While many conservatives are unhappy with Supreme Court Justice John Roberts for his opinion to uphold healthcare reform, they really should be happy for his protection of states rights, says former New Hampshire Republican Sen. Judd Gregg.
Roberts produced “as deft a decision as has been written in the last 20 years,” Gregg writes in The Hill
. Not only did Roberts protect states rights, but he limited congressional power and set the stage for a productive debate on tax policy, Gregg says.
Democrats had used the Constitution’s clause allowing congressional jurisdiction over interstate commerce to justify Obamacare’s individual mandate. “Because of this [the court’s] decision, that clause has finally been fenced and is no longer a mutating force for federal expansion,” Gregg states.
“Second, the Roberts decision has given state governments — which are already running unique and effective programs to get healthcare delivered to their citizens — the chance to opt out of the incredibly onerous and expensive Medicaid directives included in Obamacare.”
And third, Roberts has turned taxes into the major issue, Gregg says. “This is a fairly good outcome for most conservatives. It is now clear the Obama administration and the Pelosi Congress passed the largest, and one of the most regressive, taxes in recent times.”
And it’s a tax aimed at small businesses and middle-income Americans, Gregg maintains. One of Obamacare’s main goals was to “massively expand the size of the federal government in the name of better healthcare.” And in the end, it’s an attack on free markets and profit, he argues.
“Its whole structure was built with the intent of forcing profit-based activity — and the efficiencies that come with it — out of the healthcare delivery system.”
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.