Breakdown of the ObamaCare Decision

Ok folks, so let's talk about the biggest political news so far of the summer: the Supreme Court's decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or otherwise known as ObamaCare. On June 28th, the Supreme Court released its decision on the law in the case National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, immediatley re-igniting a heated debate about the powers of the national government.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's recap the major aspects of this law that the Court was dealing with. Long story short, the two most controversial aspects of the ObamaCare law were
        - the individual mandate that all Americans must have health insurance, either by privately  purchasing it, having their employers provide it, or being enrolled into a government-run program like Medicaid; otherwise they must pay a penalty,
        - and the requirement that the states had to enlarge the number of people enrolled in the Medicaid program, or risk losing all federal money in running these programs.. Medicaid is a joint program run by both the federal and state governments, helping poorer folks afford health coverage. However, Medicaid costs make up quite a bit of a state's budget, and many states were very upset at being forced to spend more on health coverage.
So we have two main issues involved here: first, can the federal government force individual citizens to buy a product? And second, where are the boundaries between the federal and state governments?

So, let's talk about the decision, because it gets a bit complicated. You may recall that the Obama administration argued that the individual mandate was within the government's powers under the Commerce Clause in the Constitution. The Court rejected this argument, saying "The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance." However, the Court decided that the penalty for not getting health insurance could be considered to be a tax, and that could be considered to be allowed under the Taxing Power in the Constitution, "The Federal Government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance." So in other words, you can not be forced to buy something by the federal government....however, you can be heavily encouraged to buy something by facing an additional tax if you don't. Makes perfect sense, right?....Right???

I know that seems very contradictory, but it is not entirely unheard of. The government does use its taxing power to encourage its citizens to do certain things. For example, there are taxes on alcohol and cigarettes in order to encourage people to abstain from buying these products. There are tax credits (i.e. you pay less in taxes) if you buy a home, or adopt a child, or give to charity. What's different in this ruling is that you will pay a tax for NOT doing something, in this case obtaining health insurance.

As for the second part of the case, can the federal government force the states to expand Medicaid? In a surprise, the Court ruled that the federal government does NOT have this power. The Court found that the states have every right to not comply with the new rule, and still be able to recieve their current levels of Medicaid funding. For the first time in quite a long time, the Court drew a clear line limiting what the federal government can require of the states.

So what does all this mean? Well, conservatives and Republicans are upset that ObamaCare was upheld, and are worried about the possibility that this will open up the possibility of new taxes and requirements from the federal government. However, they are happy that the Supreme Court has decided to uphold the theory of federalism, by keeping a distinct line between the federal and state governments. And finally, they won't publicly announce it, but they are quite happy with this ruling because it gives them ammunition!

What do I mean by this? Simple. A majority of Americans were against the individual mandate of ObamaCare. After the Supreme Court decision, the Republicans and Mitt Romney can now portray themselves as the ONLY chance to repeal ObamaCare, and they are hoping that the American people remember that come November. And they can do this by using President Obama's own words, when he routinely said throughout the debate over ObamaCare that the penalty for not getting health insurance would be a penalty or a fine, and most certainly not a tax. Ouch!

Good grief, that was a lot of info! If you have questions, concerns, comments, haikus, please share! Stay groovy!

ObamaCare (Decision) is Coming!

For the Class of 2012, goodbye and good luck! For the Class of 2013, welcome to the No Sheep Zone. Here you better be be able to think for yourself and not follow the crowd. In other words, DON'T BE A SHEEP!

It's summer time, and maybe you think you can relax and not worry about government or politics or work....but you'd be wrong! First, you have to worry about your summer assignment, so don't forget that. But in the world at large, there are some significant events happening this summer that we want to keep an eye on and be ready to discuss. These are Mr. G's MAJOR EVENTS TO WATCH FOR THIS SUMMER:

June
- The Supreme Court's decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as "ObamaCare". This is going to be a huge decision...so huge that in the future it will be one of the cases I'll require for the summer assignment! In case you haven't been paying attention, ObamaCare was passed in 2010 with great controversy. Long story short, the law will guarantee health insurance for almost everyone in the country, no one can be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition (like if you were born with heart condition or a weasel in your kidney or something), allows more low-income families to enter the Medicaid program, and allow college students to stay on their parent's health insurance plans while they're in college. Also, there is a tax on tanning beds, so don't fake bake if you want to save some money.

