@DavidMDrucker Is a technical issue because states permitted feds to set up exchanges for them-court ruling wrong was not law's intent
-
-
-
@bspence5 Law's intent not the issue here. Rather, it's the law as written. -
@DavidMDrucker having worked in govt before retiring and being familiar w/SCOTUS other court rulings INTENT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED-Roberts ct?? -
If no one read Bill b4 passing it, how can intent be determined? No discussion, no debate =no identifiable intent..
@bspence5@DavidMDrucker -
@Politics_Matter@DavidMDrucker don't believe all you hear-intent can be determined by logic,in context-this ruling is literalism-at worse -
@bspence5@Politics_Matter The problem w/ this argument is that the issue here is an IRS reg, not indecision over interp of the law. My view -
IRS regulations that go beyond the scope of the law, make the law relevant in determining scope.
@DavidMDrucker@bspence5 -
@Politics_Matter@DavidMDrucker not talking scope which is important,SCOTUS does nothing but rule on intent of LAW constitution-relevant - 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@DavidMDrucker The real reason for the federal#Obamacare#exchanges. Please RT video at http://bit.ly/1nzrUAJThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.