So Obama has now rewritten the Affordable (HA!) Care Act multiple times with his pen and his phone (and lots of selfies along the way). Now the push is to allow the courts to decide whether the plain language can be interpreted willy-nilly along the whims of whoever is in charge no matter what the thing said. Hard to determine what the congressional intent was when they decided to pass it before finding out what was in it, but I digress. We are stuck with a stupid law, and even Obama agrees the law is stupid and figures the law means whatever he can manage to get away with. So here is the problem - Let's imagine that in 2 years there is a different president, perhaps someone like Ted Cruz or Rick Perry. Both these guys obviously believe that government largess gets in the way of economic development and that if at all possible the federal bureaucracy should be gutted.
The problem for liberals now is that Obama has set precedent. What if President Perry decides to nominate a Secretary of Health and Human Services who removes most of the requirements for approved health packages? Basically the insurance requirements could be stripped down to only covering the first 24 hours in an ER and everything else is optional.
What if President Cruz decides that although the law can include the Federal exchanges it also can exclude the Federal exchanges and orders the IRS to act accordingly? What if he decides to choose a new head of the EPA who deems carbon (which encourages plant growth) to be a net benefit and so rather than regulating encourages CO2 emissions?
The Left is now encouraging the executive branch to completely ignore the constitution when it comes to immigration law. Is that really something they want to be the standard in 2 years? Personally I think this approach is idiotic and short sighted. They are rooting for a system in which any acting president can absolutely destroy any major program by re-interpreting the law however he may wish as long as it can get through a court.