Rush explains the difference between Wide Receiver & Fast and Furious
By Patrick Hobin
June 25, 2012
Health care, illegal immigration, and Fast and Furious are going to be at the top of the agenda for what will be an historic week in Washington.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on President Barack Obama’s healthcare law and on Arizona’s immigration law, two huge campaign issues, Politico reported.
Congress will take up student loan rates and federal highway funding. Obama wants to keep loan rates from doubling and is urging Congress to fund federal highway programs. Laws covering both will expire June 30, according to Politico.
Also, the House is scheduled to to vote on whether Attorney General Eric Holder should be held in contempt of Congress for withholding documents in the “Fast and Furious” case.
Appearing on Fox News, U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa predicted that Republicans and Democrats would vote to find Holder in contempt of Congress.
Issa’s committee is seeking documents related to Operation Fast and Furious, which allowed guns illegally purchased in the U.S. to be smuggled across the border to track them to Mexican drug cartels.
“This has the potential to be a hugely consequential week for President Obama and the Democrats who run Washington,” Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, told Politico. “If Senate Democrats are able to reach agreements on student loans and highways, that will obviously eliminate two of the president’s talking points about congressional inaction."
Read more: http://bit.ly/KxZhvI
Read more: http://bit.ly/KxZhvI
Suspense: Obamacare Judgement Day?
by Guy Benson
June 25, 2012
- Scenario #1: The entire law is upheld - After all is said and done, the high court may conclude—as the majority of lower courts did—that Congress was acting within its powers under the Constitution when it required most Americans to carry health insurance or pay a penalty. That provision was at the center of the two-year legal battle, and if it survives, the rest of the law is likely to stay as well. Such a ruling would be a victory for Democrats and President Barack Obama, who had passed the biggest reworking to the health system since the creation of Medicare in the 1960s and faced the prospect of the court nullifying their effort. It would also avert disruption for hospitals, doctors and employers who have spent more than two years preparing for changes in the law. Even in this case, however, the law would face an uncertain future.
- Scenario #2: The insurance mandate is struck down, but the entire rest of law stays - This was the ruling of a federal appeals court in Atlanta last year, and the Supreme Court may choose to uphold it. In thisscenario, the high court would conclude that Congress exceeded its powers with the requirement to carry insurance or pay a penalty. But it would judge that provision separable from the rest of the law. This would be the worst-case scenario for insurance companies and set off a scramble for the Obama administration and supporters of the law to prove that it could still work...Politically, a ruling under this scenario would vindicate critics who called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandate an unprecedented overreach of federal power. Mr. Obama would face an election in a little more than four months with the nation knowing that a core part of the law he signed in March 2010 was found to violate the Constitution. Republicans would push ahead with plans to repeal the remainder of the law.
- Scenario #3: The mandate and two related provisions are struck down but the rest of the law stays - At Supreme Court arguments in March, the Obama administration, fearing the market chaos in scenario #2, argued that the insurance mandate was inextricably linked to two other provisions. Those provisions require insurers to accept all customers and restrict the insurers from charging more based on a person’s medical history. The administration said if the mandate were struck down, the other two provisions should go too. If the court adopts that position, it would mean that the principal aim of the law—expanding coverage to tens of millions of Americans—would be unlikely to be achieved. Republicans would feel vindicated and push to repeal the rest of the law.
- Scenario #4: The entire law is struck down - If the high court concludes that the insurance mandate is unconstitutional, it may agree with challengers that the only path is to invalidate the entire law. Such a ruling would unravel all the work by the health industry and local governments preparing for the law. It would be a painful blow to Mr. Obama and Democrats who spent so much time and political capital on their health-care overhaul. Yet it would also put pressure on Republicans. They could no longer talk about repealing what they term ObamaCare but would have to figure out what, if anything, to bring before Congress to replace it