Saturday, June 30, 2012

obamacare a pyrrhic victory?

An interesting piece in the NYT. I suspect many have not seen how this using undermines the coercive powers of the federal government on the states. The ruling also seems to stop the abuse of the commerce clause. this obviously lefty lawyer seems upset that the federal government is being reigned in. I think that is a great thing. bo's overreach using the spa may also be reigned in. That's really good news. In potentially ominous language, the decision says, for the first time, that such a threat is coercive and that the states cannot be penalized for not expanding their Medicaid coverage after receiving funds. And it does so in the context of Medicaid, which Congress created and can alter, amend or abolish at any time. The states knew the terms of the deal when they joined — and those terms continue to be enshrined in the federal code. This was the first significant loss for the federal government’s spending power in decades. The fancy footwork that the court employed to view the act as coercive could come back in later cases to haunt the federal government. Many programs are built on the government’s spending power, and the existence of an extraconstitutional limit on that power is a worrisome development. The government told the court that longstanding laws, like the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, contain clauses that condition money on state performance of certain activities. The decision leaves open the question of whether those acts, and many others (like the Clean Air Act), are now unconstitutional as well.

No comments:

I Support Lord Black