Supreme Court expresses skepticism over constitutionality of health care mandate

Two years after a hard-fought victory, President Barack Obama’s signature legislative accomplishment — the health care reform law — seemed at risk of being struck down as the Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday.

“I think it’s very doubtful that court is going to find the health care law constitutional,” NBC’s Pete Williams reported after watching the two hours of oral argument before the high court. “I don’t see five votes to find the law constitutional.”

While it’s difficult to know for certain after Tuesday’s oral arguments, the conservative justices appeared skeptical of the constitutionality of the law’s requirement that uninsured people purchase insurance.

Court observers caution that one shouldn’t read too much into what any particular justice says during oral arguments; a justice will sometimes test out a theory and his comments don’t necessarily indicate which way he or she will decide.

Court signals it will decide constitutionality of insurance mandate

But there were few encouraging hints for the Obama administration from Justice Anthony Kennedy, a potential swing vote on the court, or from any of the conservative justices.

Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, arguing the case for the Obama administration, tried to defend the requirement that uninsured people purchase health insurance. But he came under constant pressure from the conservative justices.

As the Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of the health care law, the Obama team shifts strategies to gather support.

The mandate is backed up by a financial penalty the law imposes on uninsured people who choose to not buy insurance. This provision takes effect in 2014.

Justice Antonin Scalia, who upheld broad federal power in the court’s 2005 Gonzales v. Raich medical marijuana decision, “had nothing good to say about this law,” Williams said.

High court’s ruling could return health care fight to Congress

Justice Kennedy “seemed to have grave concerns,” Williams reported, saying at one point in the oral argument “this is beyond anything Congress has ever done before.”

It did not seem during the oral argument that Kennedy “found the justification that he needed” for the law, Williams said.

Veteran Supreme Court lawyer Tom Goldstein, who was in the court room Tuesday for the oral arguments, said it was “very worrisome” for the Obama administration’s side of the case.

The four liberal members of the court seemed inclined to accept the administration’s s argument that Congress has ample power under the commerce clause to regulate health insurance and to require uninsured people to join the insurance market.

Verrilli and the government were “hunting for a fifth vote — and it really wasn’t at all obvious where that might come from,” Goldstein said.

Both conservative and liberal justices seemed to agree that Congress could require people who showed up at the doctor’s office for treatment for purchase insurance — but the conservative justices seemed entirely unpersuaded that Congress could force people to buy insurance before they had any medical need.

President Obama’s landmark health care reform law is under the microscope during a second day of arguments at the Supreme Court. NBC’s Pete Williams reports.

“It’s risky to predict, but if I had to predict right today, I would say the law is in trouble,” Williams said.

The fate of the health care overhaul hinges on the issue the justices weighed during the argument Tuesday morning: does Congress have the power to force individuals to buy a product they otherwise would not have purchased?

Much of Tuesday’s battle focused on the extent of Congress’s reach under the power to regulate interstate commerce which the Constitution assigns to it.

Kennedy said from the beginning of the oral argument that the Obama administration’s claim that Congress could force people to buy insurance seems unprecedented — and given the unprecedented scope of the law, Kennedy questioned whether the government didn’t have a special burden on it to prove that the law was justified.

Arguing on behalf of Florida and 25 other states was Paul Clement, the former solicitor general in the Bush administration.

The court is expected to hand down its ruling in june

Tea Party federation expels group over racial writing Tea Party Express refuses to rebuke spokesman Mark Williams

Tea Party federation expels group over racial writing
Tea Party Express refuses to rebuke spokesman Mark Williams

WASHINGTON — The Tea Party political movement saw a major split over the weekend, with the National Tea Party Federation expelling a member group after its spokesman wrote an online post satirizing a fictional letter from what he called “Colored People” to President Abraham Lincoln.

On its website, the federation stated it had given the Tea Party Express, through direct contact with one of its leaders, a deadline to rebuke and remove spokesman Mark Williams.

“That leader’s response was clear: they have no intention of taking the action we required for their group to continue as a member of the National Tea Party Federation,” the federation stated.

Therefore, effective immediately the National Tea Party Federation is expelling Tea Party Express from the ranks of our membership.”

Federation spokesman David Webb, interviewed Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” called the blog post “clearly offensive.”

Williams, who said his letter was satirical, started it like this: “Dear Mr. Lincoln, We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!”

“Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn’t that what we want all Coloreds to strive for?” he added. “What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us Coloreds!”

A conservative talk radio host, Williams later removed the post as criticism grew.

Williams’ post was a reply to a resolution by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) earlier this month that called on Tea Party leaders to “repudiate the racist element and activities” within the political movement.

Immediately after the resolution, Williams said it was unfortunate that the NAACP had chosen to “profiteer off race-baiting and fear mongering” when it could be doing so much to help the black community.

He also questioned the motives of African-American leaders, suggesting they were taking advantage of the publicity the resolution generated.

“I’m not surprised they are jumping into the fray here because the NAACP just tapped a Gulf oil well full of cash contributions that will arrive from this resolution,” Williams said. “And I know Al (Sharpton) and Jesse (Jackson, Jr.) want their piece of it. The slave traders of the 16th century should have been as good at exploiting Africans as these people are, because it’s just disgusting.”

On its website, the Tea Party Express does not say how many supporters it has, but on Facebook it has 600 followers.

The federation says 61 groups are members, and that it has “affiliate relationships” with 21 other groups.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Limbaugh released; no heart trouble found

The Associated Press.

HONOLULU – Conservative talk radio show host Rush Limbaugh said Friday that tests show nothing wrong with his heart after chest pains hospitalized him earlier this week.

