The Right Opinion
Obama Has a Good Day
But liberty has a bad one.
It is a big victory for the White House.
ObamaCare, including the insurance mandate, was upheld. What would have been a political disaster for President Obama has been averted. He has not been humiliated, and the centerpiece of his efforts the past 3½ years has not been rebuked by the Supreme Court.
The ruling strikes me as very bad for the atmosphere of freedom in our country, the sense of freeness and lazy, sloppy liberty we've long maintained with some hiccups along the way. Those hiccups seem to come more and more now, and closer and closer together. From the dissent of Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito: "If Congress can reach out and command even those furthest removed from an interstate market to participate in the market, then the Commerce Clause becomes a font of unlimited power or, in Hamilton's words, 'the hideous monster whose devouring jaws ... spare neither sex nor age, nor high nor low, nor sacred nor profane.' " They were quoting Federalist No. 33. The language is dramatic, but the thought applies.
A great practical question, an informed friend reminds me, will not be answered for years: How much will an average family's health-insurance premium rise if ObamaCare isn't repealed or significantly revised? His guess is 40%.
In any case, brace yourself for the admiring profiles of Chief Justice John Roberts. Last week's wisdom: right-wing nut in black robe. This week's wisdom: rigorous mind, independent nature, unswayed by partisan considerations, he's grown in the role since being appointed by George W. Bush.
To the presidential politics of it: For the first time in months, the president looks like he's on the Uppalator, not the Downalator.
This may mark a turning point for the president's listless, directionless campaign. Certainly it will buoy the spirits of the White House. "There's nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result," said Churchill. Members of the president's campaign and White House will stop feeling like what they usually feel like, Team of Losers. The snake-bit White House has for once found a serum.
There will be a downside: The president is left carrying the burden defending a bill nobody likes. It certainly has the worst public reputation of any new government program of my lifetime. The Republicans can say, "It may be constitutional, but it's still a bad law, and we'll get rid of it." In fact the speaker of the House said it within hours of the decision.
If the court had knocked the mandate down, the president might, in the end, have been given a fiery argument to rouse his base: "A divided court, dominated by conservatives, has thwarted progress, but we will persevere, and we will do everything we can to achieve universal coverage for all Americans. Now we know, once again, just how crucial it is who serves on that court, and who appoints them. Do we want more radical right-wing judges?" Instead, the base may feel they got what they wanted and they can relax.
For the Republicans, a national issue has been revived: Tear it down, repeal it. "But we'll need a new president and Senate to get rid of ObamaCare. Send Republicans to Washington this November. Send in the cavalry!" This will rouse the Republican base.
As will this: The court decision was clarifying in that it held the penalties associated with ObamaCare are, in fact, taxes. (Chief Justice Roberts agreed with the dissenters that it was not a permissible exercise of the Commerce Clause.) South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, among others, picked up on this right away. The president didn't tell the truth when he said his program contained no taxes on the middle class, and every Democrat on the Hill should be asked to take a stand and back those taxes or not.
The president, in his statement Thursday afternoon, was all sweet reason and moderation. His voice was full and firm; he looked like a man trying not to show happiness and relief. His media people must have decided that if he showed joy it would make him look small, as if it were about him and not the country. He said the politics surrounding the program don't matter, that the program itself is a matter of trying to make life better for all Americans. "The highest court in the land has now spoken. We will continue to implement this law."
Twice, and with an unusual tone of modesty, he said all sides should work together "to improve on it where we can." What we cannot do is "refight the political battles of two years ago, or go back to the way things were." It is "time for us to move forward -- to implement and, where necessary, improve on this law." Cleverly, he suggested those Republicans who continue to oppose ObamaCare are wasting the country's time at a crucial moment. We must focus "on the most urgent challenge of our time: putting people back to work, paying down our debt, and building an economy where people can have confidence."
He stressed what he said were the program's benefits. Those already insured will find their coverage "more secure and more affordable," insurance companies will provide "free preventive care like checkups and mammograms," "seniors" and "young adults" will receive benefits, those with pre-existing conditions will no longer be denied coverage. Also, the insurance companies "won't be able to charge you more just because you're a woman."
It was a targeted base-greaser.
He said the debate has been "divisive," but "I didn't do this because it was good politics," he did it because it was right. This was sly, positioning ObamaCare not as legacy-making overreach whose unabating unpopularity took the White House by surprise, but as a sacrifice, a commendable expenditure of personal popularity in order to achieve a public good.
He urged America to go forward.
It was pretty good stuff, meaning shrewdly put, politically astute, and delivered with the august halls of the White House sparkling in the background.
The president had a good day, the first in a long time, in months.
Is it too late for him to change his image to modest and moderate man of the center who's only trying to do what's best for America? Because that's what he's trying to do. He's in a perfect position now to tell the leftwardmost parts of his base that he's given them plenty and suffered for it, it's time they got in line. Is it too late for independents to give him a second or third look? He's going for that, too.
The race is not remade, that would be saying too much. But there's a new dynamic now: Mr. Obama got a break.
Republican backers of Mitt Romney have been feeling pretty confident, and understandably. Their challenge now is to make the most of the moment. They will have the help of their base, which is, at the moment, angry as hornets, loaded for bear, and fully awake.

