RUSH: I really appreciate all of you on the phones who have been on hold, holding on. It is your turn now, and we are starting in Monument, Colorado. Hi, Dave. Welcome to the program.
CALLER: Rush, how you doing?
RUSH: Very good, sir. Thanks.
CALLER: God bless you. You do so much for America. Oh, my gosh, I can't believe I got on. (laughing) I agree, we have to repeal Obamacare, and that's why I went to my first ever Colorado caucus. I spoke for Santorum. He won in a landslide. It's fantastic. I do have two points related to your earlier scenario, if Obamacare is declared constitutional, what might happen. First, I don't trust that Romney would do anything about it. I really don't trust him, but I'll tell you, a Santorum/West ticket, and there's my plug, Santorum/West, I think they would repeal it. They would get rid of it. But the other point is that the Democrats, the socialists, they must think that the Republicans will never get back in control again because if they did they could put a Health and Human Service secretary in there that could undo all of the abortion, the infanticide, the late-term abortions, the new Sandra contraception welfare program, the death panels. They could undo all that, and so the Democrats must think that they're gonna be in power forever, as part of their plan.
RUSH: It's an interesting point, Dave. What he's talking about is the health care bill itself, all 2200 or 2700 pages, people who have read the whole thing have tabulated the number of times the bill actually says "or as the secretary shall determine." Throughout the health care bill, the secretary of Health and Human Services is really the all-powerful individual who will determine practically everything about it, including appointing commissions and panels and so forth. So what Dave's saying here, if the Republicans win the White House and therefore name the cabinet, you get a Republican secretary of Health and Human Services, well, "as the secretary may direct," could include to do nothing.
But it's not that simple, Dave, 'cause the law is -- at the same time it's very broad and specific. It does dictate how health care will be mandated and parsed out, paid for as years ago go by, who's exempted from it. For example, Muslims are exempted from this in many instances of it. Native Americans are exempt from it in spots. A lot of groups have permanent waivers from health care. So it's not universally mandated on everybody. However, the secretary of Health and Human Services is not gonna be able to do nothing and therefore have no part of the bill implemented. There are specific things that happen independent of the secretary of Health and Human Services, but it is a good point that you're making. And here's the way to express it. They have written a piece of legislation here that takes as much freedom from private citizens as possible and transfers it to the government. Now, if you put Republicans in charge of the government, then they have that power, and, believe me, the Democrats and the left do not want an all-powerful federal government when the Republicans are running it. Nowhere near. So that's an interesting point. I appreciate the call.
Up next, Valerie in Erie, Pennsylvania. Hi, and welcome to the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hi. It's an honor. If the Obamacare mandate is ruled as unconstitutional, won't the new regulations and upcoming regulations, along with the IPAB board, destroy businesses and insurance companies? They could just keep regulating and regulating.
RUSH: It depends on how they declare it. Suppose they say everything but the mandate is okay, which they could do. Now, if they do that, if they sever the mandate from the rest of the bill, what they will then be doing -- and this is theoretical 'cause I think this is all bogus anyway -- but the purpose of the mandate, the reason the mandate's in the bill is to pay for it. The purpose of the mandate as written in the bill is to pay for insuring the 30 million or whatever number it is that don't at present have health care insurance. The mandate forcing people to buy health insurance or pay a fine is the funding mechanism for the 30 million. So if you take that out, then the bill becomes two, three times more costly than it is now.
CALLER: I don't think that will stop them, do you, from implementing the next --
RUSH: No. No. You're right, if they just sever the mandate and leave everything else intact. What do these people care about cost? That's why I think this whole funding mechanism is bogus anyway. That was just to get the thing passed. This bunch doesn't worry about what things cost. They wouldn't have run up deficits the way they have if they were concerned about things like that. They could rule with a narrow scope or they could toss the whole thing. I don't know that actually they can toss the whole thing, a mandate's what's up for argument here. But they can do whatever they want. They're the Supreme Court. If they just rule the mandate's unconstitutional, everything else is okay, then all those rules and regulations stay, other than those that mandate you buy something.
That's why this has to happen fast. You're point is a really good one. It has to happen fast because there are elements of it that have already been implemented, such as, and not limited to, your kid staying on your policy until age 26. That was early. The attempt to get people covered with preexisting conditions, that has been partially implemented. Look at all these waivers that were granted, a thousand waivers to companies, and those waivers were granted so those companies wouldn't literally be put out of business during an election year. That would have doomed Obama's fate. They had to waive over a thousand entities from having to play ball with this law, but those waivers are over now. There are no new ones and they will expire after the election, starting next year. Well, those regulations are already in place, but not all of it.