Limbaugh spoke at a Honolulu news conference shortly before being released from The Queen’s Medical Center, where he was rushed Wednesday during a vacation. Doctors said he did not have a heart attack or heart disease.

“The pain was real, and they don’t know what caused it,” Limbaugh said.
Asked whether he was taking painkillers, Limbaugh said no.

His medical problems have attracted attention in the past. In 2003, he acknowledged an addiction to pain killers for severe back pain and took a five-week leave from his radio show to enter rehab.

Limbaugh couldn’t resist a few political comments in the short press conference at the hospital. He said he got the best health treatment in the world “right here in the United States of America.”

“I don’t think there’s one thing wrong with the United States health system,” Limbaugh said.

Caller after caller to his show Thursday sounded their well-wishes, asked to simply say “ditto” — a traditional Limbaugh catchword — so they could get on with questions and comments on social and government issues on the national talk show. Friday’s show was a Best of Rush special.

Americans in a poll last month called Limbaugh America’s most influential conservative voice, and more than 14 million people hear him at least once a week, making him the nation’s highest-rated broadcaster.

U.S. air security system failed, top official says ‘System did not work’ to catch suspected would-be bomber, Napolitano says

WASHINGTON – Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano conceded Monday that the aviation security system failed when a young man on a watch list with a U.S. visa in his pocket and a powerful explosive hidden on his body was allowed to board a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit.

The Obama administration has ordered investigations into the two areas of aviation security — how travelers are placed on watch lists and how passengers are screened — as critics questioned how the 23-year-old Nigerian man charged in the airliner attack was allowed to board the Dec. 25 flight.

A day after saying the system worked, Napolitano backtracked, saying her words had been taken out of context.

Obama spells out plan to combat joblessness President says U.S. still must spend its way out of recession Image: Barack Obama

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama outlined major new government stimulus and jobs proposals on Tuesday, saying the nation must continue to “spend our way out of this recession.”

Without giving a price tag, Obama proposed a package of new spending for highway, bridge and other infrastructure projects, deeper tax breaks for small businesses and tax incentives to encourage people to make their homes more energy efficient.

“We avoided the depression many feared,” Obama said in a speech at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. But, he added, “Our work is far from done.”

Read More : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34312987/ns/business-economy_at_a_crossroads

Obama family lights National Christmas Tree

Did anybody notice, we lit the china tree! (red and yellow lights)

WASHINGTON – Surrounded by celebrity performers and characters from the North Pole, the Obama family on Thursday led a countdown and lighted the National Christmas Tree.

First lady Michelle Obama and daughters Malia and Sasha helped President Barack Obama press a button to light the tree, an annual tradition since the 1920s. “I’m technologically challenged and I might not get this right,” the president joked. “Everybody has got to help me out here.”

The Obamas and the spectators counted down from five, and the red and yellow lights came alive on the 40-foot Colorado blue spruce growing on the Ellipse, just south of the White House. “It worked,” Obama shouted.

Read More! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34264595/ns/today-today_holiday_guide/

‘Official’ job numbers don’t tell the whole story

Government jobs data are only estimates. The “official” numbers don’t include everyone who wants and needs a full-time paycheck.

I want to know why the government/news does not report the unemployment rate correctly? Counting people who are no longer collecting unemployment, never received unemployment because they didn’t qualify or people who are working part time just to have a little income – it’s more like 19-22 percent. Why don’t they report honestly?

The data is there if you’re willing to dig for it. Unfortunately, as you point out, the “official” unemployment rate badly understates just how truly awful the job market is right now. And since most news reports rely on that “official” number, the real picture is not widely understood.

One reason for this is that discussions about the “real” unemployment rate often degenerate into a rant about the government’s inability to collect accurate statistics. As we’ll see shortly, the data are all there for anyone who wants to look.

As for why this story isn’t reported “honestly,” we tend to give the participants the benefit of the doubt. It’s entirely possible that government statisticians put their thumb on the numbers to make them look “better” than they really are. In our experience, the folks at the Bureau of Labor Statistics take their work seriously and try to get it right. So do most of the news outlets that report the “official” number every month. Unfortunately, in a deep recession, that number just doesn’t tell the whole story.

So let’s take a deeper dive past the so-called “headline” number. The BLS publishes various series of jobs data every month, based on two separate surveys. The “household” survey, which covers only 60,000 households a month, asks people whether they have a job, or are looking for a job, or have given up, or gone back to school, or retired.

The problem starts with the official definition of who is unemployed. For example, if you’ve decided that you’re never going to find a job like the one you lost, and you go back to school to get retrained, you’re not in the work force, and you’re not unemployed. Likewise, if you’re in your late 50s, and every potential employer tells you you’re just too old or overqualified, you may give up looking and hope your savings will carry you over until you can collect Social Security. In that case, you’re considered “retired” — again, not unemployed.

Since 60,000 households is about four one-hundredths of one percent of the total work force, the results are then subject to a variety of statistical adjustments, just like any survey. Same goes for the separate “establishment” survey, which contacts roughly 150,000 business and government agencies to find out how many people are on the payroll that month. It’s a little broader, which is why most people believe the payroll survey is more accurate. But it still gets hit with a heavy round of adjustments. And that’s when things start getting a little murky.

When the economy is humming along smoothly, these adjustments tend to be relatively minor. But in the worst job market since the Great Depression, the data get much more difficult to pin down. The payroll survey for last month, for example, showed 263,000 jobs lost. But the household survey logged a drop of 710,000.

Worse, the BLS announced last month that it probably understated job losses this year by more than 800,000, in part due to an adjustment known as the “birth/death” model that tries to estimate the number of small businesses that go in and out of business each month. It turns out that in a deep recession the model doesn’t work very well.

By John W. Schoen
Senior producer
msnbc.com