August 11, 2026

Members of Congress shouldn’t get a pass from Obamacare

The following is an op-ed I wrote for KSL’s Statecraft page, posted on August 2, 2013. Over the last few months, members of Congress and their staffs have been worried about losing their health care subsidies and being forced to participate in the Affordable Care Act insurance exchanges, as the rest of us will be […]

The Man Behind the Curtain and the Suspension of the Law

It’s one thing to delay the implementation of a massive, complex and far reaching government program because it is, well, massive, complex, and far reaching. It’s quite another to act like it’s completely normal and anyone who says otherwise is up in the night. But that’s exactly what the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney […]

TANSTAAFL: Obamacare turns three and the costs continue to tally [Infographic]

This week in TANSTAAFL news: it’s  Obamacare‘s third anniversary, and, as then Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously said, we had to pass it to find out what’s in it. We’re still trying to find out what’s in it. Today, for your pleasure, a small infographic on the costs that have come with the ironically named Affordable Care […]

The Obamacare saga encourages political dishonesty [Contributor]

Political dissemblance over the nature of taxes and regulatory architecture looms as an inevitably dark truth of post-Obamacare government. Through the tortuous legislative course of Obamacare’s genesis, Democrats continually denied that the individual mandate was a tax, the heaviest word in America’s political lexicon. Instead, the mandate was a “penalty,” or a “shared responsibility payment.” (A chillingly Orwellian turn-of-phrase). The Democrats knew that truth in taxation would slay Obamacare and scuttle their century-long obsession with state-directed flu shots and hip replacements. So they prevaricated. What do congressmen call a law that amends the Internal Revenue Code, is enforced by the Internal Revenue Service, and forces families to pay up to 2.5% of their incomes into the federal treasury? Anything but a tax.

Unless you’re in court—there, any word will do. [cont…]

What is the role of the Supreme Court, anyway?

“The Constitution, though it dates from the founding of the Republic, has powerful meaning and vital relevance to our own times. The constitutional protections that this case involves are protections of structure. Structural protections—notably, the restraints imposed by federalism and separation of powers—are less romantic and have less obvious a connection to personal freedom than the provisions of the Bill of Rights or the Civil War Amendments. Hence they tend to be undervalued or even forgotten by our citizens….”

Exaggerated Claims: Swallow at Supreme Court to “ensure” unconstitutionality of Obamacare?

In short, the email walks through a loose timeline for the Affordable Care Act (also known as “Obamacare” more colloquially), putting Swallow at each crossroad of the legal battle. But for him, and Utah, Obamacare might not have made it before the Supreme Court.

Except that isn’t quite how it happened. We’ve already learned that Idaho had passed a law that gave standing to challenge Obamacare, and that Utah jumped on board. Sincerely, of course, but not necessarily crucial to the fight against the Affordable Care Act. It was important politically, but not really legally.

Now, Swallow’s campaign is claiming that he was at the Supreme Court to “ensure” the law was found unconstitutional. It’s a claim that stretches the truth. [Cont…]

Obamacare before the Supreme Court: “The Emperor Has No Clothes!”

In a case of “the Emperor has no clothes,” the justices played the part of the skeptic to the Obama Administration’s protestations of Obamacare’s constitutionality. With the oral arguments on constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act over, let’s take a look back at the reactions to the arguments: [cont…]