Health care: The decision (UPDATE)

UPDATE: Color me stunned. The Supremes found in favor of Obamacare.

I'm also a little stunned that CNN could get it so wrong.

"And there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour," as John the evangelist once said. (I always wondered if there were clocks in heaven.) All is quiet in punditland, as everyone drinks in the meaning of it all. We do not often stand witness to so profound and unusual event. How could so politicized a court -- so conservative a court -- not find grounds for overturning Obama's key legislative attainment? The decision was authored by Justice Roberts -- the Dubya appointee.

I suspect that the reason has to do with the fact that Obamacare is unpopular. The Supremes have not left Romney bereft of an issue that favors him.

On the other hand, Obama comes out of this looking strong. People like a winner. (Or so the axiom has it. Personally, I've never met anyone who rooted for Santa Ana while watching a movie about the Alamo.)

Republican Senator Jim DeMint favors unconstitutional and borderline treasonous means of rejecting the new law. This bodes ill. 

Question: Does the Supreme Court's decision make the goal of single payer health insurance more or less attainable? There are those who argue that Obamacare is a "step toward" a truly progressive health care system. I am not at all persuaded by such arguments.

And yet -- if the new system should develop problems, will the citizenry really want to go back to a non-system that leaves so many without coverage?

(What follows is the post I wrote before the Supremes announced their decision.)

In less than an hour, the Supreme Court will announce a decision on Obama's health care plan. Within liberal circles, people are psychologically prepping themselves for a reversal. The folks at FDL think that striking down Obamacare will mean that true single payer may have a shot. As one reader put it...

Everyone, even the conservative justices, agree that single payer would be Constitutional.

It presents the best possible system.

the current law is an abomination that would take decades to morph into a single payer system. So, its death will be welcomed by all except maybe one person running for re-election.

Hm. Would the Supreme Court consider single payer constitutional?

If Romney gets into office -- an excellent bet -- he'll choose justices who make Scalia look like Mother Theresa. Surely such a court will find some grounds for challenging the constitutionality of single payer...?

If that happens -- we will be truly screwed.

I'll have something to say about the decision in a short while. I'm expecting the Court to scuttle the thing entirely.