• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: A Devastating Blow to Obamacare

    Obamacare has suffered a devastating blow. On Friday, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the individual mandate in President Barack Obama’s signature health care legislation is unconstitutional. With its ruling, the court affirmed the principle that the Constitution means what it says—Congress does not have unfettered power to force the American people to comply with any and all dictates it creates.

    The federal government’s argument in favor of Obamacare’s individual mandate, in contrast, is without limit—and it’s a position that the court strongly rejected:

    The government’s position amounts to an argument that the mere fact of an individual’s existence substantially affects interstate commerce, and therefore Congress may regulate them at every point of their life. This theory affords no limiting principles in which to confine Congress’s enumerated power….

    The federal government’s assertion of power, under the Commerce Clause, to issue an economic mandate for Americans to purchase insurance from a private company for the entire duration of their lives is unprecedented, lacks cognizable limits, and imperils our federalist structure.

    The Obama Administration wasted no time in decrying the ruling, reasserting its argument that the individual mandate is constitutional—cleverly calling it an “individual responsibility” provision and hanging its hat on an earlier decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals which upheld the law. But the significance of last week’s opinion cannot be easily undone with clever wordsmithing, spin—or claims of partisanship, given that one of the authors of the ruling, Judge Frank Hull, was appointed by President Bill Clinton.

    The Heritage Foundation’s Todd Gaziano and Robert Alt explain what the decision means for the President and for Obamacare’s future:

    In short, the Obama administration has lost its battle to delay review of the individual mandate until after the 2012 election. Until today, there was at least a chance that the Supreme Court would pass on the case until after its forthcoming term, but now, with a split between the Eleventh Circuit and Sixth Circuit, the High Court will have little choice but to take the case and resolve the fate of the forced-purchase mandate. After over a year of delaying tactics, the Obama Administration has no more options to slow-walk the constitutional end-game for the mandate.

    Our best estimate is that the case will be argued either in late March or in April 2012. The Court will issue its decision near the end of its term in June, during the presidential candidate nominating season.

    Though the Eleventh Circuit only struck down the individual mandate and related must-carry provisions, it could be the thread that unravels the sweater. And the Supreme Court’s decision can’t come soon enough. The more America learns about Obamacare, the worse it becomes.

    Obamacare has far-reaching consequences for all corners of American society, the economy chief among them. In addition to the unconstitutional individual mandate, Obamacare includes more than $500 billion in new taxes, burdensome new paperwork for business owners, and penalties for companies with more than 50 workers that do not provide employees with a mandated level of health coverage. And with the added costs Obamacare brings, the nation’s publicly held debt will be $753 billion higher at the end of 2020.

    Heritage’s Kathryn Nix writes, “Heritage’s Center for Data Analysis simulated the overall effects of the new law on the economy and found that Obamacare would result in reduced investment in the U.S. economy and a loss of 670,000 job opportunities every year.” With 9.1 percent unemployment and an average duration of unemployment hitting a record high of 40 weeks, the last thing the U.S. economy needs is another anchor weighing it down. As Heritage analyst Curtis Dubay explains, the law “will slow economic growth, reduce employment, and suppress wages. These economy-slowing policies could not come at a worse time. [Obamacare] tax increases will impede an already staggering recovery.”

    To date, 28 states have challenged the constitutionality of Obamacare in court. A federal circuit court has struck down a central pillar of the law, holding that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. The judges have affirmed a truth that Americans already know: When Congress passed Obamacare and the President signed it into law, they crossed a constitutional line in the sand. Fortunately, the courts are holding that line, and now it is up to the U.S. Supreme Court to make it final.

    Quick Hits:

    • President Barack Obama’s approval ratings have hit a new low of 39 percent. He begins a three-day bus tour of the Midwest this afternoon.
    • At least 69 people died and more than 180 were wounded in a wave of more than a dozen bombings and shooting attacks in Iraq on Monday. They occurred on the halfway mark of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
    • British Prime Minister David Cameron promised to review all government policy to tackle the “slow-motion moral collapse” he believes led to last week’s riots that swept the nation.
    • Nouriel Roubini, an economic adviser to Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, says that Karl Marx was right about capitalism self-destructing. Watch the video.
    • Join Heritage today at 11:00 a.m. ET for a special live event: National EMP Recognition Day: The Threat That Can’t Be Ignored. Click here to watch online.
    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    76 Responses to Morning Bell: A Devastating Blow to Obamacare

    1. D. White says:

      Finally a court who recognizes when the Constitution is being trampled on. May the Supreme court be as wise. Hopefully this is the beginning of repealing of the Obama-Axelrod socialistic agenda and a return to constitutional based government.

