While the Supreme Court’s upholding of the main provisions of Obamacare has been meet with glee by liberals, it has created at least one awkward issue for them. It officially ruled that the law’s individual mandate is a tax, something that the Obama administration had flip-flopped on.
The response, as evidenced by a press conference organized by the liberal Center for American Progress today regarding the ruling, is to say “whatevah” and move the discussion along.
“Calling it one thing or another is a red herring,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, when asked about the tax designation. “It is irrelevant at this point what we call it.”
Economist Jonathan Gruber, a key architect of both Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care plan and Obamacare, was similarly dismissive. He said the claim that Obamacare ran afoul of the Commerce Clause “was a fringe legal argument” to most scholars.
“But hey, all’s well that ends well,” he said.
Gruber didn’t take kindly to critics of the Massachusetts health care plan either. “Criticizing our law for not controlling costs is like criticizing the Red Sox for not winning,” he said.
I’m no baseball insider, but I’m pretty sure the Red Sox at least try to win.
