And unelected bureaucrats determine what "is" is for the purposes of a law. Which makes law infinitely malleable, incomprehensible to normal people and functionally irrelevant. It is the death of law and the rise of impunity. And the death of law is the death of rule by the people and it's replacement by a permanent technocracy that will say what "is" is for us.
Saul Alinsky was right: government is nothing but power and power is simply what you can get away with. Here's an example from this Federalist article:
this case, the ad hoc rewrites are driven by an implicit admission that Capitol Hill’s super-genius central planners could not actually project the law’s results or design a workable system. So when major parts of the law don’t work out the way they thought they would—one after another—they’re scrambling to save the system by reinventing it ad hoc. And they don’t want any fussy ideas about the letter of the law to get in their way.
The mentality behind this is on perfect display in the mental gyrations of one defender of ObamaCare, who goes so far as to claim that the definition of “state”—as in the 50 states—is unclear in the law, despite being explicitly defined multiple times. As ridiculous as this is, notice what use he makes of this alleged ambiguity.
What matters is that whether the wording was sloppy or deliberate doesn’t change the fact that it’s ambiguously written, which means you have to look at the context in the other thousand-plus pages of the law to figure out what the intent was…and the name of the law itself is the “Patient Protection andAffordable Care Act”. “Affordable” is right there in the name…and screwing over people in 2/3 of the country by making them pay 3-4x as much for their insurance as people in the other 1/3 of the country isn’t exactly “Affordabl
No comments:
Post a Comment