But the more of this that gets implemented before it is shut down and repealed, the tougher it's going to be. These things get intricately woven into the fabric of society and culture and yanking this stuff out of there, can somebody name for me an entitlement that has ever been totally shut down? I can't think of one that's been totally yanked. So this has to happen fast. It has to happen quickly, 'cause most of this doesn't get implemented until 2014.
RUSH: Dale in Ventura, California, you're next, your turn here on the EIB Network.
CALLER: Mega dittos, Rush. My question for you is should -- and I'm taking a cautionary term here, should the health care law be ruled unconstitutional, we know it's gonna hurt Obama. By the same token then, since Massachusetts was modeled after it, is it gonna make Massachusetts null and void and thereby cripple Romney in his election run?
RUSH: No. States can do this. The federal government, the interstate commerce clause, federal government by virtue of the Constitution cannot mandate that citizens buy something. Massachusetts, being a state, is not bound in this regard by the US Constitution when it comes to the interstate commerce clause, so there won't be any fallout on Romneycare as a result of what happens on the constitutionality or not of Obamacare. The states are free to come up -- that's why it's often referred to that the states are 50 individual laboratories where things like this, let the states play with it. Let the states come up with a solution. Let them test this. Let them find the best way to work, then have the Feds adopt that, is an often uttered constitutional and policy theory.
But Romneycare is safe on this score. There might be some fallout on free birth control pills. In fact, there will be. If Obamacare is held unconstitutional and college co-eds could face personal expenses, what do we hear, $3,000, a thousand dollars a year to have protected sex. So free birth control pills would go by the wayside, and who knows, a number of other things. But Romneycare would survive.
RUSH: Now, I want to clarify this Medicare business, because that was a good question from Jonesboro, Arkansas. Medicare is a direct tax for a benefit. You can look at it that way. Obamacare is not a tax for a benefit. Obamacare forces people to enter into a private contract or to be penalized for failing to do so, and a "compulsory contract" is oxymoronic. You can't be forced to sign a contract, but that's what you have with an insurance company when you get a policy. The government simply cannot do that. The Supreme Court may say that it can, but it's ignoring the Constitution when it does (it's that simple), which is what the left is hoping for, by the way. But there's no comparison. People are taxed for the benefit that is Medicare, but there's nothing like that happening in Obamacare. There's no tax for a benefit. Just like you don't go buy a car for a benefit. You buy a car to buy a car. You go buy it. The benefit is not the car. The car is the purchase. It's the same thing here with Obamacare: You are forced to go buy insurance and compelled to sign a contract. And that force, that government force or the compelling you to do so -- or being penalized if you don't do it -- is unconstitutional.
So there really is no comparison between the two.
RUSH: Here is John in Norwalk, Connecticut. You're next. It's great to have you, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Rush, how are you?
RUSH: Excellent. Thank you.
CALLER: Rush, just a quick question: In Obama's State of the Union message of a few years ago, right, remember the Supreme Court was sitting in the first row?
CALLER: And he sort of like disrespected 'em a little bit. Could it influence their decision?
CALLER: I mean, to have that in their back pocket, you know what I'm saying? They're thinking...I mean, they may not tell each other, you know?
RUSH: Idealistically you'd like to say "no."
RUSH: But these guys are human beings, and he dissed them and their work on national TV in front of the world.
CALLER: Right. Exactly.
RUSH: And it was over the Citizens United case, and he challenged their competence and their legal judgment, and it was in that instance Sam Alito shook his head and said, "No, you're wrong." He mouthed the words. Like you, I've wondered if the justices might not have forgotten that and have a little payback on mind. Obama lied to 'em. He lied to their faces. He lied to the American people about the work that they had done on the Citizens United case. And he impugned their integrity in front of them and the world, and he did it right to their faces. So this open contempt for five justices on the US Supreme Court? Who knows?
We will never know if that's a factor in what they do, because you're right: They won't say so. I doubt that they'll even talk about it amongst themselves. It's not how it works. There's not a whole lot of conversation between the justices. Contrary to what you think, folks, they don't go into a room. The case is before them and they take a preliminary vote and they read their briefs, but they don't debate. Very rarely do justices try to persuade each other that they're wrong. I have this on the highest authority. They don't go into a room and start sipping coffee and eat danish and start arguing with each other about these cases. It's not how it works.
I was surprised when I learned that, but it's not standard operating procedure.