Sounds great, right? Well, this is where it gets tricky. See, everyone will have guaranteed health insurance, but that's because the government will require you to have it. Either you pay for it, your employer pays for it, or you enter a government-run program (like Medicaid). This would be the first time in history that the national government would require its citizens to buy a product. President Obama is claiming he has this power under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, granting the federal government the power to "regulate interstate commerce". You're going to get sick sometime, medical supplies cross state lines, therefore, the government can force you to buy health insurance....Yes, I know that sounds kind of flimsy, but the government has used that exact same power (interstate commerce) to do everything from forcing restaurants and hotels to stop discriminating against minorities (YAY!) to regulating the size of pickles on fast food sandwiches (HUH?).

Obama's opponents, of which there are many, are outraged by what seems to be a substantial power grab by the federal government. They fear that by allowing the federal government this kind of power to force its citizens to buy a certain product, then what would be the limit to that power? Could the government force its citizens to buy an American-made car in order to support the American economy? Does this open a Pandora's box of other possibilities? (Pandora from Greek mythology...not the Internet radio station). Whatever the Court decides this month, it is immediately going to become an issue for the November election. So we definitely will be discussing this throughout the summer and fall, so be sure to be paying attention!

Wow, I did not expect to spend so much time talking about that. So let me just give you a teaser for the other major events coming up this summer, and we'll discuss those at another time:

Also in June
- French parliamentary elections will take place June 10th and 17th. Yes, we do care about what the French are doing!
- The Greeks will also be voting for their legislature on June 17th. Pay attention, and then Greek politics will no longer be Greek to you! (Wow, that's lame even for me).

July
- On July 1st, Mexico will be having its presidential election. Grande stuff happening with our southern neighbor that we'll want to be paying attention to.
- July 20th, The Dark Knight Rises comes out. No, it has nothing to do with politics. But come on......BATMAN!

August
- The last week of August will seek the Republicans hold their national convention in Tampa Bay. Obviously, Mitt Romney will be the nominee (barring something unforeseen like his death or a major scandal). The big news for the convention will be 1) Who will be his vice-president nominee? and 2) Will Ron Paul have gained enough delegates to force some major changes to the Republican movement from inside?

September
-The first week of September will be the Democratic convention in Charlotte. Honestly, not much is expected from this one...unless Obama pulls a major switcheroo and drops Biden as his VP candidate...but that's not expected.

Ok, we'll keep an eye out this summer and be discussing these and other events. So be sure to leave your comments, thoughts, feeling, appropriate jokes, haikus, etc! Also, I'll be in Florida from the 11th through the 23rd for.....let's call it research into fairytale monarchical systems.

My Internet connection may be spotty while there, so don't get discouraged if I don't post or respond for a while. Stay groovy AP!

Debt Ceiling Approaches!

If you've been paying attention to the news, in between all hoopla surrounding the Casey Anthony trial and hacking scandal in Britain, you may have heard a little something about a tiny problem called the "debt ceiling." And here's the thing...it's a much bigger deal than Casey Anthony or hacking Brits.

Long story short, the debt ceiling is the absolute legal limit that the U.S. government can borrow. You see, Americans like like getting stuff from the government. Stuff like Social Security checks, national forests, a sweet military with lots of stuff that go boom...you get the point. But we don't like paying a lot of taxes for that stuff. As a result, the government borrows money to cover the cost for the rest of that stuff...just like a credit card. We borrow money from other countries, like China, as well as from the Federal Reserve, mutual funds, and even individuals.

But there is a limit to how much we can borrow...that is the debt ceiling. We will reach that limit on August 2nd...that's two weeks away. Now, about seventy times before in our history, whenever we get close to the debt ceiling, the government just raises that ceiling. (Kinda if you could just raise how much money you borrow on your credit card). What's different this time is the political climate. The current debt for the U.S. is about $14 trillion...quite the chunk of change. Many people think that this kind of debt is unsustainable, and last year voted in many congressmen, mostly Republicans, who vowed to bring government spending under control. To make an even longer story short, Republicans in Congress have stated that they are willing to raise the debt ceiling...if Democrats are willing to start cutting spending. Democrats have said that cutting government spending will hurt the economy even more, and have instead proposed a reform of the tax code and tax hikes, particularly on the wealthy. Republicans have countered that tax hikes on the wealthy, people who invest in companies and start businesses, will hurt the economy even more than cutting spending...and the debate keeps going in circles.

What is for certain is that this is a big issue. How big? Nobody's really sure, because we've never had to face this problem before. If no deal is reached by August 2nd, there is the possibility of interest rates increasing, and there are rumors of social security checks not reaching the elderly...we'll have to wait and see, unless a compromise is reached.

Birth of a New Country!

