States sue to end Obamacare

[PainRack]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/27/twenty- ... acare.html

Led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel, the lawsuit said that without the individual mandate, which was eliminated as part of the Republican tax law signed by President Donald Trump in December, Obamacare was unlawful.

"The U.S. Supreme Court already admitted that an individual mandate without a tax penalty is unconstitutional," Paxton said in a statement. "With no remaining legitimate basis for the law, it is time that Americans are finally free from the stranglehold of Obamacare, once and for all," he said.

The U.S. Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the Trump administration would defend the law in court.

Blinks...... Ok.... This is a strategy totally out of left field here....

From a plain sense reading, it doesn't make sense but it IS true that the mandate passed as a taxation to make it consitutional. To me however, that would just mean striking the mandate from the law as unconstitutional.... It's... Interesting to consider they can just remove the whole law and the regulation of the market because they made one portion of the law illegal..

[bilateralrope]

Is anyone in a position to fight against this lawsuit ?

Because I can't see Trump sending any lawyers to defend against it. So, unless others have standing to intervene, Obamacare is dead because the judge will only be hearing from those opposed to Obamacare.

[Crossroads Inc.]

pretty much my worry as well.
Trump has the power to end all sorts of Obama acts simply but not bothering to defend them in court.

[Simon_Jester]

If it succeeds, I'm pretty sure the only path to health care reform is single-payer.

Which I suspect I'll be pointing to twenty years from now as an excellent example of why blocking the closer-to-you paths to a widely supported social change is a good way to channel the pressure into paths further from what you wanted.

[Captain Seafort]

If it succeeds, I'm pretty sure the only path to health care reform is single-payer.

Which I suspect I'll be pointing to twenty years from now as an excellent example of why blocking the closer-to-you paths to a widely supported social change is a good way to channel the pressure into paths further from what you wanted.

Or it's an excellent example of getting exactly where you want to end up, without it being obvious to the vast hordes who a) don't like it and b) voted you into the White House. Trump, IIRC has a long track record of banging the drum for a US NHS right up to the point that he decided that attacking Obamacare was an essential part of a successful election strategy.

[Simon_Jester]

This theory falls prey to many of the same problems that all the other "Trump is playing twelve-dimensional hyperchess" theories do, sadly*. Trump has made so many frankly stupid decisions that he could have avoided, including some that have at least an outside chance of sending him to jail. A real subtle mastermind could be accomplishing his objectives without the sheer mass of feculent rottenness Trump brings to the table.
________________

*(Yes, sadly; I'd like to think he's a secret super-genius who is genuinely trying to achieve something good, I just don't buy it).

[Captain Seafort]

I'd like to think he's a secret super-genius who is genuinely trying to achieve something good, I just don't buy it).

Super-genius? No. On the other hand he's a very long way from being the idiot some people like to portray him as - he is, after all, objectively smarter than Hillary Clinton by the simple measure that he's in the White House and she isn't. I also don't think he's trying to "achieve something good", at least not by some universally applicable definition of "good" that probably doesn't exist anyway. What I think is certain is that he's acting in ways that will (or he believes will) further his own interests, either in some objectively measurable way or by stroking his ego. Being able to say in six or seven (or possibly only three) years "I brought universal health care to the US where Obama failed", regardless of how much carnage and misery are caused along the way, would certainly fulfil the latter criteria.

[PainRack]

I'd like to think he's a secret super-genius who is genuinely trying to achieve something good, I just don't buy it).

Super-genius? No. On the other hand he's a very long way from being the idiot some people like to portray him as - he is, after all, objectively smarter than Hillary Clinton by the simple measure that he's in the White House and she isn't. I also don't think he's trying to "achieve something good", at least not by some universally applicable definition of "good" that probably doesn't exist anyway. What I think is certain is that he's acting in ways that will (or he believes will) further his own interests, either in some objectively measurable way or by stroking his ego. Being able to say in six or seven (or possibly only three) years "I brought universal health care to the US where Obama failed", regardless of how much carnage and misery are caused along the way, would certainly fulfil the latter criteria.

Except there is no political plan to actually sign a Beveridge or other form of public health Care system. Medicare for all is the only option being discussed, but it's a Democrat plan and hence unable to get through a Republican controlled Congress and barring some huge twist, most of the senate seats up in midterm aren't for vulnerable Republican seats. So, at best a Blue house and a much more contested Senate where the R lose their majority.

[Simon_Jester]

I'd like to think he's a secret super-genius who is genuinely trying to achieve something good, I just don't buy it).

Super-genius? No. On the other hand he's a very long way from being the idiot some people like to portray him as - he is, after all, objectively smarter than Hillary Clinton by the simple measure that he's in the White House and she isn't.

As a teacher I would caution you against trying to judge people's intelligence (or for that matter competence) by an examination that contains a single pass-fail question, even if that question is competitive.

That works well for single-variable things (strongest weightlifter, fastest runner, tastiest pie-baker). It doesn't work so well for intelligence, which is very much multi-faceted, and where the same skill set succeeds or fails depending on many complicating variables.

It's like trying to judge which of two three-mile routes through suburban streets is "fastest." So much depends on the vicissitudes of traffic and stoplights that you don't reliably learn anything from a single experiment.

I also don't think he's trying to "achieve something good", at least not by some universally applicable definition of "good" that probably doesn't exist anyway. What I think is certain is that he's acting in ways that will (or he believes will) further his own interests, either in some objectively measurable way or by stroking his ego. Being able to say in six or seven (or possibly only three) years "I brought universal health care to the US where Obama failed", regardless of how much carnage and misery are caused along the way, would certainly fulfil the latter criteria.

