Ha. No wonder that schmo McKenna doesn't want you anywhere near him.
How much did Washington State piss away pursuing his legal gibberish theory? Try not to miss at least one public opportunity to tell him, "Told you so!"
That's the best explanation of the tax/mandate/incentive/whatever I've seen. Putting your own name in this post title is a new height of self-tootery that you probably deserve (maybe this once). No wonder McK fears you.
All that being said (and good job on calling it), Richard Posner has a nice, concise summary as to why the mandate could have been upheld on Commerce Clause grounds.
@3 -- I can't believe the Legislative Branch passed a law and advertised it disingenuously!
I've never heard of such a thing!
I don't suppose you remember all of Obama's noise about how he was winning on his accomplishments but losing on his messaging. What did you think he was talking about?
You should start writing articles now on the ways McKenna will fuck-up when he's Governor. Two or three years from now I look forward to more blog posts about how you were right and no one would listen.
Seems to me the result of all this could be for at least some states to enact single payer health care.
This would be because it is now in the interest of highly paid, but independent business owners to not have to pay the high costs of insurance or penalties.
@21 Yes, I did nail Goldmark v. McKenna. Before the case was even filed. Read my original posts, and the briefings and opinion, and you'll fund much of the same case law and conclusions cited.
True, as @16 points out, I have no legal training, and my lack of legal vocabulary and procedural knowledge often shows through my analysis. But I have a good legal mind, and I'm damn proud of my track record reporting on legal issues.
So is defeat a disaster for small business? Almost certainly not, though it may prove to be a disaster for NFIB’s main policy priority of low taxes.
The bill in fact contains substantial benefits (some might even say giveaways) for small businesses. That starts with a program already under way to offer special subsidies to firms with fewer than 25 employees that want to offer health benefits. As long as your employees earn less than $50,000 on average (law firms, medical practices, and other elite professional partnership are thus ineligible), you can get a tax credit to defray 35 percent of the cost of the insurance if you’re a for-profit firm, and 25 percent if you’re a nonprofit. When the law really gets rolling in 2014, those subsidies rise to 50 percent for for-profits and 35 percent for nonprofits.
Firms with fewer than 50 employees are also exempt from the “employer responsibility” provision of the law... That is supposed to deter firms from responding to the law by simply dropping existing insurance coverage. But the ACA doesn’t make small businesses pay that penalty.
Put the special subsidies and the exemption together, and the result is a law that’s pretty clearly a good deal for small businesses.
How much did Washington State piss away pursuing his legal gibberish theory? Try not to miss at least one public opportunity to tell him, "Told you so!"
Obama and Mck.....
what a bunch of ChuckleHeads.
Will Obama be apologizing to Goldy and George Stephanopoulos?
But seriously, good call.
Today Obama is reaffirming his position that it is NOT A FUCKING TAX......
And he said "you could go fuck yourself you pretensious douchedrip"
But a good explanation, nonetheless
Is that snark or irony?
I've never heard of such a thing!
I don't suppose you remember all of Obama's noise about how he was winning on his accomplishments but losing on his messaging. What did you think he was talking about?
You should start writing articles now on the ways McKenna will fuck-up when he's Governor. Two or three years from now I look forward to more blog posts about how you were right and no one would listen.
This would be because it is now in the interest of highly paid, but independent business owners to not have to pay the high costs of insurance or penalties.
I do tend to find astro physics best with a serving of annoying tripe.
I also nailed the 2004 gubernatorial election contest, about four months before Judge Bridges finally ruled, explaining in detail why Rossi's reliance on Foulkes v. Hays would ultimately doom his case.
True, as @16 points out, I have no legal training, and my lack of legal vocabulary and procedural knowledge often shows through my analysis. But I have a good legal mind, and I'm damn proud of my track record reporting on legal issues.
anybody there?
did you see Obama doubling down on the "ITS NOT A FUCKING TAX!" thing today?
comment?