On July 9th, the southern portion of the Sudan seceded from its northern neighbor, declaring itself the Republic of South Sudan. This completes a process that began in 1983, when the Second Sudanese Civil War began. You see, the government of Sudan has always been controlled by the northern Sudanese, who are generally Arab and Muslim. The southern Sudanese, who are generally black and Christian or animist, have traditionally been discriminated against. Jobs, government positions, money for schools, most everything have gone to northern Sudanese. And for the southerners? Well, the region remained impoverished, many were arrested, and many were killed. An estimated 2.5 million people were killed in the genocidal civil war, which only ended in 2005 with a peace agreement that would allow the southerners to vote for a peaceful secession if they wished. In January of this year, southerners turned out in force for the vote, with 98.8% of southerners wishing for independence.

The newest country in the world is going to face many challenges. The region is very impoverished, there is virtually no infrastructure in the country, and very few doctors. On the plus side, they are sitting on a TON of oil! And that means soon a lot of money will be flowing into the country! Woohoo for them! And what to they plan to do with this money? Build their cities into the shapes of animals... So they do have that going for them.

I'm Still Alive!

Hey folks,

Sorry that the blog hasn't been updated for a month. Unfortunately, first my laptop, and then my wife's, ended up biting the dust. We've only just been able to get a replacement.

Because of this, I haven't been able to answer your email questions about your summer assignment. Because of this, I'm not going to be strict on the deadline for your answers regarding "The Prince." If you've already turned them in, great! If you haven't, just try to get them in before your "Common Sense" questions are due in August. And if you sent me an email with a question, my apologies, I'm trying to respond to each one as quickly as possible.

Also, be sure to check back soon for updates on the political world!

Who Wants to be the 2012 Republican Nominee for President?

2012? Why is Mr. Gilkerson talking about 2012? It's only 2011! The 2012 presidential election is almost fifteen months away! "Mr. G, why are you talking about Republicans in 2012 when we won't even be in your class when this election takes place?", you may be asking. You may also be asking "Does he always refer to himself in the third person?"

In answer to your questions, no, I don't always refer to myself in the third person...only when I want to feel special. But more importantly...yes, the 2012 GENERAL election is fifteen months away, but the PRIMARY elections are only eight months away! "What's a primary election?" That's a fantastic question! Think of primary elections as playoff elections. They take place within a political party months before the regular election in order to choose (hopefully) the best candidate for that party. And the campaigning for the Republican nomination has already begun! Several debates have already been held, websites have been set up, bumper stickers sent out, and the money is flowing in!

So, who wants to be the Republican nominee for president? Who has the guts to go up against Barack Obama, vying for the most powerful person in the free world? Actually, quite a few folks have either tossed their hats into the ring, or are seriously looking or being considered for it. Let's take a look at the top 12 candidates for '12 (woo, numerical symmetry...that's nice):

- Michele Bachmann, congresswoman from Minnesota. Bachmann is a big favorite among the Tea Party crowd...however, she is seen as too conservative amongst most Republicans.

- Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza and radio talk show host from Georgia. A long shot, but has been gaining steady ground in the last couple of weeks. While he has little experience in politics, that may be an advantage, building off the year of the anti-incumbent from the 2010 congressional elections. In addition, he is an African-American running in a party that has been seen as being anti-minority. However, I'm still gonna call him a long shot.

- Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House from Georgia. This is a BIG name. You kiddies are probably too young, but Gingrich was once the most powerful Republican in D.C. He was also the chief pursuer of Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal back in the '90's. But that's the problem. Newt hasn't been involved in politics since then...plus it doesn't help his image that he is on his third wife after cheating on the previous two.

- Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York City. While he hasn't declared that he's running, this is still a big name that would attract almost immediate support. However, he's already run once in 2008, but gambled badly with his campaign and was out of the race in almost a month.

- Jon Huntsman, Jr, former ambassador to China and governor of Utah. Another long shot, his name is gaining some ground here lately as a person who can appeal to independents and a few liberals as well.

- Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico. Now this is an interesting possibility. Johnson is not your typical Republican. He's actually a libertarian rather than a conservative. He's opposed the War on Terror, the Iraq War, and the American intervention in Libya. He supports civil unions for homosexual couples, legalizing marijuana, drastically reducing both government spending and taxation. Johnson could certainly attract a lot of support, though his biggest obstacle will be....

