Change and hope
Perhaps it is simple human nature. We dislike and disparage those who disagree with our take on a particular issue and tend to admire and regard those who seem to take our side in an argument. So, it has been particularly entertaining to watch as pundits and just-plain-old opinionated folk have reacted to the surprising outcome of the recent Supreme Court deliberation on the constitutionality of some provisions of the largely yet-to-be-implemented heath care reform act widely known as Obamacare. Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the liberal justices in supporting Obamacare, holding that it is a tax allowed under the Constitution.
If we can net out the noise, Roberts seems to be the kind of judge who is singularly focused on the task at hand. He is rarely swayed by protestors seeking the “right” outcome and operates with regard to the Constitutional context and rule of existing law. I’d guess that Roberts is simply convinced that Congress maintains the power to tax the American people as it sees fit and does not ascribe a belief that he is secretly making a ruling based on the desire to impose his view of social justice. His less predictable approach to decision making should lead to a generation of important, if volatile, moves by the high court.
With the change made, we can only hope that Americans most in need are elevated by taxpayers’ additional contribution to the common good. And, we hope that any risk of program dependency and reduction in freedom and self-reliance is ameliorated by empowering citizens served by our national largess to break free of these bonds and become more productive and contributing members of the collective good using the money saved, and contributed by others, to pursue education and focus on opportunity for themselves and their progeny.