realize.
I agree with you. Build on single-payer instead. Congress has the power to tax and spend for a national health-care system, and the Supreme Court will not stop it.
I recall a lot of angst among Republicans about judicial activism and using that as a part of their campaign rhetoric. And when you have justices adding political comments to unrelated rulings, you can maybe understand why the left felt the way they do about that institution before this morning.
It's exactly what I would expect from America these days. Can't have universal care provided via government - that's socialism!!! So instead we pay more to prop up an industry and make some folks fantastically rich in the name of the "free market".
If the broccoli market suffered from the same assymetric information problems as the insurance market, sure. Adverse selection and moral hazard on broccoli markets is pretty low though.
I had a meeting with a friend who runs a heart hospital yesterday. We were talking about the upcoming ruling and he pointed out his (Los Angeles) window toward a cluster of tall buildings in Glendale. "See those buildings? All insurance companies. Think they're making a good profit in their business?" he's a very conservative guy, but he sees only one solution to the health care system: "take medicare down to age zero." On the ruling itself, I wish it wasn't 5-4. I don't like Kennedy's logic, though is sounds very lofty of course. We do exist. We consume air, water and food. We create waste products. We also use the health care system sooner or later. I just don't see a "fundamental change" in how government relates to citizens in this law.
