Overthrow the Judicial Dictatorship: The Scalia dissent demonstrates why the fight for traditional values cannot and must not stop

Commentators have missed the real significance of Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the gay marriage case. He calls the decision a judicial “Putsch,” an attempt to overthrow a form of government—ours. His dissent, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, was written “to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.”

His comment about the Court using the kind of reasoning we find in a fortune cookie is a funny line. But there is much of the Scalia dissent that is not funny and which serves as a warning to the American people about what the Court has done to us.

Scalia understands the power and meaning of words and he chose the word “putsch” for a specific purpose. One definition of the term means “a secretly plotted and suddenly executed attempt to overthrow a government…” Another definition is “a plotted revolt or attempt to overthrow a government, especially one that depends upon suddenness and speed.”

Hence, Scalia is saying this was not only a blatant power grab and the creation of a “right” that does not exist, but a decision that depends on public ignorance about what is really taking place. It is our system of checks and balances and self-rule that has been undermined, he says.

In that sense, he is warning us that we need to understand the real significance of this decision, and go beyond all the commentators talking about “marriage equality” and “equal rights” for homosexuals. In effect, he is saying that the decision is really not about gay rights, but about the future of our constitutional republic, and the ability of the people to govern themselves rather than be governed by an elite panel making up laws and rights as they go.

Scalia’s dissent cannot be understood by listening to summaries made by commentators who probably didn’t read it. Although I may be accused of exaggerating the import of his dissent, my conclusion is that he is calling for nothing less than the American people to understand that a judicial dictatorship has emerged in this country and that its power must be addressed, checked, and overruled.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading....

King v. Burwell Decision Doesn’t Change That Obamacare Remains Unworkable, Unaffordable and Unpopular

Today the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the administration to allow Obamacare subsidies to flow through HealthCare.gov. This is a disappointment for the rule of law and for the states that have fought to keep some of Obamacare’s flawed policies out of their states.

While the administration and Obamacare supporters attempt to convince the American people that it is now smooth sailing for Obamacare, nothing could be further from the truth.

Despite the decision, the problems with Obamacare are real and not getting better. The law’s flawed foundation continues to make Obamacare unworkable, unaffordable and unpopular.

As my colleague Ed Haislmaier skillfully points out, “The complexity and cascade of adverse effects are the inescapable byproducts of major flaws in the legislation’s basic design.” For instance, the complexity of the tax credits has resulted in two-thirds of those receiving subsidies, having to repay some portion of the subsidies they received, according to H&R Block.

Nothing in the court’s ruling will change this moving forward. Each year individuals wishing to claim a subsidy will have to estimate their income for the year in advance. Any miscalculation, specifically underestimating their income, necessitates a repayment to the IRS.

     Select Your State     Alabama     Alaska     Arizona     Arkansas     Delaware     Florida     Georgia     Illinois     Indiana     Iowa     Kansas     Louisiana     Maine     Michigan     Mississippi     Missouri     Montana     Nebraska     New Hampshire     New Jersey     North Carolina     North Dakota     Ohio     Oklahoma     Pennsylvania     South Carolina     South Dakota     Tennessee     Texas  Utah     Virginia     West Virginia  Wisconsin     Wyoming 

In King v Burwell, the Supreme Court could decide that ACA subsidies are no longer available to individuals in the 34 states that chose not to set up a state exchange. Americans affected by such a decision will need access to more affordable coverage. Select above to see how much you could save if Congress removed the ACA insurance regulations that are driving up the cost of coverage.

Today, a majority of the Supreme Court chose to overlook the clear language of the statute. As Justice Antonin Scalia noted in his dissent it is “quite absurd” that Congress meant to allow subsidies in the exchange established by the federal government when it expressly limited those subsides to state-run exchanges. This flawed ruling allows the administration to continue making the law, rather than enforcing it.

The law continues to be unaffordable for everyday Americans. Obamacare’s costly insurance regulations have made coverage more expensive. The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the subsidies to flow through HealthCare.gov only helps a few million people pay for coverage leaving millions more facing higher, not lower, health care costs.

Even now, double digit rate increasesare being submitted for 2016. These trends fuel the mounting budgetary pressures facing the law, as my colleagues Robert Moffit and Pat Knudsen have well documented.

Via: Daily Signal

Continue Reading....