Thursday morning's high drama was intense out front on the Supreme Court steps, where I had the honor of standing with my friends from the Tea Party Patriots. The nervous energy before the decision was palpable. The concern about the future of our country that brought so many activists into the tea party movement in the first place had only intensified since, and the contrast between their intelligent, heart-felt speeches and the hypnotic chants of the counter-protesters was stark.
Then the news broke - I thought. There it was on my Twitter feed, courtesy of CNN: "@cnnbrk Supreme Court strikes down individual mandate portion of health care law." I relayed the information to the crowd, which erupted in applause.
But wait. In the next instant came a text from my wife - who is not only the most wonderful wife and mother in the world, but also a leading employee benefits tax lawyer and expert on the president's health care law. She wrote: "Mandate unconstitutional but surviving as a tax."
So I corrected my earlier announcement. People were confused and disappointed. Activists were prepared for a loss. But not like this. Not with Roberts joining the four liberals - who of course are so political in their decision-making that what they would do was never in doubt.
I explained that this legal sleight-of-hand by John Roberts - transforming the mandate into a tax despite all evidence to the contrary - at least preserved the legacy of the Rehnquist Court, which was to place limits on the Commerce Clause. But if the federal government can compel behavior via "tax penalties" when it can't regulate them as commerce we're left with a distinction but not much of a difference. William Rehnquist was sorely missed on Thursday.
The bottom line is that the John Roberts ignored the entire legislative history of the president's health care law, dozens of public promises from the president himself and supporters in Congress who insisted the mandate was not a tax, and a 20-page explanation in the law itself.
He did that to rule that the mandate at the heart of the president's health care law is actually a tax on the middle class after all. A tax on people who can't afford the expensive health insurance the government wants them to buy, or have ideological or religious reasons they would prefer not to buy such health insurance.
So now the president's promise not to tax the middle class has been exposed as fundamental deception at the heart of his health care law. Now Congress must repeal the law and pass real health care reform that empowers patients and doctors and doesn't rely on a dishonest mandate tax.
Phil Kerpen is president of American Commitment, a columnist on Fox News Opinion, chairman of the Internet Freedom Coalition, and author of the 2011 book Democracy Denied.
American Commitment is dedicated to restoring and protecting America’s core commitment to free markets, economic growth, Constitutionally-limited government, property rights, and individual freedom.
Washingtonian magazine named Mr. Kerpen to their "Guest List" in 2008 and The Hill newspaper named Mr. Kerpen a "Top Grassroots Lobbyist" in 2011.
Mr. Kerpen's op-eds have run in newspapers across the country and he is a frequent radio and television commentator on economic growth issues.
Prior to joining American Commitment, Mr. Kerpen served as vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity. Mr. Kerpen has also previously worked as an analyst and researcher for the Free Enterprise Fund, the Club for Growth, and the Cato Institute.
A native of Brooklyn, N.Y., Mr. Kerpen currently resides in Washington, D.C. with his wife Joanna and their daughter Lilly.
White House: There Is No Justification For Terrorism Over Expression, Including Muhammed Cartoons | Katie Pavlich