is what the president was basing his defense of the statute on, and the taxing authority, even in oral argument they ran away from the whole idea that this could be a tax. john roberts is the um spire, he calls the ball and strikes, he called it a strike, the decent called it a ball. i sided with the decent here, i think clearly this was an over reach. to rewrite the statute and making it a tax, i think under cuts not only the credibility of the white house here, who is saying this wasn t a tax, but i think also it was a stretch legally cheeking. chip merlin i m going to quote clark nealy, he says it s a terrible mistake and the supreme court has forward the most significant expansion of federal power since the new deal. does that concern you? i disagree with the premise. i think we ll have problems with the commerce clause in the future because of them finding that the commerce clause was inapplicable to enforce this act. the truth of the matter is republicans were calling this a