Obamacare 3, Republicans 0
June 18, 2021: ACA, here to stay + Dems’ compromise trap + NC’s new social studies standards + Coop vs. Duke + Raleigh's top cop + UNC’s NKJ problem + the N&O’s future awaits + how to fix homelessness
+ TODAY’S TOP 8
1. The Affordable Care Act Survives (Again)
For the third—and probably final—time, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a Republican challenge to the 11-year-old Affordable Care Act, saying the GOP-led states that tried to toss Obamacare based on a (how to put this?) novel interpretation of the Constitution had no grounds to sue.
“On a 7-to-2 vote, the court dismissed the latest challenge from Republican-led states and endorsed by the Trump administration. Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s somewhat technical opinion said neither the states nor individual plaintiffs had legal standing to challenge the law, which also survived challenges in 2012 and 2015.” (WaPo)
Technical it may be, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t decisive, according to Mark Joseph Stern at Slate:
The Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday to throw out the latest challenge to the Affordable Care Act is like a Magic Eye. Upon first glance, it’s barely anything: The 7–2 majority tossed the case on standing, holding that none of the plaintiffs are actually harmed by the ACA’s now zeroed-out individual mandate. Sometimes, when the court finds no standing, the plaintiffs can retreat, develop a new theory of harm, and return with a beefed up lawsuit. But look closer at the decision in California v. Texas and you will see a wholesale rejection of the plaintiffs’ entire theory of the case. Other attacks on Obamacare will continue, but this uniquely daffy assault on the law is dead.
In 2012, the Court allowed the ACA to stand in part because the individual mandate qualified as a tax and thus fell within Congress’s powers. But in 2017, the Republican Congress, having failed to repeal the law itself, reduced the mandate to $0 in a tax cut bill. After that, Republican AGs sued.
The plaintiffs argued [that] the mandate collects zero dollars, so it is no longer a tax, just a command. And in 2012, the court held that a command to purchase health insurance (rather than a tax on uninsured people) would exceed Congress’ constitutional authority. … In the end, however, the Supreme Court seized upon the most glaring problem of all: The plaintiffs—both states and individuals—simply have no standing to challenge Obamacare because they are not injured by it. …
Look closely and you’ll see that [Justice] Breyer boxed in the plaintiffs at every turn. … How could a law that does not force anybody to do anything violate the Constitution? How could Congress exceed its powers when it isn’t even exercising them?
The GOP’s argument was largely viewed as silly, indulged only by a right-wing federal circuit in Texas. But when Senate Republicans rushed Amy Coney Barrett to the bench ahead of arguments last November, liberals worried that the merits wouldn’t matter; the fix was in. As it turns out, that wasn’t so. Barrett, in fact, joined the majority.
Justices Alito and Gorsuch—though, amazingly, not Clarence Thomas—dissented.
OTHER SUPREME COURT NEWS
In a second major decision yesterday, the Court unanimously ruled that foster-care agencies have the right to reject same-sex couples on religious grounds, and governments can’t refuse to contract with them over it.
“The court ruled that the city of Philadelphia violated the First Amendment when it refused to continue working with a group called Catholic Social Services, which will not certify unmarried couples or same-sex couples as foster parents.” (Axios)
OTHER NATIONAL NEWS
Today is a federal holiday. Yesterday afternoon, President Biden signed into law a bill enshrining Juneteenth—a celebration of emancipation on June 19—on the federal calendar. Since June 19 falls on Saturday this year, federal workers have today off.
“‘Great nations don’t ignore the most painful moments. They don’t ignore those moments in the past. They embrace them,’” Biden said in remarks in the East Room before a crowd that included lawmakers and 94-year-old Opal Lee, who campaigned to make the day a national holiday.” (WaPo)
2. The Senate’s Lucy and the Football Charade
Stop me if this seems familiar. Earlier this week, Sen. Joe Manchin, having previously crapped on his party’s proposed For the People Act—and especially eliminating the filibuster to pass it—circulated a memo offering his take on an acceptable compromise.
Among the provisions:
Make Election Day a national holiday
End partisan gerrymandering
Automatic voter registration
Voter ID requirement (with alternatives, such as utility bills, accepted)
Increased penalties for voter intimidation
Disclosure for dark money and restrictions on single-candidate super PACs
Updating the Voting Rights Act, but with “objective measures for determining whether a state or locality has a pattern of discrimination” and “clarity on how states or localities exit out of preclearance”
His preclearance setup is too wishy-washy for my taste, given the torrent of voting restrictions being passed around the country. But as compromises go, it’s reasonable. Voter ID for an end to gerrymandering and dark money disclosures? That’s a good trade.
Yesterday, Stacey Abrams said she thought so too.
Prominent voting rights activist Stacey Abrams said Thursday that she could “absolutely” support compromises floated by Sen. Joe Manchin III (W.Va.), the lone Senate Democrat who is not sponsoring a sweeping elections bill in the chamber. …
During an appearance on CNN, Abrams was asked whether she could support such a compromise.
“Absolutely,” she responded. “This is a first and important step to preserving our democracy.” (WaPo)
Approximately six seconds later, Mitch McConnell said no dice in a Fox-News-buzzword-salad statement that made clear he a) doesn’t want you to remember why the Voting Rights Act was passed in the first place, and b) isn’t interested in any deal that gets in the way of his party’s ability to block ballot access.
Manchin negotiated with himself, and he’ll get nothing for his trouble. In the end, if the Senate is going to pass anything to counteract the Republican assault of voting rights, it will likely do so with 50 (plus one) votes.
Keep that in mind as we discuss this next headline:
“Bipartisan infrastructure pitch gains steam on Capitol Hill as Biden weighs in from Europe”
Twenty-one senators, led by Mitt Romney and Krysten Sinema, are backing the “framework” of a “hard” infrastructure deal that comes in at less than half what President Biden proposed and will lean on regressive user taxes and tolls rather than asking the rich to contribute a penny.
The group now includes 11 Republicans, nine Democrats and one independent who caucuses with the Democrats. All told, they account for a fifth of the entire chamber.
The show of support, the senators said, marked an attempt to prove publicly that their new endeavor can win broad approval on Capitol Hill, even as an increasingly agitated liberal coalition has raised alarms that the drawn-out bipartisan talks have been fruitless—and some conservatives have questioned the need for another massive burst in federal spending.
Here’s the plan. Biden wanted $2.25 trillion. It offers $579 billion in new spending and about $435 billion in repurposed COVID bucks. Biden wanted to address climate change, the existential question of our age. It does not.
It’s unclear whether Republicans will support even this. Some don’t want to spend anything. McConnell has remained mum. Democrats, meanwhile, aren’t keen on the pay-fors. And beyond this group of 21, you have House progressives, House conservatives, and the rest of the Senate to worry about.
Currently, there’s enough GOP support for this to survive a filibuster—but only if Dems stick together. That gives Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren leverage. And House Dems aren’t happy about this at all.
To sweeten the pot, Dems are talking about a second bill that would cover climate change, Medicare expansion, and immigration reform in a reconciliation package, meaning it only needs 50 votes. Half of the $6 trillion legislation would be paid for by taxing the rich, the rest added to the deficit.
Biden has proposed a historic investment in public works that also would shore up what the White House calls the human infrastructure of everyday life: child care centers, veterans hospitals, community colleges and elder care.
Together, the $1.7 trillion American Jobs Plan and the $1.8 trillion American Families Plan make up a wish-list of Democratic priorities that most Republicans say are investments that go far beyond what they are comfortable spending.
The draft emerging from Sanders’ committee goes further and would expand Medicare by lowering the eligibility age from 65 to 60, and offer added benefits such as hearing aids and dental care for seniors, which are among his longtime priorities. Democrats would help pay for the plan with a prescription drug pricing overhaul.
Three questions:
If Republicans know this is the play—pass a small bipartisan bill, then ram through a larger partisan bill—what’s their incentive for playing ball on the first one?
The impetus for the bipartisan deal was Manchin’s insistence that Republicans be included on the infrastructure package. What guarantee is there that he’ll go for a huge, strictly partisan bill?
Based on everything we’ve seen over the last decade, how do we know that, having worked Dems down to less than half their original target, McConnell won’t roll them? If two Republicans bail, Dems won’t have the votes to break the filibuster.
3. State School Board Approves New Standards
After four months of controversy, Democrats on the State Board of Education finally approved guidance documents for the new, more inclusive social studies standards.
“Last week, the state House rewrote a COVID-19 school relief bill to include new language that would delay the social studies standards to the 2022-23 school year. GOP lawmakers said the delay would give the state more time to finish the documents and train teachers. The state Senate rejected the House’s changes to the bill on Monday. A committee of lawmakers will try to work out differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill.” (N&O)
“Two Republican board members—Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson and State Treasurer Dale Folwell—were not at Thursday’s meeting. They had voted in February against the new standards.”
Robinson missed the meeting, but he carved out time to go on Newsmax TV and talk about what he believes is critical race theory being taught in schools. (It’s not.)
The opposition to CRT, Robinson said, comes from “people who are endowed with common sense who understand how damaging this critical race theory and the surrounding teachings can be.”
On Tuesday, I shared the collective wisdom of some of those common-sense-havers who complained to Robinson’s school-indoctrination task force. Perhaps we need a couple more reminders of where this is coming from.
No. 4
My grandson has to watch CNN NEWS every morning in his class. He is not allowed to mention military guns in his classwork. They are forced to wear the stupid mask, that are proven to do no good, outside at recess and pe. And if he does not wear the mask at the pe, his pe teacher makes him run around the track. They have no real interaction with other kids. They cant even mention anything about God. They can't wear certain tshirts etc. this is not a school,this is a prison. My grandson use to love going to school, but now his mom is seriously thinking about home schooling him.
No. 8
My teen’s high school English teacher assigned students to pick one out of 7 NY Times videos and answer questions. 6 out of the 7 was about racism ( being implicit, white privilege, etc) and the other was bias against women. I felt it totally inappropriate but my daughter was afraid for me to say anything because of whatever backlash may occur. I simply told her not to take part in that assignment. I nor my child should be afraid to speak up due to fear of what my child may have to face.
No. 11
Mountain Island Charter School in Gaston County is teaching social justice which included the acceptance of gay parents, transgender kids and promoting certain women of color. The teacher spoke about Black Lives Matters alot making my son feel very uncomfortable. I spoke to his teacher and principal and they said it would be an ongoing topic from time to time.
No. 21
Teacher wearing BLM shirt on her bitmoji the entire year in her virtual classroom. Also talking about her wife at home etc. … I pulled my children to homeschool this year after getting no where with the principal and then hearing through the grapevine he talked with district and they hired a lawyer and then immediately at the next board meeting approved that BLM could be worn by teachers.
I also have a teacher at my sons high school [redacted] that has something very disturbing posted in her zoom calls and on the TV in her room. It’s got a rainbow background and states- If your parents aren’t accepting of your identity- I’m your mom now. Drink some water- take your meds- make sure enough eat- I love you. I can email pictures of al of this.
4. Maybe the NCGA Shouldn’t Let Duke Write Laws
Governor Cooper told lawmakers to rethink an energy bill that’s yet to have a hearing, saying it would “cost ratepayers too much, fall short of clean energy goals, hamper job recruitment and weaken the Utilities Commission.”
By and large, the bill was written by Duke Energy for Duke Energy, WRAL reports.
The nearly 50-page bill, crafted over the last few months by Duke Energy, representatives from the renewable energy industry, major electricity customers and House Republicans, would set nearly a decade's worth of state energy policy. It includes regulatory changes that Duke has wanted for years, significantly boosts solar energy generation in the state and pushes forward on re-licensing existing nuclear plants and toward building a new one.
The measure also would retire five coal plants around the state years faster than currently planned.
From the N&O:
The N.C. Sustainable Energy Association was one of a small number of groups in conversations with legislative leaders as the proposal was negotiated, but late Tuesday issued a statement criticizing House Bill 951, specifically the prescribed replacements for coal plants and a provision allowing Duke and other utilities to spend up to $50 million finding a site for an “advanced nuclear facility.” …
Gudrun Thompson, a senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, criticized several portions of the bill. In addition to echoing worries about the process that shaped the legislation, Thompson said the multi-year rate plan could lead to over-collection on utility bills and questioned a section that allows utilities to own 55% of the renewable energy resources required by 2026.
5. Raleigh Hires Its New Police Chief
Raleigh city manager Marchell Adams-David announced that Charlotte-Meck PD deputy chief Estella Patterson will take over for the departing Cassandra Deck-Brown starting Aug. 1.