8 Comments
ken z wilhelm in us
Saturday, June 30, 2012 at 2:47 AM
I just heard it on the radio that "Penny Health" can offer health insurance for just $1 a day any one aware of this ? have anyone purchased insurance through them. I did search for them and found them online.
Jim in Alabama
Saturday, June 30, 2012 at 9:11 AM
"In any case, brace yourself for the admiring profiles of Chief Justice John Roberts. Last week's wisdom: right-wing nut in black robe. This week's wisdom: rigorous mind, independent nature, unswayed by partisan considerations, he's grown in the role since being appointed by George W. Bush." That's Peggy in a nutshell. Having my share of relatives whose gathered "wisdom" derives form reading the Nation, the Progressive and Mother Jones I'm fairly well tuned to listen to blather and know its source. What part of the river is Peggy swimming in? This statement assumes a Liberal Leftist point of normality! She pretends an objective view but describes the folks she hangs with. And what am I reading about Obama's good fortunes? A problem for American Freedom lovers? Or something that rather excites our gal Peg.
OKBecky in Tulsa, OK
Monday, July 2, 2012 at 3:07 PM
I don't read that line your way at all. Noonan doesn't have to explicitly define every view as "hers" or "not hers," does she? I understood her to be writing about how the general media will now be championing Chief Justice Roberts as someone who has "matured" in office from the right-wing nut-job he was when first named a justice by GWBush. It's a pretty accurate reading of how some segments of the chattering classes will interpret the ruling, and Roberts' role in it; not necessarily reflective of her own personal views. That's one of the more subtle techniques of good writing.
wjm in Colorado
Saturday, June 30, 2012 at 10:06 AM
The decision exposes the lie told to pass this garbage. Maby that will wake the useful idiots in their Democrat delusion. This exposes Obamao as the liar and traitor he truly is, he would turn us into Greece, and maybe tax us if we didn't face Mecca 5 times a day.
charlie in Tunkhannock, PA
Saturday, June 30, 2012 at 10:07 AM
Although surprise at the verdict seems universal, exactly this outcome was suggested last March as a possibility in: http://morethantwentycents.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/now-this-changes-everything-the-obamacare-oral-arguments-explained/ exerpt follows: ■The Court could conclude that the Obama Administration’s argument fails under the Commerce Clause but succeeds under the taxing and spending power. Congress’s power to tax is very broad. The Court might just say that the individual mandate really just results in having to pay a tax. Congress cannot throw someone in jail for failing to buy insurance, but it can force that person to pay a tax, which is exactly what it did here (even though it used the word “penalty” instead of “tax”). ■Chief Justice Roberts could vote to uphold the law even while Justice Kennedy votes to strike it down. This is unlikely but conceivable. Roberts seemed to be willing to buy, at least for the sake of argument, the Obama Administration’s claim that all people are currently in the health care market whether they want to be or not. I will provide a deeper analysis of Chief Justice Roberts’ views in a subsequent post.
The oddity is that in a civil suit defended on the wrong basis, the judge typically does not deny the basis and then substitute a valid basis to find in favor of the defense. Aren't the lawyers supposed to get it right???
Roger in RoginSoCal
Saturday, June 30, 2012 at 11:14 AM
Obama Has A Good Day???? Must be, Peggy says so. So tell me, what is the score????? Obama -10000 U .S.A - 0 I, and I suspect most Americans, don't like it! Yes, Elections do have consequences.
Coming soon, July Fourth. Time to celebrate?
Tex Horn in Texas
Saturday, June 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM
From what I read, the bill has 21 tax increases buried in it, to be implemented over the next decade. The result? One of the highest tax rates in years. Thank you, left wing.
Holmes Simons in FL
Sunday, July 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM
The inalienable rights of American citizens have been revoked by the egotistical rantings of one pseudo-intellectual judge in an pathetic attempt to exhibit the superiority of his legal acumen above that of his peers, and, by his singular effort, he has destroyed and repudiated the legacy of individual freedom that is the very foundational principle upon which the Federal Government was created to defend and protect.
So, before one jumps on the bandwagon glorifying the shrewdness of Justice Roberts in advancing conservatism, please consider these two simple facts:
1) The inherent fallacy of the so-called “Commerce Clause”, upon which Congress has relied for years to regulate any and every aspect of economic activity, was upheld; but it cannot be used to regulate “economic inactivity”, such as one not purchasing health insurance. 2) What then can Congress use to regulate “inactivity”? What else but its UNLIMITED power to tax.
What kind of personal behavior falls outside the categories of “activity” and “inactivity”? None, whatsoever! Therefore, the ramifications of ruling by the Supreme Court that the ACA is constitutional grant Congress, a group of corrupt cowards, by one means or another, the power to regulate everything and everyone.
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, human rights that the Founders considered to be given to an individual by God, are now completely subordinated to the whims and fancies of godless, manipulative politicians.
Let’s hear it for InJustice Roberts: YEA!!!!!
Let’s hear it for God: BOO!!!!!
Let’s hear it for the American Citizen: FU.