When Nancy Pelosi announced that the Obamacare bill would have to be passed in order to see what was in it, the American people knew (or should have known) that this was not a piece of legislation which had been fully considered. Now that it is law, this is becoming increasingly evident on at least one front; the response to litigation against it. A look at decisions made regarding lawsuits filed against Obamacare show that the judicial system was not prepared for such arguments. Take, for example, the cases of Hobby Lobby and Domino’s Farms.

Nationwide arts and crafts store Hobby Lobby is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Or, as the case may be, between fundamental rights and the government enforcement of law. A first amendment battle is brewing on the grounds of religious freedom and, as the battle is heating up, neither side looks ready to budge. 

Very soon, only 1 in 3 physicians will be independent. The rest will work for hospitals, insurance companies, and increasingly, Accountable Care Organizations. The trend is a result of perverse incentives in the medical market that make it difficult or impossible for doctors to operate outside of a corporate practice.Rather than alleviating this trend, so that doctors can focus on treating their patients, Obamacare exacerbates the problem.

Today is an important day - we're one giant step closer to reversing the government takeover of our health care.The deadline for states to begin setting up their own, state-run health care exchange under ObamaCare was today, December 14th. This deadline was a crucial trial for ObamaCare, and the verdict is in -- 26 states, a majority of the union, are currently declining to set up an exchange.Below is a map of how each state stands on the exchanges:

In one of the more infamous statements regarding the process in which Democrats sought to force-feed health care reform to the American people, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi quipped, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it".

States should not implement health insurance exchanges as defined by Obamacare. There is no fiscal advantage to doing so. An exchange will not improve life for a state's citizens, and there is great risk of political liability for officials responsible for an exchange. 

American Conservatives have been sounding the alarm about state run health care and what horrors await us in a government run health care plan for most of the last century. In fact, Ronald Reagan warned us what was to come several decades ago.

With 23 states (so far) refusing to set up health care exchanges to implement ObamaCare, the federal government is being forced to implement its own exchanges in these states instead.  Since the ObamaCare law did not provide any funding to do this, observers have been wondering - "how are they going to pay for these exchanges?"Unsurprisingly, the answer is - wait for it - another new tax!

It's a headline that anybody paying close attention to the health care reform debate would have thought had likely been ripped from The Onion.  Instead, it could be found at the Weekly Standard: