Revisiting Obama's Selma Speech

Jonathan Bernstein is a Bloomberg View columnist. He taught political science at the University of Texas at San Antonio and DePauw University and wrote A Plain Blog About Politics.
Read More.
a | A

1. Jeffrey Young and Sam Stein have several people in limbo, waiting to see whether they’ll be harmed by the Obamacare subsidies Supreme Court decision. Fair enough, but remember: those without subsidies will be hurt as well because costs will spiral up. The goal of the lawsuit is to wreck the health care system in the U.S. I’ll repeat: the goal of the lawsuit is to wreck the health care system in the U.S., in order to (the plaintiffs hope) achieve through judicial sabotage what they couldn’t do through the ballot box.

Remember, unlike the first Obamacare Supreme Court case, there’s no grand principle at stake here, at least not within the lawsuit itself. Nor does anyone believe – again, unlike the first lawsuit – that if the plaintiffs win here the health care market will function better as a result.

2. At the Monkey Cage, David Samuels asks about democracy and redistribution.

3. Early Iowa polls do not predict Iowa caucus results. But if you want to assess Iowa right now, Ann Selzer’s score that accounts for more than first-choice preference sounds reasonable to me.

4. Ed Kilgore is correct: The Iowa Caucuses aren’t going away. In my view, the primaries and caucuses in general are not as important as they were in the 1970s, but Iowa’s spot is secure.

5. Andrew Sprung revisits Barack Obama’s Selma speech.

6. Jonathan Cohn on the auto bailout and the Republican candidates.

7. And here at View, Kavitha Davidson on the important reform FIFA needs.

Get Early Returns every in morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg View's editorial board or Bloomberg LP, its owners and investors.

To contact the author on this story:
Jonathan Bernstein at

To contact the editor on this story:
Cameron Abadi at