
The Affordable Care provisions for “mandatory insurance” are insignificant compared to what some court decisions have done. Court decisions allowing private property to be essentially confiscated so that a commercial venture can exploit their land certainly act to put government enforcement into commerce that aids particular interests. Government support of forcing landowners to provide land or leases to utilities or highways also act similarly.
We are taxed to give military contractors huge amounts of government largesse even if we don’t agree with the policies that seem to require such expense. Men have been enslaved in the military via the draft laws.
We pay taxes on property to educate other people’s children and pay school administrators far out of proportion to their contribution to education.
We pay extra property taxes so that religious and “patriotic” organizations and “non-profit” hospitals do not pay property taxes.
SCOTUS decisions to magically convert corporations into humans have worked all kinds of mischief and with the Citizens United decision made most of us who are not obscenely rich irrelevant in political speech.
The court and Congress have already done things which make the Affordable Care Act seem irrelevant by comparison. This is selective ire aided and abetted by partisan attorney Generals of states who are intent on helping Mitch McConnell make certain his primary job of making sure Obama is denied a second term is not wasted effort.
The real irony of all of this is that the partisan attacks on this in the courts are only possible because of the partisan obstructionism in Congress to better legislation by Retrograde GOP.
SD AG Jackley will be on SDPB-Radio Midday today. Some questions you might ask below. but which almost certainly will not be asked by SDPB moderators.
Anything related to the points made in prior paragraphs, but also these.
1. What information from the National Republican headquarters convinced SD AG to join the suit?
2. Is Jackley willing to allow people to die at hospital emergency doors because they have no insurance or finances? If not, why does he think it is inappropriate that all have some kind of insurance coverage?
3. Does Jackley think it is inappropriate that offspring under 28 be covered by affordable insurance held by their parents?
4. Is Jackley provided health insurance or health insurance support as part of his state employment?
5. Does Jackley think we all should pay extra taxes so that Congress Critters can get nearly free unlimited health insurance?
Surely you can think of a few more questions for our partisan SD Attorney General.
*** Stay tuned even if SCOTUS processes are as mystifying as quantum physics to you-- Doug Wiken
Recent Comments