Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="soonerwings" data-source="post: 1830133" data-attributes="member: 8035">After reading the opinion of the court, I get it.&nbsp; Some part of me acknowledges that they made the right call.&nbsp; Personally, I&#039;m happy that the SCOTUS shot down the commerce clause argument and called the individual mandate a tax.&nbsp; They are correct that the Constitution does allow for taxation to encourage economic behavior.&nbsp; I don&#039;t like it, but they&#039;re right.&nbsp; If tax incentives can be given for getting married or buying a house, then they can be used the other way as well.&nbsp; I think they did well in calling a spade a spade.&nbsp; It&#039;s a new tax.&nbsp;&nbsp; We all know how popular new taxes are when it comes time for an election.&nbsp; I&#039;m also happy that they struck down the ability to coerce states into signing on to the expansion by threatening the withholding of all medicaid funds if they didn&#039;t.&nbsp; It wouldn&#039;t surprise me to see a lot of states bow out of this one in the long term.&nbsp; A lot of states will probably find it fiscally unsustainable.EDIT:&nbsp; I also really liked the following statement from Justice Roberts in his opinion: &quot;Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences oftheir political choices.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="soonerwings, post: 1830133, member: 8035"] After reading the opinion of the court, I get it. Some part of me acknowledges that they made the right call. Personally, I'm happy that the SCOTUS shot down the commerce clause argument and called the individual mandate a tax. They are correct that the Constitution does allow for taxation to encourage economic behavior. I don't like it, but they're right. If tax incentives can be given for getting married or buying a house, then they can be used the other way as well. I think they did well in calling a spade a spade. It's a new tax. We all know how popular new taxes are when it comes time for an election. I'm also happy that they struck down the ability to coerce states into signing on to the expansion by threatening the withholding of all medicaid funds if they didn't. It wouldn't surprise me to see a lot of states bow out of this one in the long term. A lot of states will probably find it fiscally unsustainable. EDIT: I also really liked the following statement from Justice Roberts in his opinion: "Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices." [/QUOTE]

Verification