Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Come for the ruling, stay for the hearing

Another bad week for ObamaCare. Yesterday, a federal judge in Florida struck down the constitutionality of the federal government requiring its citizens to purchase health care insurance.

A federal judge ruled that Congress violated the Constitution by requiring Americans to buy insurance as part of the health overhaul passed last year, and said the entire law "must be declared void."

With his ruling, U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson set up a clash over whether the Obama administration still has the authority to carry out the law designed to expand insurance to 32 million Americans.

Looming, now, is a visit to the Supreme Court.

And in other related news, Richard Foster, chief actuary for Medicare and Medicaid, speaks truth to power last week in a congressional hearing and knocks everybody's socks off when questioned about two pillars of ObamaCare.

Widespread tittering ensues...

Not exactly a ringing endorsement, now is it?


drozz said...

and right on cue, Ezra Klein cited one ambiguous paragraph in the ruling as an example of judicial activism.

imagine that. journolistic activism calling out judicial activism.

anyhoo, what concerns me is that klein totally disregarded the other 77 pages of the decision.

and just for the record, vinson's ruling is a bit more long-winded then hudson's; however, vinson did up his snark, e.g. the footnote on page 76.

Road Dawg said...

This guy will never make it in politics.

Harrison said...

The irony is that the judge cited Obama's own words that everybody must be forced to buy in to make it work even though now Liberals are trying to argue this isn't the case. The result is Liberals foaming at the mouth that their own words are being used against them. Oh, the irony.

B-Daddy said...

Nice video, except I take exception to the Congressman calling it Obamacare. Call me old fashioned, it's ok for little old blogggers to so opine, but I don't like the member of Congress using the term. The lack of formality and decorum bothers me. The debate can be conducted with more seriousness.

Chris Taus said...

If Democrats had done it that way, no one would have to buy health insurance, but our taxes would go sky high to pay for the new healthcare entitlement. The government would then be in control and would decide how much doctors make and how to ration care when there are fewer doctors. That is what the democrats really want anyway.

SEO Manchester said...

Hey man I've really had a blast reading up your blog I've found them really interesting, Can't wait for your next post! Speak again soon.

Bed Bunks said...

Subject of this post is very interested. I was very pleased to find this site. I would like to say thank you for this great read!!