|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 奥巴马政府阻止美国各州挑战奥巴马医疗法案的企图失败，两起指控该法案违宪的诉讼
将得到庭审机会
Legal Setback to Obamacare Batters Democrats as Midterms Loom
Friday, 15 Oct 2010 01:44 PM Article Font Size
By: David A. Patten
The double whammy of constitutional challenges in Florida and Virginia
against Democrats' massive healthcare overhaul on the eve of the midterm
elections is shaping up to have major implications in tight races
nationwide, political commentators tell Newsmax.
On Thursday, a federal district judge issued a stinging order rebuking
Justice Department attorneys for using "Alice-in-Wonderland" arguments
against a 20-state lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare.
Judge Roger Vinson, a Reagan appointee to the bench, ordered a trial of the
lawsuit to begin Dec. 16. Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum described
the ruling as nothing less than a "victory for the American people."
Adding to the administration's political woes: On Monday morning, arguments
in a similar-but-separate lawsuit against Obamacare, which was filed by
Virginia Attorney General and rising GOP star Ken Cuccinelli, are scheduled
to get under way in Richmond, Va.
The timing for the issue to make headlines could hardly be worse for
Democrats. Polls show the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
continues to be unpopular with voters.
The House passed the measure this year via the legislative maneuver known as
"reconciliation," a process generally reserved for bills focusing on
appropriations and the federal budget. Until now, Democratic leaders scoffed
at any suggestion they could lack the constitutional right to order all
Americans to engage in economic transactions not required by the states in
which they live.
Last October, a reporter had the temerity to ask House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
D-Calif: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant
Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi's imperious response was vintage Beltway hubris: “Are you serious?"
she asked, aghast. "Are you serious?”
Later, her spokesman told the reporter: “You can put this on the record.
That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
But so far, two federal judges have determined that question to be a very
serious one indeed. And Democrats fighting the adverse tide of this election
cycle may find it increasingly difficult to explain why they didn't focus
more of their political capital on creating jobs, instead of creating of a
vast new entitlement program.
Kenneth M. Duberstein, who was Ronald Reagan's White House chief of staff in
1988, notes that not a single Democrat is running ads this cycle touting
their support for healthcare reform.
Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold ran an ad that promoted healthcare
reform but did not specifically reference the legislation Congress passed.
"What I think is critically important is that it is one more indication that
Barack Obama overreached," Duberstein said of Judge Vinson's ruling that
allows the legal challenge to Obamacare to continue. "The liberals in
Congress, led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, overreached. They didn't fix
our healthcare system. They didn't control costs. As a result, they've
totally alienated a majority of Americans.
"The people understand that Barack Obama was elected to fix the economy," he
adds, "and not to tinker with the wholesale change of our healthcare system.
"To the extent that people care," Duberstein tells Newsmax, "and I think
they do, I'm sure this will have an impact. The only time healthcare reform
is mentioned in the debate is when Republicans are running against it, and
Democrats are running from it. That tells you something about the potency of
the issue in the political debate."
Both the Florida lawsuit and the one going to trial on Monday play into the
oft-repeated tea party message that liberals have expanded the reach of
federal governance beyond the constitutional limitations as established by
the Founding Fathers.
Matt Kibbe, the president and CEO of FreedomWorks, a conservative
organization that has supported tea party organizations around the country,
says keeping Obamacare in the news is bad news for Democrats, especially in
close races.
"I think it's going to make more clear that Nov. 2 is a referendum on
Obamacare, because as we proceed with the court challenge, we need to
continue to drive public opinion.
"But we also need a new Congress that is going to demonstrate its desire to
repeal and replace this legislation," he says. "That affects how the courts
think about these issues. If you look at the way courts make decisions, it's
always the case that public opinion matters."
Kibbe cites recent polls that show voters' two most frequent objections to
Obamacare mirror key talking points of the tea parties.
"One is that it's an overreach of big government, and government just
shouldn't get this involved in people's lives," Kibbe tells Newsmax. "And
two, that the country can't afford it.
"You would think that it would have been about something more personal… 'I
don't want the government between me and my healthcare,' or 'I'm worried
that my premiums are going to go up.' No, these are national issues about
the proper role of government, and that the government spending too much
money it doesn't have."
Kibbe finds that a hopeful indication the tea party message is resonating
with American voters.
McCollum tells Newsmax the recent rulings make opposition to Obamacare an
even better issue for conservatives on the campaign trail.
"I think that people are going to have to take note of this now and say,
'Look, this is serious,'" McCollum says. "We've said all along this is not
political, this is very fundamental."
McCollum adds that even Democratic attorney generals have expressed concern
about state sovereignty, as well as the requirement that all individuals
purchase healthcare coverage.
"I think we are making this case and will make it all the way through," he
says. "And this is not just political. Will it have some ramifications on
the elections? I think so, because I think it shows we have a meritorious
case.
"This is not frivolous, this is not political. It is a really serious legal
matter that will go to the United States Supreme Court and will be a very,
very important decision when it's read," McCollum says. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
