Vail Daily letter: Rogue government
July 15, 2015
"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive" (Sir Walter Scott); and the Supreme Court, the third branch of government, became entangled in this legislative spider web with its latest construction of the Affordable Care Act and the English language itself. Like Obama and his myriad of executive orders, the Supreme Court now has legislated, via judicial construction, and amended the law into something contrary to its expressed provisions. Federal subsidies to defray or diminish premium costs were expressly made available to exchanges established by the states, where now as a result of the latest Supreme Court decision that provision has now been amended to allow subsidies for both state and federal exchanges.
The rationale for the court's reconstruction of the statute is based upon what Congress really intended, rather than what they manifested and represented to the public, i.e., that subsidies were only available to state exchanges. This all sounds familiar when compared to what Mr. Obama represented, but really covertly intended: You can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan, etc. The court overlooked or ignored the real intent of Congress regarding this provision, and that was to encourage or coerce the states into setting up their own exchanges by offering them the incentive of subsidization from a larger resource pool. It was simply disingenuous and an inane reach for the court to say that Congress mistakenly omitted the federal exchanges from the largess of subsidy. The Democrats in Congress, to a man, did not know what was in the bill, nor even read it, when they enacted this social legislation. In other words, the intent of Congress and Obama was to impose their "nanny state" agenda on the American people. The Affordable Care Act has very little to do with "affordability" or "care" as we now know. I also note that the court previously adjudicated the penalty for non-compliance as a "tax," and therefore bootstrapped the law into constitutionality. Ergo, imposing a tax on someone for his failure to purchase something is inimical to the very meaning and spirit of the Constitution as we read it in plain English.
The most egregious impact of the latest court's massaging or spin is its effect upon the trust of the people in government itself. Where the common citizen is effectively notified of the expressed provision of a law in the daily conduct of his life, and the law does not really mean what it (in plain English) says, then the result foments a distrust in the rule of law by those accountable to it. Especially is this so when those common and everyday citizens learn that the main architect of the law (Gruber) purposely "practiced to deceive" them, because of their presumed and perceived stupidity. In keeping with this pattern of deception, the court fabricated its own "intent of Congress" to again bootstrap this statute into legality. From its inception to adjudication, this Affordable Care Act is the product of corruption and deception by a government turned rogue, and even its title is misleading. It is dismaying that the Supreme Court was more concerned about the "intent of Congress" rather than what the American people were led to believe by the manifest provisions of the act itself. And therein lies the loyalty and commitment of the court to Congress and not to the people it supposedly sub-serves. The Democrats own the ACA and its tortured history from the halls of Congress, to the desk of the White House, and now to the bench of the Supreme Court — you may have gained a political victory, but at what cost to the American people!
Trending In: Letters to the Editor
- Arson on the mountain: Vail’s 1998 arson fires at Two Elk were country’s worst eco-terrorist attack
- Standoff near Breckenridge between police and armed suspect
- Fire is burning north of Dotsero, near Sweetwater resort
- Aspen girl speaks out in video about alleged rape
- Hahnewald barn’s proposed first move would cost $390K, take up 12 parking spaces in downtown Avon