Huckabee’s Ridiculous Response to Obamacare Ruling

Mike Huckabee rarely has anything coherent or intelligent to say about constitutional matters, so it’s hardly surprising that his response to the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding subsidies in the federal exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act contains lots of outrage and nothing remotely reasonable.

Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and current Republican presidential candidate, called the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to protect the Affordable Care Act “an out-of-control act of judicial tyranny.”

*yawn* Hey Mike, has the Supreme Court ever handed down a ruling you disagreed with and not committed an “out-of-control act of judicial tyranny”? Funny how “judicial tyranny” always lines up perfectly with your own views. A remarkable coincidence.

“Our Founding Fathers didn’t create a ‘do-over’ provision in our Constitution that allows unelected Supreme Court justices the power to circumvent Congress and rewrite bad laws,” Huckabee said in a statement provided to The Washington Post.

“The Supreme Court cannot legislate from the bench, ignore the Constitution, and pass a multi-trillion dollar ‘fix’ to ObamaCare simply because Congress misread what the states would actually do,” his statement continued. “The architects and authors of ObamaCare were intentional in the way they wrote the law. The courts have no constitutional authority to rescue Congress from creating bad law.”

Were they intentional in creating a law that did not provide subsidies to those procuring health insurance through the federal exchanges? If so, why can’t you find even one single member of Congress who said at the time that this was their intent? This was one of the critical elements of the ACA. Without the subsidies, the whole thing fails in its goal of providing access to health insurance to the greatest number of people. That’s why not one lone member of Congress believed or said at any point during the debate and ratification of the bill that it did not include subsidies for the federal exchange.

“As President, I will protect Medicare, repeal ObamaCare, and pass real reform that will actually lower costs, while focusing on cures and prevention rather than intervention,” Huckabee said. “The status quo is unfair, unaffordable, unsustainable and completely un-American.”

That is some major league gibberish. You’re going to “focus on cures” but not on “intervention”? Wha?

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • D. C. Sessions

    That is some major league gibberish. You’re going to “focus on cures” but not on “intervention”? Wha?

    Prayer is not an “intervention.” But it does provide lots of cures, as not only the Bible but centuries of testimonials prove.

    Therefore, President Huckster will not waste money on medical “interventions” for Americans, but will provide Federally-sponsored prayer for the ill.

  • blf

    President Huckster will not waste money on medical “interventions” for Americans, but will provide Federally-sponsored prayer for the ill.

    But only if your record of personally tithing him is extraordinary generous.

  • Deacon Duncan

    You’re going to “focus on cures” but not on “intervention”? Wha?

    Oo, I can translate that one: “I’m going to fix it so Medicare will spend big bucks on ‘alternative’ dietary supplements marketed by my major corporate sponsors who promise* that it will prevent cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and impotence.”

    *(as long as you never get sick; may not have any actual beneficial effects; not guaranteed to be free from harmful side effects; consumer assumes all liability for damages resulting from the use of this product)

  • llewelly

    Huckabee sells his mailing list to quacks who bombard his fans with avalanches of ads for fake health products. I wonder his alignment with the quack freedom movement affects his opinion here.

  • jws1

    Hates Obamacare, but loves Medicare. How does that work?

  • pocketnerd

    Thus Spake Zarajws1, #5:

    Hates Obamacare, but loves Medicare. How does that work?

    I’m sure he hates Medicare too — but senior citizens vote, so he can’t say so openly.

  • Al Dente

    Huckabee is getting to the age where he can receive Medicare. Do you think he’s going to deny himself some government largesse just because it’s not ideologically pure? The man may be a fool but he’s not actually stupid.

  • jameshanley

    So, strike down a law, judicial tyranny. Uphold a law, judicial tyranny. Kind ofva catch-22 isn’t it?

  • thebookofdave

    @jameshanley

    Not if they put behind their activist agenda, and focus on their jobs: putting away violent street thugs and drug dealers, and making ‘Merca safe for good Christians to prosper.

  • garnetstar

    I could not distinguish between Huckabee’s response and the four dissenting justices. They seem close to identical.

  • howardhershey

    Yet another Republican with the ability to “pass real reform that will actually lower costs, while focusing on cures and prevention rather than intervention” but a complete inability to tell us what this “real reform” might be.

  • http://drx.typepad.com Dr X

    Huckabee is going maximum douche this week. Commenting on Obergefell:

    I don’t think a lot of pastors and Christian schools are going to have a choice. They’re either are going to follow God, their conscience and what they truly believe is what the scripture teaches them, or they will follow civil law […] They will go the path of Dr. Martin Luther King, who in his brilliant essay the letters from a Birmingham jail reminded us, based on what St. Augustine said, that an unjust law is no law at all. And I do think that we’re going to see a lot of pastors who will have to make this tough decision.”

    He learned at the feet of his secret father, Orval Faubus.

  • Al Dente

    So a bunch of evangelical clergy won’t be marrying people of the same sex. Big yawn.

  • http://drx.typepad.com Dr X

    The problem is we have people like Texas AG Ken Paxton telling Texas county clerks that they aren’t required to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. He’s encouraging massive non-compliance which creates some serious problems for enforcement. People can sue, but that takes time and how do courts proceed when judges rule against the clerks? Are we going to see federal agents go into Texas and round up clerks? Don’t get me wrong, I would LOVE to see that. I’d love to see judges throw the book at these belligerent bigots. But remember how goddamned slow the federal government was about enforcing the law when it was about race?

    I hope this moves quickly, but it could take years. And, if the next administration isn’t Democratic, we’ll also see a lack of interest in enforcement.

    Goddamned South still fighting for the lost cause by proxy.

  • colnago80

    Mike Huckabee rarely has anything coherent or intelligent to say about constitutional matters