    2. Eric says:

      Great news. However, I wonder how this court decision can be applied to the FATCA legislation. I am an expat American living in Belgium and I was advised by my bank that they will not allow me to open/maintain a securities account. As a result I have had to sell all of the shares I held.

    3. bevrly LaCross says:

      about time!!! does this also mean the states can get their soverignty back? example, we do not want the epa to regulate us, we can do it ourself?? just saying bev

      • Bevrly, You are absolutely correct!!! When I am elected President this unconstitutional government program will be eliminated. If your state wants to have a EPA it is there right to. But we have to get the federal government out of the way of business so Americans can get back to work. For more information about my plans on getting America back on track visit http://albertmorzuchforpresident.com

      • Chris Powers says:

        The best way for the states to gain their Power back and not be held hostage by the Federal Government by means of "sweet deals" and appropriation promises, is to repeal the 17th Amendment.

    4. Mike says:

      The biggest joke was the obama supporter who said that if it doesn't pass it will be unfair because others will be paying for other's healthcare. One of the tenets of obamacare was to increase medicaid. Who does he think pays for that? obamacare is a farce.

    5. John Stewart says:

      It is refreshing to hear the judiciary address the commerce clause and how Obamacare "imperils our federalist structure". It will be extremely interesting to see how the Supreme Court handles this issue. Will it be as an activist or as a representative for the Constitution? The future reputation of this body lies in very turbulent waters. One can only pray that the Constitution weighs heavy on the minds of the liberal judges.

      • Jyrine says:

        A sound step away from this socialist/communist black dog. A good move in starting the clean-up from the disgraceful Obama blight on the land. Hurah!

      • William Chesson says:

        It is going to be a game changing decision since they are being forced to do their (lifelong job) and either support the constitution, or completely throw out everything Americans have worked for since the founding of this great country. I am afraid that they will rule against the American people's will, and if they do, it will trigger a backlash so servere that America as we know it will cease to exist! I pray that this is not the case.

        • John Stewart says:

          I fear that there is truth in what you say. I base this on the appointment of a non judicial activist to a post that requires vast amounts of experience in Constitutional law. This seems to have gone the way of extinct species. A moderate amount of common sense would suffice, it is too bad that lacks also.

      • Bill says:

        The government ignores the Constitution. It will just ignore the Supreme Court . In past days, lower federal courts rulings were binding until the appeal but this government has ignored the lower rulings and kept seeking to expand its roots during the appeal process.

    6. Jim Delaney says:

      Very honestly, leaving the matter of "resolving the fate" of the individual mandate to the Supreme Court does not give me any comfort at all. I trust these nine imperious, unelected and unaccountable black-robed oligarchs who more often than not champion judicial supremacy over constitutional supremacy as much as I trust a rattlesnake or a Marxist.. SO, in the event that SCOTUS once again flouts the Founders' clear meaning and intent, the States MUST be prepared to invoke their 10th Amendment authority to nullify, failing which we the people MUST assert our right of civil disobedience.

    7. ThomNJ says:

      "To date, 28 states have challenged the constitutionality of Obamacare in court." – sadly, New Jersey is not one of those, in part because we have a RINO for a governor (notwithstanding the fact that he is doing an decent job so far).

    8. Stephen Hanna says:

      Probably Justice Kennedy will make the final decision in this case and I think that even he says that the Constitution is a living everchanging document. And to some younger people that I know of, the US Constitution is considered unimportant and should be discarded! Stephen Hanna, Sarasota Florida

      • Dean says:

        Young people consider the constitution to be unimportant because they do not know what it is. They have never studied it in school and have no idea what it says. If you don't believe me, asked them.

