ACA Trooferism Roundup
By - Crucial point by David Strauss: “There is no need to resort to anything about Congress’s intentions or the ACA’s purposes – although if you did, the government’s case would be even stronger.” Which is another reason why the ACA’s opponents have invented a fictitious bizarro history of the ACA rather than relying on a textualist argument. There’s no conflict between when Congress was trying to do and what the statute says if you use any coherent or defensible theory of statutory interpretation. Timothy Jost has similar points.
- But it’s not as if the Supreme Court accepting this farcical argument would have disastrous consequences or anything.
- President, Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader, Secretary of State, Prime Minster, and Falklands War correspondent Jonathan Gruber is accused of over-billing the Vermont government for his services. I’m sure the fact that the only person remotely associated with the ACA who ever said anything that could be construed as saying that tax credits would not be available on federally-established exchanges stood to reap financial benefits from states that established their own exchanges is just a massive coinky-dink. Gruber remains the only person not affiliated with the Cato Institute who can authoritatively determine the meaning of the statute.
- I’ll have longer form on this later this week, but this list might as well begin and end with #3.
- Arkansas and Kentucky had the biggest drops in the number of uninsured people last year. Fortunately, thanks to the “constitutional law” of John Roberts 22 other states have remained free of this kind of corporate sellout.