Its a kind of a forced private- dollar subsidy in which those who are forced to subsidize receive no benefits ( at least as is articulated in the Act). Technically you should be able to go to the ER and get free health care. It is also important to note that not only does the threat of having to pay the subsidy coerces a person to purchase insurance, it is insurance AS DEFINED by the government, not freely chosen in an expressed contract of insurance freely offered by the insurance company. The government decides what the insurance covers and how.
As Mark would say, if Obamacare survives, America is dead!
Must the eventual solution to this creeping collectivism be another American revolution? Hope not, but if it is, count me in!
RS - you may consider the first 30 minutes of the program as including just the first two segments might be cutting it short a bit. I'm a Levin Podcast listener who downloads the previous nights audio to my phone then listens to it on the way to and from work the following day. I thought last nights show was great. Thanks for posting the audio!
There are hundreds of legislative ways to deal with healthcare issues in America yet 60 Democrat senators, without even one exception, chose, not a bipartisan solution, but a tyrannical unconstitutional solution and supported a monumental bill that they had not even read.
Do not be seduced into thinking that this is just an issue regarding spiraling American Healthcare costs in the private sector or via the Medicare and Medicaid federal programs that are way beyond sustainable projections. Nor will this be just a bill that provides healthcare insurance for all. This bill is really about about providing the Federal Government power without limits under the guise of a bill to solve unsustainable costs that could have alternative legislative solutions well within Constitutional boundaries. If this bill survives and as significant as will become the demolition of American healthcare, as we know will be, such a fate will pale against the backdrop of future legislative decisions that will compromise thousands of freedoms we currently take for granted. There will be no stoping a Congress and Executive when they decide to pursue policies that were historically deemed unconstitutional and off limits. Everything the Founders decried against and protected the Republic against will be lost through one SCOTUS decision that significantly expands the limits of the Commerce Clause to an almost unlimited degree; and this could possibly occur by only one vote. In fact, even if a future Congress and future Executive strike down ObamaCare the legacy of this court could be one that advances tyranny beyond anything imagined by our freedom loving Founders. Therefore the decision from this court will ultimately not be just about the cost and regulation of Healthcare in America; more significantly it will be about the loss of freedom for all Americans... forever.
Mr Paul makes the above argument as a matter of guiding principle, yet Mr Levin ridicules him repeatedly, through baseless conjectures and notions, though Mr. Paul has verifiable proof that he won't violate the constitution.
Obama was so disgusted that George didn't take his word on what tax means. So now Obama is redefining definitions, because the Merriam Dictionary just doesn't get the definition right in the eyes of King Obama.
What an outstanding legal mind Mark has! If the attys arguing for the states are anywhere near as sharp as Mark the mandate will be struck down.
Does anyone know if there is a specific day in June when the SC closes or does it vary according to case load?
Constitution - What's that? - Obama decreed ->>>
I wonder if Levin saw this yet ?
Question: since when have Marxists given a rip about the Constitution or logic?
The real issue is not logic or past case law, but whose side the Court members are on. They have no bones about legislating from the bench and we should be able to safely judge the outcome of this case right now, don't you think?
Kagan - Obama
Sotomayor - Obama
Alito - GW Bush
Roberts - GW Bush
Breyer - Clinton
Ginsburg - Clinton
Thomas - HW Bush
Kennedy - Reagan
Scalia - Reagan
That's 4 for Obamacare and 5 against, based on party affiliation.
Which of them are swing votes or tend to be more Constitutional?
 Please forgive the snark/sour grapes. Let's pray for wisdom instead, shall we?
I thought it was funny hearing some liberals say that losing the argument by the supreme court could be a good thing because it might rally the liberal base for Obama lol...
So Obama rejected it's a tax but now his attorney is going to argue to the supreme court justices that it is a tax because they think that would grant them-the federal government the authority for the individual mandate.
Honestly, before this evening's discussion I anticipated much of what was said because I am a regular listener. Nevertheless, tonites's show was one his best. Anyone who wants a quick Constitutional tour should link onto the Levin website and download this evening's audio.
Do you want to know what our Founding Fathers were like? Look no further than 'The Great One' Mark Levin. He is our modern day founding father and I love him dearly for what he does to educate all of us. God Bless Mark Levin....truly the great one indeed.