      • John Stewart says:

        I think if the founding fathers thought this was a living document, they would have provided erasers.

    9. Stephen says:

      The individual mandate has been struck down for the time being, but would companies still have to comply with the law if they have more than 50 employees?

    10. Mary P. says:

      This is one step towards helping our freedom, but there are so many other rules and regulations in Obamacare, none good for the citizens, and if it were good for us, they would not have excluded themselves, and their buddies. If the Supreme Court does not rule in our favor, we have a corrupt Supreme Court. And Obama needs to go for sure.

    11. REXHANDSOM says:

      Only a Liberal oops a Progressive would have thought otherwise… that darn pesky Constitution just gets in the way…ok…..ok… more work needs to be done on the Supreme Court …waiting for the ONE'S Second term….ok all better…

    12. Joe says:

      Really? You mean we finally got a non-activist ruling from an American Court? I must step back and ponder whether or not this actually happened or if it is nothing more than a temporary respite from the ongoing assault upon Americans and American Freedoms launched by the progressive left years ago.

    13. Whicket Williams says:

      The price of freedom is eternal diligence. Shame, Americans have been sleeping for 100 years, and lost everything to those willing to take it.
      And, those who pretend to be your friends steal the most.
      FDA EPA Mitt, Rick, Ect Ect

    14. dave says:

      When (if?) the issue is decided by the Supreme Court, I wonder how the wise latina and the law professor who never practiced law will decide?

    15. Laurie Bluth says:

      It's about time someone in the court system upheld the Constitution! Let's hope the now liberal Supreme Court stands by it.

    16. KC - NM says:

      Getting government out of our lives is a priority and this court decision on Obamacare is a start. We do not need big government and past results have shown that larger government is not effective and certainly not efficient. Granted, not all of this is Obama's fault but his actions and lack of planning over the past three years has generated a huge mess that will take years for this country to recover. Reducing the size of government, reducing the influence of tax based employee unions, and reducing the entitlement culture (except SS and Medicare) will be significant. We need leadership in the Whitehouse and Congress that will plan and implement change that will result in recovery, growth, job growth and significant gains in our infrastructure. Yes we can – and yes we must in 2012.

    17. Jim says:

      How would the elimination of the indivdual mandate serve as the "thread that unravels the sweater"?

    18. Robert A Hirschmann says:

      Finally!! It seems to me that the will of the people means nothing to Obama. At last the courts got some common sense and voted in our favor. When will the dictator to be in the white house learn that he cannot overrule the people of the United States when we get together and oppose him?

    19. This is a defining moment in our history-we are at a cross roads and the path taken forward will heavily depend on the Supreme Court's decision. It will determine whether this grand American experiment will go on or end. Our federal government is unique in that it's powers come from the states (not the other way around) and hence the people-where the people govern. Individual liberty is protected brilliantly by the Constitution. If we continue to allow our government to supersede the Constitution, our individual liberties will dwindle. What defines America is a government that enables it's citizens to take care of themselves and succeed-not to oversee our lives. At this point will America continue to be America? If the Supreme Court sides with Obama-then the sweater that is the United States will hit a major snag that might not be able to be repaired. We have an amazing country-but only if it's citizens don't forfeit their liberties for bribes under the name of "entitlements".

    20. John Eley says:

      There is a good chance that all this discussion about the power of Congress under the commerce clause, the one used by Congress in justifying the individual mandate, will become moot if the Supreme Court follows the patterns established under the New Deal. In that pattern the Court defers to the judgment of Congress and allows any reasonable regulatory system to stand. If the Court finds this system to be reasonable and holds that the individual mandate is integral to it, it is likely to uphold it. If it treats this mandate as less than central to the system it could uphold it using the broad interpretation of the tax and spending authority relating to the general welfare. In any case the Court is not likely to be persuaded by the individual liberty argument since it can treat the fine as a tax and skirt the core issue. This being said it is unlikely that the Court will find the Act unconstitutional because it does not accept the mandate. This shifts the fight to the next election where it belongs.

