tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14192095.post6582046095866043929..comments2024-02-07T02:14:50.146-08:00Comments on Dogwalk Musings: ACA And The CourtMari Meehanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09322012728807169863noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14192095.post-74848293903685274022015-06-26T07:58:04.861-07:002015-06-26T07:58:04.861-07:00For nearly twenty years I dealt with laws on a dai...For nearly twenty years I dealt with laws on a daily basis. Laws that had tension between and within them. It has always been the nature of the beast with federal and state law. The ACA has tension within...and that is not unusual. In fact, for a bill that is as long as this one, it is the norm. The ACA is crystal clear that the intent of congress was to provide monetary assistance to qualifying, low income entities. It is also crystal clear that if States did not set up their exchange, the Fed would set up an exchange that citizens of that State would use to acquire insurance. This was a compromise to take to take "single payer" off the table so the bill could move forward. I believe the court got it right....because, just I had to do on a daily basis, one has to look at the intent of law to resolve the "tensions" within and between bills. Most often, courts have resolved the tension somewhere in the US....and now the "tension" between one section and two or more sections of the ACA have been resolved. Your points that 1) this SCOTUS decision sets a precedent for legislative sloppiness and 2) the administration has somehow cheated here are completely off course. Neither is correct.LWRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17679721656623922252noreply@blogger.com