Supreme Court Hears First Arguments on the Affordable Care Act

Article first published as Supreme Court Hears First Arguments on the Affordable Care Act on Technorati.

The United States Supreme Court began hearing arguments today concerning the constitutionality of the Affordable Care act.  This is the beginning of a 3 day process where the 9 justices will hear arguments related to whether the act violates constitutional protections. 

Today's 90 minute oral arguments  concerned whether or not the Supreme Court could even hear the case.

At the center of the arguments was the definition of a tax as it pertained to Supreme Court jurisdiction  and whether the penalty for non-compliance constitutes one .  If the court finds it is and agrees with the 4th circuit court's lower ruling that the penalty is a tax based on using the IRS as a collection mechanism then all further arguments could cease.

That end would come about because under the Tax Anti-Injunction Act of 1867 or AIA, a challenge to taxation can't be heard until the tax has actually been levied.  Since the Affordable Care Act's mandatory compliance provisions don't come into play till 2014, the challenge would have to wait till the 2015 tax filing season when the first penalties had been assessed.

Arguing that the AIA was applicable to the case were Gregory Katsas  Former Bush Administration justice department official and Robert A. Long former assistant to the United States Solicitor General .  Arguing the federal Government's position that the penalty is not a tax was U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.

The Tax Anti-Injunction Act came about to prevent plaintiffs in a federal tax case from receiving benefits derived from not paying the assessment while the case was ongoing.  Instead the tax is expected to be collected when assessed with plaintiffs then filing for refund.  Suit can then be filed if the IRS denies the refund which would provide the necessary foundation to bring a challenge to the tax law itself.

Tuesday's scheduled oral arguments will consider the constitutionality of the individual mandate itself.  Wednesday morning's oral arguments are centered around whether the rest of the Affordable Care Act is legally viable if the mandate is stuck down. 

The final arguments are scheduled to be heard on Wednesday afternoon and concern the challenge made by 26 states to the act's Medicaid provision.  This part of the Affordable Care Act would force expansion of the state run Medicaid programs to individuals not currently covered by the program.  The state's argument claims the provision would negatively impact budgets and amount to an debilitating federal mandate. 

Google NBC

Recently I wrote an article about Google's recent hiring of Kevin Rose and expansion of their premium content channels on YouTube.  In that piece I commented on the concern of independent content providers that Google may be making a push to become the dominant player on the Internet.  In essence a content gatekeeper minimizing all other outlets.

While questions remain as to whether it's proper or even an anti-trust issue for Google to operate in both the content and search spaces it's important to keep things in perspective.

Let's face it, what lands in Google's premium channels will still have the restrictions of the medium to contend with not to mention varying degrees of production quality.  Couple that with the basic fact that the majority of popular video content on YouTube is for all intents and purposes, garbage.

I watched the IAWTV(Intl. Academy of Web TV) awards a few months back.  Aside from the one news related program nominated that I was interested in, the rest of the nominees never rose above the quality of fan films. Much of it reminded me of those awful videos made in high school multimedia classes.  The common thread among many of the nominees was YouTube, with the notable exception of the news program that I was interested in. 

When you've got content like this...

I wouldn't worry too much about Google crushing the Free Internet. 

I'd be far more concerned about providing good programming than a giant monolith betting on pet videos and B list talent to corner the content market.  The Internet is a fickle beast and those who seek to control its destiny soon find themselves on the sidelines.  That an Internet company like Google would think otherwise seems unlikely. 

The medium lends itself to specialized content for very distinct audiences that can number in the thousands if not millions. Google sees that as a potential cash cow but that's a very traditional view of media.   Internet consumers tend to distrust singular sources for their information and always prefer an a la' carte experience to the combo deal.  Unlike television, your audience isn't captive and always finds a way to bypass you if you don't meet their needs.

I'd cite the recent examples of Myspace and RIM for those who thought otherwise.  If Google does become the next Internet NBC it's a safe bet that other alternatives will surface shortly thereafter and relegate Google to the ranks of Alta Vista.

Google Making Major Moves in the Content Space

Article first published as Google Making Major Moves in the Content Space on Technorati.

While partaking in a daily allowance of Internet broadcasting the other day there was news of some apparently notable maneuvers by Google.

The rumored acquisition of Kevin Rose of Digg and Revision 3 fame  by Google last week was confirmed Sunday with he and his staff at the recently idled Mi.lk (creator of the Oink app) being hired for an as of yet undisclosed project. 

Close on the heels of that development was news of the imminent launch of a new premium channel on You Tube called Geek & Sundry aggregating popular web content from  personalities like Felicia Day (The Guild)  Wil Wheaton (Star Trek, The Guild), Veronica Belmont & Tom Merritt (Sword & Laser, TWIT), 

Speculation abounds that these moves signal Google's intention to improve their stagnated social networking destination, Google + and become a dominant provider of popular Web produced content much like Rose's Revision3 but on a grander scale. 

Google's recent acquisitions and development of You Tube channels may pose a threat to smaller content providers if successful.   Some pundits such as Leo Laporte have gone as far as to suggest  Google may aspire to the role of a content gatekeeper not unlike traditional television networks.  The dual role of Google as both content provider and de-facto search engine of record does beg the question of whether the company can remain unbiased in both roles.