    21. This is a defining moment in our history-we are at a cross roads and the path taken forward will heavily depend on the Supreme Court's decision. It will determine whether this grand American experiment will go on or end. Our federal government is unique in that it's powers come from the states (not the other way around) and hence the people-where the people govern. Individual liberty is protected brilliantly by the Constitution. If we continue to allow our government to supersede the Constitution, our individual liberties will dwindle. What defines American is a government that enables it's citizens to take care of themselves and succeed-not to oversee our lives. At this point will America continue to be America? If the Supreme Court sides with Obama-then the sweater that is the United States will hit a major snag that might not be able to be repaired. We have an amazing country-but only if it's citizens don't forfeit their liberties for bribes under the name of "entitlements".

    22. Curt Krehbiel says:

      Obama Care is, and we hope "was", the proverbial camel's head in the tent. Obama Care is the first major step toward a total socialist system. Its importance was obvious in view of the manner in which it was enacted with the coercion and bribes and nighttime sessions. We can only hope and pray that the supreme court will reject it as well.

      • Bill says:

        But there are STILL people who don't see this, Curt. Will the willingly blind elect the next president again? WE can not depend on the Supreme Court to do its job, already. The wise Latina said that the court does not create law <wink, wink>

    23. Frank says:

      "The government’s position amounts to an argument that the mere fact of an individual’s existence substantially affects interstate commerce, and therefore Congress may regulate them at every point of their life. This theory affords no limiting principles in which to confine Congress’s enumerated power…."

      Exactly right! Either we return to a Constitutionally limited Federal Government that works as the servant of the people, or the intents of our Founding Fathers are disregarded, the Constitution is trashed and we wind up with a totally out-of-control Federal Government with no bounds on it & which will make the people the servant of the government. We are at a turning point in American history for good (the former option) or evil (the latter option).

    24. Sarasota John says:

      If the King has unlimited power under the commerce clause will that force the citizens to fight the King as they did the last time on the tea tax? Or are we just so many sheep these days and how much longer can this go on?

    25. George R. Waterman says:

      It would be interesting to analyze the political makeup of the state governors AND attorney generals in the 28 states that are pursuing a legal judgment against OBAMACARE and the 22 states that have not pursued such a legal judgment; I believe your audience would find this political breakdown quite interesting.
      Sincerely and respectfully, Russ

    26. carol,az says:

      One, "Audacity of failure," is coercion blocked.
      As stated the law blocks; " economic growth, staggering increase to our debt" but the primary fact is:

      As viewed by this administration, the new proletariat, in this case ( the middle class) the minions, will be forced to pay for, "all cost" for the new age "change we can believe in" by the sultan.
      It will further mutates increased govt control over our lives in an unprecedented way, morphing the Federal Govt larger, for all agencies created, to run this nightmare.
      It shreds our freedom of choice, unimaginable in a Democracy.
      It alters every aspect for freedom.
      It dominates and regulate every aspect for personal choice, from a power structure that has already dominated our lives breaking freedom for choice, that has damaged America and her liberty's' for what she stands for.
      Thank You Mike Brown we all need some good news as we wait for the S.C. decision.

    27. Paul Skibba says:

      I dont know who Mr Roubini is but he not very astute. If Capitalism fails here it will be because of the conscious destructive policies of the Socialists and Marxists that are in command in the present administration.

    28. toledofan says:

      The law is the law, I know that sometimes it can be intrepreted differently, but, in this case the decision should have been 3-0. Anyways a win is a win and it's great to see the system work. The sooner this law gets reversed, the better for the overall economy and peoples health care concerns as well. Withouit the mandate the system can't work, so, hopefully this law will become a memory.

      • Bill says:

        IF the Law were the Law, the decision WOULD have been 3-0 and the Supreme Court would be 9-0 but the law is a tool to be used by the politicians and the courts are willingly used.

    29. cathy says:

      why is no one considering The Physicians for a National Health Program? pnhp.org. they have all the details spelled out and it sounds like a good alternative to Obamacare or doing nothing.

    30. Gary says:

      I hope it stands but am still leery. Obama has shown little regard for the Constitution, the business community, or the average American taxpayer. I am concerned he will find a way to disrespect and disregard a court ruling that is not in keeping with his agenda, no matter how unpopular that agenda may be.

