What to do if SCOTUS overturns the Affordable Care Act
by David Atkins
With the conservative Supreme Court's remarkably activist anti-labor 5-4 decision today, it is becoming apparent to almost everyone that the court is a purely partisan political body. Interested parties from interest groups to bloggers are preparing for next steps should the Court take the extraordinary step of overturning the entirety or parts of the Affordable Care Act.
To me, the answers are clear:
1) For the short term, by far the most important progressive issue is the Supreme Court. Nothing else comes close. I would rank climate change as the pressing issue for humanity over all, but absent miraculous scientific breakthroughs it will require heavy national and international regulation to make a dent. Even were such a thing politically possible, it is obvious that this Court would find some reason to strike down any sort of meaningful regulation on this front. Meanwhile, the Citizens United decision is perhaps the most baleful event for progressive politics in at least the last 20 years.
That fact in turn puts presidential politics in an increasingly stark light. The next President will have the likely opportunity to replace three septuagenarian justices during his term. The current Court stands on the edge of a knife, with a 5-4 conservative split. The election of the President for the next four years doesn't just affect the next four years of public policy: it will likely affect the next half century. Whatever the disappointments of the current administration, there is no question that Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor have been excellent nominees. It is no overstatement to say that the ability of the country's middle class to survive may well depend on which political party has the ability to nominate justices over the next four years.
2) The issue of reforming the healthcare system will necessarily devolve to the states. While they have always been important to close political observers, state legislatures will become the main battleground on which healthcare reform is fought. Fortunately for progressives, state legislature races are also where grassroots political organizing can have the greatest impact in terms of picking better Democrats at the endorsement and primary stage. Legislature battles are ones we can actually win more easily than Congressional battles where the power of big money and big influence is often simply too much to overcome.
Vermont already has a single-payer healthcare law, but the state is too small to have the leverage to truly make it work. California is but a few good progressive votes away from passing the bill (a combination of just enough Republicans and cowardly/corrupt conservadems still stand in the way.)
Enough states have majority Democratic legislatures than pressure can be brought to bear to pass single-payer healthcare in Democratic states. Those Democrats who refuse to vote for it should face grassroots primary challenges on the issue in every district.
The only way out of this mess is to organize, lobby and charge grimly through it. Refusing to vote for the President won't "teach the Democrats a lesson" or reorient the system in any way. All it will do is give the presidency to Romney, convince Democrats to become even more conservative, and most importantly lock in conservative dominance on the Supreme Court for the next half century.
Meanwhile, refusal to engage in local legislative political organizing because it's seen as too boring, too small-time or not sexy enough to merit attention is precisely what will ensure that this country never receives universal single-payer healthcare.
One thing is certain: Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy couldn't care less how many people march in the streets, or how many people stay home and don't vote. And it's increasingly clear that they and the seats they occupy have the greatest impact on all of our future. It's up to us to do something about it.
.