The big news is not the spray painting of the Jefferson Davis monument in Richmond. It’s the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in King v. Burwell, which upheld the constitutionality of the federal subsidies upon which a not insignificant portion of Obamacare rests.
Or, we can adopt the language of the dissent, from Justice Scalia. This is no longer “Obamacare.” It’s “SCOTUScare.”
Cheeky, to the end. But Scalia went further:
…this Court’s two decisions…will surely be remembered through the years. The somersaults of statutory interpretation they have performed (“penalty” means tax, “further [Medicaid] payments to the State” means only incremental Medicaid payments to the State, “established by the State” means not established by the State) will be cited by litigants endlessly, to the confusion of honest jurisprudence. And the cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.”
My friends on the right are glaring at Chief Justice Roberts, and wondering what sort of horror George W. Bush appointed to the Court. It’s a question we will have years to debate.
But let’s get to the meat of the issue: relying on the federal courts to undo the ACA was always a triple bank shot. Obamacare (or SCOTUScare, if you prefer), has always been, and will always be, a political issue that has to be settled at the ballot box.
Voters have moved both the House and Senate more to the Republican column since the ACA’s passage. But not enough to build a veto-proof majority.
Only a party change in the White House will give Republicans the ability to end Obamacare. And yes, this assumes a great deal — that the GOP retains its congressional majorities…that it actually has the stones to vote for full repeal if one of its own is president…and that it is willing to endure the brickbats that will accompany any repeal effort.
Open questions, every one.
Update (J.R. Hoeft): Statements are starting to roll in….
First up, the man who led the legal charge against ACA from the commonwealth, former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli:
“For the second time the Supreme Court has completely ignored the plain text of the law and legislated from the bench to save Obamacare. Now, more than ever, Congress must take action to repeal this law, root and branch. Obamacare is unaffordable, unworkable, and unfair, and Americans overwhelmingly oppose it. Republicans in Congress promised the voters they would repeal Obamacare, and now they need to keep their word. Republicans said their budget would repeal Obamacare, and now they need to use reconciliation to pass full repeal and send it to the president’s desk.”
The irony, of course, is that while Cuccinelli has been fighting the good fight against ACA, his successor is the man who failed to uphold Virginia’s statutes and paved the way for no resistance from the state, current Attorney General Mark Herring. He’s practically giddy about today’s ruling:
“I’m really proud that the court agreed with us, but mostly I’m relieved that millions of Americans dodged a bullet. This lawsuit was a legal Hail Mary that was just playing games with the healthcare of nearly 300,000 vulnerable Virginians, nearly 9 million Americans, and the stability of the health insurance markets in at least 34 states. In Virginia, the average annual assistance at stake was more than $3,000. That’s the difference between having healthcare and going without for hundreds of thousands of Virginia families. That’s life changing. The stakes were too high for us to sit this one out, so we fought and won at the 4th Circuit, and now we’ve fought and won at the Supreme Court.”
Most statements are effectively a variation on these themes. Ultimately this comes down to what you believe: should the state mandate healthcare coverage, make you pay for it, and penalize you if you don’t get it? Should it regulate coverage, making it more expensive, not allow you to choose your doctor, incentivize some businesses to game the system in order to not pay for coverage, cause other businesses to not offer coverage altogether, and cause still others to go completely out of business? Now it’s up to you, the voter. This can either be tolerated and accepted or overthrown like the garbage that it is. SCOTUS has actually given conservatives a gift. The question now becomes whether or not they have the skill to use it.
Perhaps our best indication of will comes from Rep. Robert Hurt:
“Today’s Supreme Court decision is disappointing news for the people I represent, so many of whom continue to be negatively impacted by the President’s healthcare law. We continue to see employers being forced to cut working hours for their employees; we see families being unable to keep healthcare plans they have always counted on; and we see unsustainable increases in insurance premiums, co-pays, and deductibles.
“Today’s decision does nothing to change these facts. We in the House of Representatives must continue to pass measures that will minimize this fundamentally flawed law’s effects on the American people while we work to replace the President’s healthcare law with substantive reform based upon market-oriented principles.”