    31. C. Hyatt says:

      No this is not great news! Everyone needs to remember that Nancy P. and Gang passed this law without it even being understood what was in it. And, we have on many occasions heard that the "Health Care Bill" was dead. Not so. Obama and his minions will just deem it passed and deem that the courts have no jurisdiction. The only way to reform the Healthcare law is to change the current administration in 2012. He and his band of merry thugs are just going to ignore the constitution, laws and courts. Or, he will figure a way to legislate this through regulatory agencies and by-pass congress. This is not over yet. As we start to lose coverage and carriers and options it will be seen that reform is needed. However, the current Health Care law is not that.

    32. Dave S. says:

      Who has the stronger legal argument, the 6th or 11th circuit? I pray the 11th circuit, but with the 4 to 4 conservative / liberal split in the supreme court, it will all come down to Kennedy's opinion. Unless a future congress and the president repeal Obamacare, this one man will shape the future of American society and the financial strength of this country for the foreseeable future.

    33. Russell Errett says:

      There is more to the constitution than the commerce clause. The first is the pursuit of happiness. Although it is not a specific item in the constitution, what is the purpose of life? The next is “promote, not provide, but promote the general welfare” When the government over regulates and over taxation, does that not hinders the general welfare. “Just compensation” is completely ignored. Since governments are a monopoly and must be regulated. “the constitution” The government is also a service industry. The service industry “government and private” must not exceed what the goods industry can afford. Otherwise debt will result.

    34. J E Houser says:

      The 11th Circuit Court was correct. But the devastatingly correct part is the common reference to "lines in the sand." That is, most unfortunately, the correct discription of that "piece of paper" called "The Constitution." Sadly it amounts to less and less each day. It is strange indeed that as I was growing up in the 1930's I could walk virtually anywhere in Richmond Va and have NO problems unless I misbehaved. And as went to the western part on Virginia, no one there or in Richmond talked of, or complained about, the federal government until the draft was started. Washington was simply a place to have fun and look at wonderful buildings and exhibits.

    35. Bud says:

      Now it's time to IMPEACH OBAMA. The courts will do away with OBAMACARE.

    36. spongekill says:

      Why is the Constitution suddenly so sacred, when 8 years ago you got accused of being a traitor for pointing out the myriad ways in which the Bush Administration was ripping it to shreds? Politics seem to be completely disconnected from history.

    37. Libusters says:

      DR. SEUSS 2011:
      I do not like this Uncle Sam, I do not like his health care scam. I do not like these dirty crooks, or how they lie and cook the books. I do not like when Congress steals, I do not like their secret deals. I do not like ex-speaker Nan, I do not like their 'YES, We Can.' I do not like this spending spree, I'm smart, I know that nothings free. I do not like their smug replies when I complain about their lies. I do not like this kind of HOPE, I do not like it…nope, nope, nope

    38. Gene L Flatt says:

      Obamacare is the current vehicle by which the socialists are advancing the destruction of capitalism as outlined by Marx, Alinske and Cloward/Priven. This administration has brought the point home again and again.

    39. christian blake says:

      Auto insurance is NOT required in the state of new Hampshire. There goes the governments argument about individual responsibility!

    40. Allan Robertson says:

      I don't care what the llth Circuit Court of Appeals–or any other court–did. In the end, it's the nine old men and women on the US Supreme Court who will make the ultimate decision. And with OBama's liberal appointees on it, it could go either way. Don't hold your breath that it will go the right way.

    41. Bob Davidson says:

      I wrote a response to todays Article (8/15/11) posing the question of states rights (Tenth Amend.) against Obamacare, Re: States duty to protect and defend its Citizens. The Constitution under Art. 1 Sec. 8 enumerated powers agreeing with this article and legal president which started back in the mid 1800's.
      After waitnig for my writing to appear I called The Heritage Foundation and was told it would take up to 7 days before the article i wrote would appear – Absolutely Ridiculus!

    42. Loretta Bates says:

      I agree with John Stewart's response. In reading the message, there were many "typo's" or what were those marks? They were confusing.

    43. Eric Nisula says:

      Let's just pray the conservative members of the Supreme Court continue to eat their
      Wheaties, and get enough sleep and exercise!