- Ron Paul, congressman from Texas. Paul is the other major libertarian candidate in the Republican race. Paul is a darling of the libertarian movement, staying true to his beliefs and not willing to compromise and tow the Republican Party line. Nicknamed "Dr. No" for his routine votes against ANYTHING that is not specifically authorized by the Constitution, from the Patriot Act to health care reform to American inclusion in the United Nations. Paul ran in 2008, gathering a significant amount of support, and also proved his abilities at fundraising. His biggest problems: he refuses to tow the party line and is seen as too intellectual and too far outside the mainstream for most Americans.

- Sarah Palin, former Vice-President candidate and governor from Alaksa...and now apparently a reality TV star. Palin has not formally entered the race, but it is largely expected that she will. Palin will no doubt gain a lot of support...but is seen as a laughing stock by almost all non-die hard conservative Republicans. But hey....at least she can see Russia!

- Tim Pawlenty, former governor of Minnesota. Keep an eye on this one, I believe he's going far. Pawlenty was seen as a centrist as governor of Minnesota, (though his statements now are doing a 180 from his previous positions). Pawlenty can certainly get support across the spectrum...if people actually know his name.

- Rick Perry, governor of Texas. Perry had originally said he wasn't interested. However, after the withdrawals of Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump, and Mitch Daniels, Perry has shown renewed interest. Another favorite of the Tea Party, Perry's biggest obstacle is himself. He's seen as too boasfult, as well as that bit where he said Texas might be better off seceding from the Union and forming their own country.

- Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts. At this point, most political commentators are saying that this is Romeny's race to lose. At this point, I'd say most political commentators are idiots. Yes, Romney's name is on top of most polls at this point, but polling eight months out means absolutely diddly-doo. Romney's advantages include name recognition and an ability to appeal to moderates. However, his biggest disadvantage: while governor of Massachusetts, he signed into law a bill VERY similar to the "ObamaCare" health care reform bill. Romney is going to have a very hard time convincing conservatives that he truly is a conservative himself.

- Rick Santorum, former senator from Pennsylvania. Gonna go ahead and say that Santorum really has no chance in this. Santorum has little name recognition, and what he does have is largely negative. He is seen as being very conservative, has stated that he does NOT believe the Constitution protects a right to privacy, and supports the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.

So there they are. The current 12 for '12. So my question for you: Who do you think will get the Republican nomination? NOT who you want to be nominated, but who do you think will get it? Will it be a big name or a dark horse? Conservative, libertarian, or Tea Partier? Somebody who's not even been mentioned yet? Share your responses, comments, rants, random trivia below!

Little Advice to my Hooligans

Wow....this summer has been crazy busy. A little advice to my students out there: When y'all are older, I recommend NOT getting married, buying a house that need some fix-me-ups , and having your truck break down all within a month of each other. Otherwise, you'll find yourself neglecting other things...like maintaining your government class blog. Anywho, I hope y'alls summers are going well. Your responses to the Machiavelli questions were great....for the most part. I look forward to getting your Paine responses here soon, and especially to starting the school year in less than a month. Until then, a few tidbits on some major political happenings over the last couple of weeks:

- Elena Kagan, President Obama's Solicitor General, has been sworn in as the newest justice of the Supreme Court. Democrats have praised her previous work as a prosecutor and for adding another female voice to the Court, while Republicans have criticized her for her lack of judicial experience (she's never been a judge) and for some of her rathery cryptic answers during the confirmation hearings. Overall, this doesn't change the make up of the Court, as we still have four conservatives, four liberals, and one independent who has become the Court's swing vote. (5 bonus points for the first person to identify who that independent voice on the Court is!)

- Yesterday, a small plane crashed in Alaska, killing former Senator Ted Stevens. Stevens, 86 years old, was a long time member of the U.S. Senate, and was the longest serving Republican member until he lost re-election in 2008 (after being convicted of concealing several hundreds of thousands of dollars in inappropriate gifts). Stevens was famous for being a stubborn advocate for his state, and funnelling millions of dollars in pork barrel projects toward Alaska (a Little Debbie cake on the first day of class for the first person to identify what a pork barrel project is!). Stevens was also famous for requesting $250 million for a "Bridge to Nowhere" and for once referring to the Internet as a "series of tubes."

- Finally, we come to the issue of gay marriage in California. In summer 2008, the California Supreme Court ordered that homosexuals be allowed to marry in that state. In November of that year, voters approved Proposition 8, which overturned the Court's decision, outlawing same-sex marriage. Now, just last week, a federal judge in California found that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional. So the issue of same-sex marriage in California is currently in a state of chaos. And in a strange twist, many homosexual advocates in California are criticizing President Obama for his opposition to same-sex marriage. Can Obama, already facing an approval rating of only 45%, afford to lose this key support base? Well, can he? Looking for your comments, reactions, questions, rants!