Obamacare.........hitting the buffers?

President Obama's Health Bill, officially known as the Affordable Care Act, is under scrutiny by the US Supreme Court. Seldom do the mechanics of our governmental system reveal so much about our system of checks and balances than during debates like this. In the process of such scrutiny, the character of the Court is laid bare while efforts to influence decisions by both the President and the Legislature are stripped of their shrouds.

The President is actively and unashamedly seeking a favorable decision with respect to the constitutionality of the Act which is popularly called Obamacare. He argues that the Court is bordering on Judicial Activism by even suggesting the Act might be illegal. At the heart of the matter is whether obligating citizens to purchase health care insurance is in violation of the Constitution. Most Americans agree that the government does not have the power to obligate people to enter into any commercial contract and that Obamacare does just that. Indeed, the political right further argues that the Act as written is but another example of government's expanding efforts to create a welfare state and to impinge upon individual rights.

The Court's current review of the Act leads directly to a link between judicial review and judicial activism. The Act is the signature event of O's first four years in office. His record is slim save for Obamacare. If that is thrown out as unconstitutional, O will have to struggle to not only defend his record, but to mount a credible campaign for   reelection. Any negative action against the Act, or parts of the Act, exposes the Court to charges of playing politics. This of course is an ever present threat to any sitting court. You will recall the last incident of this nature when the Court decided that George Bush won the Florida primary and thereby gave him the popular votes to win the state and the election.

In a finer point of law than the above, if one aspect of the Act is declared unconstitutional the entire Act can be scrapped. This is partly because the Act was written without an exclusivity clause stating that in effect if any part of the Act is declared illegal, the remaining parts shall remain valid. This leads to another aspect of the Act that has not been much discussed.

Namely, Obamacare as a piece of legislation is one of the worst on record. It is too long, to complex, to quickly written and has too many authors. It is a piece of junk legislation that has many redeeming qualities, but needs to be revised, edited, shortened, made consistent, properly costed and above all made clear. Government economists have recently put a price to Obamacare concluding that it is considerably more expensive to implement than originally thought. Yet, O is hanging on to the Act as if it were a life jacket in a stormy sea.

More than all of the above, Obamacare frightens the daylights out of everyone who fears that the US is becoming a welfare state. Its political philosophy is strongly leftist and strongly favors giving more assistance to not only America's poor, but to America's professionally poor. To those who follow a life style characterized by living on handouts and public funds without being gainfully employed. This expanding class of American citizens is becoming increasingly worrisome.