Lake Erie Conservative

thoughtful discussion(s) about issue(s)

Posts Tagged ‘Halbig v Sebelius’

… It Was Not Just the ObamaCrapCare Architect [#IRS Subsidies Rule]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Thursday,October 6th,2016

.. no , it was not just the architect of ObamaCrapCare ..

.. the IRS itself was in on the shenanigans …

.. an excellent column by Kim Strassel [WSJ] points out that the career staff at the IRS initially followed the law , to the letter . That meant that it would be subsidies in state – based exchanges ONLY . The situation changes when it was kicked up for political backing to the highest levels of the Service …

.. [h/t — WallStreetJournal/Opinion]..
.. [link] to the opinion ..
.. [h/t — NationalReview]..
.. [link] to the article ..

.. at that level , the chief counsel [a political appointee] and the Commissioner [ditto] had a very serious problem . Most likely , they got heavy duty heat from the ObamaCraps at the White House . Guess What Happened ?? ..

.. the ruling changed . by July of 2011 , the ruling came out in its final form , having it as subsidies for ALL … a couple of weeks later , Professor Jonathan Alter of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland , Ohio and Micheal Cannon of the Cato Institute came out with their famous paper … [– note — it is available from the Social Science Research Network , and there is a link , [here]]

Advertisements

Posted in body of law, legal opinion, legal question, personal opinion, tax question | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Today is A – Day [#Argument Day]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Wednesday,March 4th,2015

.. yep , it is Argument Day .

.. today , arguments are held at the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of King v Burwell . Yep , it is another ObamaCrapCare care ..

.. except in this case , it is damn serious . Given the actions of the Government , and , in particular , the Infernal Revenue Service , it is absolutely critical ….

.. the Government feels that they can re – write and re – interpret statutes as they see fit . No , they cannot . The precedent that was set in the ruling Chevron v NRDC [commonly called ” Chevron Deference] . The government has some latitude , but only so much latitude in calling a spade a spade . In other words , they cannot engage in creative writing by rewriting and reinterpreting a statute …

.. Professor Jon Adler [of CWRU] and Michael Cannon [of the Cato Institute] really hit a home run when they did the ground – breaking research on their paper . They really hit the nail on the head . The government went too far …

.. now , it is up to the U.S. Supreme Court . One part of the decision is to make the tough decision . The Government royally screwed up . Someone needs to hold them to account for it . The other is to actually hold the government to account …

Posted in communications strategy, constitutional opinion, legal question, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Victory for the Rule of Law [#IRS tax subsidies]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Friday,January 9th,2015

.. the ruling in Pruitt v. Burwell [Sebelius] came through the other day . Oh , Boy , it was a doozy , and it was a winner ..

.. [h/t — m.NationalReview.com]..
.. [link] to the legal ruling ..

.. Pruitt is another case that takes on the I.R.S. playing games with the federal exchange subsidies in ObamaCrapCare . The plain letter of the law does not allow for them . The I.R.S. tried to push this through , and people have fought them , tooth and nail …

.. this time , for the first time at the district court level , a district court judge has sided with the folks attempting to make the federal government hold itself to the plain letter of the law . Judicial doctrine gives the government a certain amount of leeway to implement a law . However , they are only given so much leeway …

.. this leeway [“Chevron Deference”] does require the Government to follow the law . Sometimes , the Government can be a little creative in its interpretation . However , it cannot go too far . If the Government does not follow the plain letter , text , and intent of the law , then un – uh …

.. that is what Pruitt v. Burwell has done . It has also done more …

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Big ObamaCrapCare Oops [#designer speaks intent]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Wednesday,August 13th,2014

.. oh , I bet the ObamaCraps in the White House have to be groaning at the outcropping of this ..

.. this guy , along with former Sens. Ben Nelson [now the head of the Natl Association of Insurance Commissioners] and Max Baucus [the US Ambassador to China] helped design and write the principal ObamaCrapCare bill . It is the one that originated in the Senate . They know the bill . Baucus was the principal author . This other guy was the co – author . Ben Nelson was one of the last votes to come on board , and why , among other things : …

.. there is no ” public option … ” , and

.. the tax credits are offered through exchanges established and controlled by states …

.. [h/t — HotAir.com]..
.. [link] to the speech …

.. It is also why the ObamaCrapCare bill has the Constitutional ” origination ” problem … All bills for the raising of ” revenue ” [taxation , as well as spending] are supposed to originate in the House of Representatives . This one did not . Whoops …..

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Victory with Halbig v Sebelius [#halbig v burwell]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Saturday,July 26th,2014

.. well , I think I had better get used to the new name …

.. the other day , a 3 – judge panel voted [2 to 1] to overturn the JRS powergrab in ObamaCrapCare and its subsidies …

.. [h/t — WallStreetJournal/Opinion]..
.. [link] to the opinion piece ..

.. contrary to liberal bleating , the ruling does not destroy ObamaCrapCare . It just upholds the law , as it was originally written . As originally written , ObamaCrapCare is a colossal mess . We are finding that out now , God knows …

.. the problem is the design of the artifice . The whole house of cards is an economic monstrosity . It is designed by politicians with no experience in the private sector . These idiots never had any idea of how to make a payroll , how to deal with a bureaucrat [from the outside] …

.. simple , it is designed not to work . Nice try , dummies ! You flunked the test !! …

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

… An Important Case [but not at the US Supreme Court]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Monday,April 7th,2014

.. what initially I am referring to was Hobby Lobby v Sebelius . That was the current case that was at the U.S. Supreme Court only a couple of days ago …

.. this is a different case . It is one that is at a court at a different level , at the D.C. Federal Court of Appeals . It is Halbing v . Sebelius , one of a number of legal challenges that are still in the works to ObamaCrapCare . Jonathan Keim of National Review ‘ s Bench Memos has an excellent take of the legal combat [here] …

.. if I were an ObamaCrap , I would be sweating this one , just like if I were them , i would be sweating out the outcome of Hobby Lobby at the U.S. Supreme Court . From the verbal combat , from what I have read in various places , this one is likely to come out in favour of halbig in a 2 to 1 decision . You might ask …

.. Did not POTUS  pack the D.C. Appeals Court with 3 of his nominees , courtesy of Dingy Harry Reid ? Yes , he did . Appeals Court cases are heard by a 3 – judge panel , first . Then , after that , if  the Court so decides , it can hear it ” en banc . ” Usually , that means the full court , but not always . Also , the U.S. Supreme Court will be well aware of this case . More likely than not , the Supremes could opt to hear the case themselves , thus taking it away from the full court …

.. I would think and bet on a 2 –  1 decision for Halbig . Also , I think that the Supremes will act to take the case away from the full court , given the immorality of the court packing done by Dingy Harry Reid ….

Posted in constitutional opinion, legal opinion, legal strategy, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »