What do Dems have to lose by seating Barrett?

Posted

To the Editor:

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals found the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional. It’s being appealed to the Supreme Court, which most court watchers maintain will, at worst, be split 4-4 — which means a tie defaults to upholding the Appeals Court’s decision and ACA is dismantled...without Amy Coney Barrett.

Should Barrett be seated and votes to dismantle it, the 5th Circuit’s decision is upheld and the ACA is dismantled...with Amy Coney Barrett.

It’s reminiscent of the popular rock group U2’s song “With or Without You.”

However, should she vote to uphold the ACA with a 4-4 vote by the other justices, the ACA remains law.

So, what do the Democrats stand to lose by seating Barrett on this issue? I cannot believe supposed intelligent people, members of the world’s most exclusive club [the U.S. Senate], have chosen this issue as their crutch.

Just one more reason for voters to understand what the Democratic Party has become: a do nothing, obstructionist, power-hungry, political organization that wants to control every part of our lives by taxing and regulating to the point we are totally dependent upon their government. In their orthodoxy we’re too stupid to run our own lives, families, and businesses.

They are afraid to go too far; Roe v. Wade or any other hostile issue is unseemly, so they have chosen to show a united front on ACA. I think every Dem in their opening statements had the picture of someone dependent upon ACA. Such a shame they didn’t have pictures of the business owners whose lives have been destroyed by thugs and rioters...rioters, some of whom Democrats, including Kamala Harris, bailed out of jail.

Philip H. Johnson

Siler City