Patterson, per the city’s press release: “I am looking forward to strengthening the relationships with citizens and residents in the community and advancing 21st-century policing ideals to make Raleigh the safest city in America.”
In a town hall last week, she pledged accountability and transparency: “In building trust and legitimacy with the community, you have to be connected.” (N&O)
Yeah, but: Patterson was head of Charlotte’s internal affairs when a cop killed Keith Lamont Scott. She absolved the officer who shot Scott, even though body-cam footage contradicted the police department’s claim that Scott threatened officers with a gun. After an officer held a gun to an unarmed man’s head, she called his actions “reasonable,” though CMPD’s former chief said last week that Patterson made a point to investigate him for conduct unbecoming an officer.
Raleigh has only made faint nods toward meaningful police reform, and the council just increases the police budget by $5 million.
A lot of activists weren’t happy about Deck-Brown’s tenure, and not without reason. She was, to my mind, overly protective of bad cops. And believe me when I tell you the drug-planting scandal is going to get worse before it gets better.
There’s distrust toward the RPD in Raleigh’s Black community, and there will be skepticism of Patterson, too. Addressing it needs to be her top priority.
6. After the Nikole Hannah-Jones Fiasco, Black UNC Profs Are Ready to Bail
Filed under Actions Have Consequences: After the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees embarrassed themselves—and the entire state, really—by bending to political pressure and not granting Nikole Hannah-Jones tenure, UNC’s Black faculty and staff are rethinking whether they want to stick around.
From the N&O:
About 20 Black faculty and staff at UNC-Chapel Hill say they are considering leaving the university because they feel undervalued on campus, particularly in light of journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones not being offered tenure.
Members of the Carolina Black Caucus took a poll at their regularly scheduled Zoom meeting this week and found that 70% of the about 30 attendees are considering leaving UNC-CH and more than 60% of them are actively looking for other jobs. The group announced the news in a tweet Wednesday.
7. The Murky Future of the State’s Essential News Source
In The Assembly, Jeremy Borden takes a deep dive into the state of the state’s media, particularly the recently-acquired-by-hedge-fund McClatchy papers.
The fear in North Carolina—and elsewhere—is that even a big profit margin won’t be enough for its owners.
Hedge fund Alden Global Capital, which owns several newspapers and has become infamous for slashing their resources, saw a $160 million profit in 2017, reported media analyst Ken Doctor. That number represented a very strong 17 percent operating margin. “Alden Global Capital is making so much money wrecking local journalism it might not want to stop anytime soon,” he wrote.
Doctor, now the founder of Lookout Santa Cruz, told The Assembly that McClatchy’s new hedge-fund owner, Chatham, would seek bigger returns and, at some point, a willing buyer—like one of the remaining newspaper chains, a hedge fund, or a private equity group.
Read the whole thing, and not just because I’m quoted (briefly) in it. I’ll also put in a shameless plug for you to subscribe to The Assembly, which over the last two months has published some of the best journalism in the state (not just because one of those pieces was mine).
They’re doing ambitious work, and they’re paying journalists good money to do it.
For reasons both selfish—I’m starting to work with them on a long-term project I’m very excited about and really hope pans out—and beneficent, I want them to thrive. You should, too.
8. A Simple Solution to Homelessness
Give them housing.
Really, that’s it.
Elior Cohen, an economist at UCLA, writes in a newly released study that “housing assistance for single adults experiencing homelessness reduces the likelihood of future return to the homeless system by 20 percentage points over an 18-month period …. Moreover, my findings show that housing programs reduce crime, increase employment, and improve health, while not increasing reliance on social benefits. A simple cost-benefit analysis implies that up to 80 percent of housing and program costs are offset by these potential benefits in the first 18 months alone.”
Giving the unhoused housing could almost pay for itself in a year and a half.
As of 2020, North Carolina—the entire state—had an estimated 9,280 unhoused people, of whom 1,576 were children, 2,558 had no shelter whatsoever, and 1,272 were considered chronically homeless.
Cohen, whose analysis was conducted in Los Angeles County, estimated a permanent supportive housing cost of $50 per person per day.
Using that estimate, North Carolina could house every homeless person for less than $170 million—before recouping any benefits. Focus on just the chronically homeless, and you’re looking at $23 million.
For comparison, the state will give Apple $25 million a year in tax incentives for the next 40 years. Just saying.