    44. RME KRNL says:

      My question is, what do we do if the Supreme Court UPHOLDS ObamaCare's individual mandate as constitutional?

    45. The Farmer says:

      Why didn't those who claim to be Americans in Congress stop this fiasco befor it ever got to the Presidents desk by demanding Judial review; since everyone who has any sence at all knew it to be unconstitional?
      Do you think any of those RINO's are one with us?

    46. Jim Delaney says:

      Leaving the final decision to an unelected, unaccountable Supreme Court which seems to value judicial supremacy over constitutional supremacy is not reassuring. If this nine-person Politburo somehow decides in favor of the individual mandate, then the States MUST nullify the decision and, therefore, Obamacare!!!!!

    47. Jill Maine says:

      I just recently heard that the most exciting and promising cancer research this year is some great success doctors are having in curing leukemia. They added that if it wasn't for a donation made by a family that lost a member to this disease they never would have had the funding for this break through. This is one reason our medical costs are so high but we used to have the money for research and development. That would vanish with obama care. And I think it had already started and that is why that one family came to the rescue.

    48. Howard Reed says:

      Hello America,

      Yes America, there is a God and he is still looking after his recalcitrant American children. My step-daughter called her mother this morning to ask if her doctor would take her. She is having a hard time finding doctors that take medicaid patients anymore. She was informed that the group my wife and I are in are no long taking medicaid patients. Fortunately, she did find a local doctor that does. Even dentists taking medicaid are far and few between. She found one taking on a first come first serve basis six medicaid patients a month . . . and ObamaCare hasn't even kicked in, but the medical profession are hunkering down. This is great news . . . now if only the SCOTUS will do the right thing and find the Communist clause in which the Bama & Company can force people to buy insurance on threat of penalty is unconstitutional.

    49. Ben C. says:

      Consider this – if human hospitals declined to be "Tax exempt" they would no longer be required to provide "free medical treatment" to those without insurance or those who scam the system. At first blush this seems inhumane but consider the reduction in overhead for the hospitals and increased tax revenues for local communities. The overall cost of health care will decrease given hospital systems are competitive (competition is a good thing). Once people realize the "free ride is over" reforming the insurance industry with oversight will make policies more affordable. And now we have created a mostly free market environment where having health insurance is a really good idea. And for those who are really desperate I am sure Democrats will be willing to create a fund with their own money to support these folks. It's a thought.

    50. Jeanne Stotler says:

      All the talk was how much lower premiums would be, etc. Well Part B premiums are up, supplement are up and many doctors are dropping Medicare and Medicaid patients as fast as they can. Hospitals are turning Medicaid and Medicare patients out before they are healed as someone decided that they would decide if the patient was well enough, this person is not a doctor,. Ever since DRG's (diagnostic related goals) was innaugerated we have had more readmmits then ever. Let's give the practice of Medicine back to the MD's & DO's and Insurance back to private enterprise. Then let's give BHO a pink slip on Nov.6,2012.

    51. Key Phrase: "…Congress may regulate them at every point of their life…"

      Motive: Bring the entire population down to poverty, cull out the good slaves and get rid of the rest.

      This motive is a core value of the Democrat Party-Hearty.

    52. Glen says:

      Hopefully, the members of the Supreme Court that Obama appointed will excuse themselves from any desision. He has tried to stockpile his choices for the court. We have a Constitution that he tries at every turn to bend for his own purposes.

    53. jan bussler says:

      I was a labor and delivery nurse for 25 years, worked primarily with able-bodied non-working multi-generatonal women receiving entitlements and illegal immigrants receiving free services and automatic citizenship. At 56 years old, after working 40 years, I pay over $600.00/month for health insurance. Can ANYONE explain how it is fair or just that my tax dollars should support ANOTHER 30 million people on Medicaid while my premiums continue to rise??? Can ANYONE explain to me what ever happened to taking care of the backbone of the population who was/is the productive class and has paid taxes their entire lives???

