President Obama's decision not to seek review by the full appeals court will likely speed up consideration of the matter by the high court in its 2011-12 term that begins next week. A ruling could come by late June, in the middle of the presidential campaign.He's a gambling man, that's for certain.
Tracking through your links: I agree that the individual mandate was a bad way to go about it, but I don't know enough about commerce cases to really make an intelligent comment. I'm wondering why they didn't require states to require insurance, the way they did with the 21-year-old drinking age?
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, if the Courts strike the individual mandate but leave the law intact, that would run contrary to what the insurance companies want; they needed the mandate to help their bottom lines.
I think P. Obama has come a long ways since he first was elected.
ReplyDeleteWhen you consider that 44% of people reporting income do not make enough to pay Federal taxes, declining incomes, high unemployment, out of control health care cost and people in general want a national health care program we can all live with, I think he knows what he's doing...to get everyone covered, save money and create jobs...I haven't see anything to the contrary.
By the way, it appears our jobs governor may not be as interested in jobs as he claims when you see one of the largest and most important employers in the State and nation (Oshkosh Trks.) needing help that he apparently isn't giving them.