The thing is, that would require Donald Trump to be capable of the subtlety of saying "I created such a mess that other people said "fuck Trump" and fixed it, and I get credit for this." Which in turn requires a bit of lowering of the ego, because one has to admit that one made the mess in the first place. Trump seems too busy pretending he never makes messes- narcissism.

[The Romulan Republic]

This theory falls prey to many of the same problems that all the other "Trump is playing twelve-dimensional hyperchess" theories do, sadly*. Trump has made so many frankly stupid decisions that he could have avoided, including some that have at least an outside chance of sending him to jail. A real subtle mastermind could be accomplishing his objectives without the sheer mass of feculent rottenness Trump brings to the table.
________________

*(Yes, sadly; I'd like to think he's a secret super-genius who is genuinely trying to achieve something good, I just don't buy it).

I've said many times that Trump's one true skill is as a con man/showman. He knows how to play the system, and the media. It doesn't remotely excuse the numerous ways in which he's an utterly vile person-in fact it probably makes them much worse, because it allows him to be vile semi-effectively-but it is a legitimate skill that he possesses.

Edit: But yes, the persistent idea that Trump is actually secretly working some brilliant master plan towards some greater good is at best wishful thinking, and at worst obfuscation of the threat he posses which dampens the opposition. Trump deliberately plays to this, by the way- how many times have we gone through the "Oh, he's finally acting Presidential, maybe he's turned over a new leaf" routine, only for him to revert to form within days or hours? He contradicts himself constantly in part, I think, as a deliberate tactic to confuse the opposition.

If he's working towards a greater goal, its him as dictator for life of a Russia-style American oligarchy, where big business, government, and organized crime are effectively indistinguishable.

[Captain Seafort]

As a teacher I would caution you against trying to judge people's intelligence (or for that matter competence) by an examination that contains a single pass-fail question, even if that question is competitive.

Sure, but we're not talking about a single pass-fail question, we're talking about dozens of pass-fail questions per test, in a test that then has to be repeated tens or hundreds of millions of times, with the correct answers changing each time, the weighting of each question changing for each test, and the weighting of each test varying depending on location until you get to the final answer. The result is something very close to your traffic analogy.

The thing is, that would require Donald Trump to be capable of the subtlety of saying "I created such a mess that other people said "fuck Trump" and fixed it, and I get credit for this." Which in turn requires a bit of lowering of the ego, because one has to admit that one made the mess in the first place. Trump seems too busy pretending he never makes messes- narcissism.

Agreed, and I certainly don't think that would be the presentation, more like "Obamacare failed because it was inherently fundamentally flawed, my system will work". The bottom line is that I'm not convinced that Trump's views on universal healthcare have changed, not least because of that ego of his - "my views on a subject are always the right ones because they're mine". He simply changes his public views and actions depending on what he thinks is most likely to achieve his desired outcome (which may on occasion simply be to provoke much wailing and gnashing of teeth among the opposition for his own amusement).

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, the Dems are slowly, grudgingly coming around to single payer. I dare say if Obamacare does get killed this way, and if we get a blue Congress, it'll force the issue, and we'll probably see a single payer bill voted on in Congress within a few years.

Of course, if we don't get a blue Congress, then Obamacare will die, nothing will replace it, and thousands upon thousands will die, and millions go bankrupt, because they can't afford decent health care.

[Soontir C'boath]

This opinion piece on the Washington Examiner seems to suggest that although the penalty would be zero, it actually means everyone fully complies with the mandate and therefore remains constitutional. Though I'm not sure about his conclusion about how no injury will be cause. With the penalty lifted, premiums will certainly rise although I guess it can be argued that since one would voluntarily buy a health plan, they agree to it.

[Simon_Jester]

As a teacher I would caution you against trying to judge people's intelligence (or for that matter competence) by an examination that contains a single pass-fail question, even if that question is competitive.

Sure, but we're not talking about a single pass-fail question, we're talking about dozens of pass-fail questions per test, in a test that then has to be repeated tens or hundreds of millions of times, with the correct answers changing each time, the weighting of each question changing for each test, and the weighting of each test varying depending on location until you get to the final answer. The result is something very close to your traffic analogy.

Yes, and the entire point of the traffic analogy is that a complex, multivariable system cannot be usefully measured by gauging a single yes/no binary outcome.

I mean, is Trump somehow smarter because the Democratic Party hasn't taken the liberty of spending decades and millions building up a cottage industry entirely around the promulgation of "Crooked Donald" memes? Does it make Trump smarter that he has, and has always had, enough hush money and attack-dog lawyers to crush and silence people who would otherwise be accusing him of crimes, whereas Clinton doesn't?

The thing is, that would require Donald Trump to be capable of the subtlety of saying "I created such a mess that other people said "fuck Trump" and fixed it, and I get credit for this." Which in turn requires a bit of lowering of the ego, because one has to admit that one made the mess in the first place. Trump seems too busy pretending he never makes messes- narcissism.

Agreed, and I certainly don't think that would be the presentation, more like "Obamacare failed because it was inherently fundamentally flawed, my system will work". The bottom line is that I'm not convinced that Trump's views on universal healthcare have changed, not least because of that ego of his - "my views on a subject are always the right ones because they're mine". He simply changes his public views and actions depending on what he thinks is most likely to achieve his desired outcome (which may on occasion simply be to provoke much wailing and gnashing of teeth among the opposition for his own amusement).
[/quote]

[Simon_Jester]

[note, the second half of 'my' post is an accidental repost of Seafort's; a mod deleting it would be welcome.]