    54. cewest says:

      Hoo-rah! Finally Socialist – social management defined by gov. for gov is defeated! It is not enough though. Why? Because the essence of Socialism is NO SOVEREIGNTY OF the individual as "person" or as "person- business" the beginning of "The Declaration of Constitutional Principles"; including State and Nation; of Democracy as 'collective' actions by people…only if gov. declares the group-membership of the people – ie race, culture, amount of money, illegal (not a person crossing US Border without law which other, legal emigrants do obey), Never: the equal protection provision of the constitution that ALL LAWS must be applied uniformly; and more egregious — any of the 2600 Agencies and depart. of gov can write any regulation they want to..without regard to the Constitution or to the elected agents of "We the People" named Congress.

    55. Kyle says:

      May God bestow his grace on American citizens, and have the Supreme Court do what OUR Congress should have done in the beginning, and make this tragedy UNCONSTITUTIONAL once and for all!

    56. Carol says:

      While leftist intellectuals are not necessarily intelligent, in the case of Obamacare, they are in fact quite smart, smart as a fox that is. They really do understand that the costs of premiums cannot possibly be universally affordable while allowing anyone to wait until they are sick before they get insurance, or by requiring that every insurance policy covers every possible act of medical care that the most hysterical hypochondriac could imagine. The “idiocies” that make up Obamacare are, in fact, a very clever ploy to force private health care to be so universally unaffordable (meaning not just for the 15% currently without insurance but for all individuals and all employers) that there will be no choice for virtually everyone but to be forced to succumb to government controlled and financed health care.

      A comment made earlier today notes that an alternative plan has been offered by the Physicians for a National Health Plan. Although I do not agree with their premise that the only workable alternative is universal government-funded health care, they make a critical point that is virtually always overlooked: there is a very big difference between the government simply paying for each individual's health care, as is the case in France, and the government not just funding, but also controlling the actual practice of medicine, which is the foundation of what the Obama gang so desperately wants.

    57. Dr. H.D. Sinopoli says:

      In the words of Barry's wife…Michelle 'the bell'…for the first time, I'm proud of my country.

      Not really the 1st time but the first time since Barry settled in the White House

    58. charles watson says:

      What ever happen to freedom of choice? Auto insurance manditory, healthcare manditory. where does all that money go? I am 64 years old and i've been paying car insurance all those years. What do I have to show for it? 0. I could have bought a 300 thousand dollar home by now! One thing I will say, Obama Care has eliminated the need for drivers in all states to carry personal injury insurance, but I havn't seen my premiums go down one cent. I think the states are more worried about loosing insurance money than they are concerned about my health care. Just one vets opinion ! Let the people decide for themselves at the poles.

    59. CJM says:

      As the suits go into the different Federal jurisdictions, it will really depend on whether the ruling judge(s) are obama supporters—it seems that the merits of a case matters anymore when it pertains to obama's involvement. We KNOW obama's phoney healthcare bill is unconstitutional…so why don't the judge's rule that way. A waste of time and money just so obama can get his way. Impeach him.

    60. Peter Dayton says:

      This goes back to the Wickard vs Fillburn decision during the depression. It is unlikely that this decision would be reversed but it should. Never have there been so much judge made law that telling a farmer that they can not grow wheat to feed their family because it interferes with interstate commerce!

    61. This is a good first step. I am glad to see a court that has ruled on our constitution " not the Fake Political one" My hope is that the highest court of the land will follow up with a clear ruling based on our constitution and not political ideas based on our current administration.

    62. LINDA WEMPA says:

      IT'S ABOUT TIME, EVERYONE STARTS READING WHAT IT IS………..INSTEAD OF JUST VOITING A BILL INTO LAW……..MISTAKES, MISTAKES..I BET NO ONE HAS READ ANY OF IT..THE MEDIA NEEDS TO COME TO THE FORE, AND MAKE OUR GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OF THESE ACTIONS…I SAY IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT..NOW

    63. Blair Franconia, NH says:

      Stick a fork in Obamacare. It's done.

    64. Robert Van Deusen says:

      Looks like round three in the fight to prevent Obamacare from becoming law. I feel that if the conservatives along with the help of rogue liberals, we can end this sharade at the critical time of the 2012 Election. This would invariable leave President Obama with few, if any, accomplishments. Let the citizens rejoice.

    65. Humble Gent says:

      This is a well delivered article! Good job! Mike!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×