Welcome to your Wednesday edition of The Morning Roar!U.S. Appeals Court Dissents on ObamacareIn what may prove to be a major blow to the implementation of The Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, yesterday a U.S. Appeals Court ruled that the federal subsidies used to help people purchase insurance through state exchanges are illegal. This being the U.S. legal system and all, of course another appeals court mere hours later ruled the opposite. CNBC has the breakdown: 

A panel of federal appeals court that covers Washington, D.C., ruled 2-1 that the subsidies are illegal. But about two hours later, a panel from the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 in a separate case that the subsidies are legal.The split could mean the cases would soon land at the U.S. Supreme Court.In the D.C. circuit case, the panel said such subsidies can be granted only to people who bought insurance in an Obamacare exchange run by an individual state or the District of Columbia—not on the federally run exchange HealthCare.gov.The ruling relied on a close reading of language in the Affordable Care Act."Section 36B plainly makes subsidies available in the Exchanges established by states," wrote Senior Circuit Judge Raymond Randolph, who was joined by Judge Thomas Griffith in the majority decision on the case known as  Halbig v. Burwell."We reach this conclusion, frankly, with reluctance. At least until states that wish to can set up their own Exchanges, our ruling will likely have significant consequences both for millions of individuals receiving tax credits through federal Exchanges and for health insurance markets more broadly."

Obamacare is a looming disaster that will have deleterious effects for millions of people, especially those in the most urgent need of health care, and any blow struck to its implementation should be cheered. However, ultimately it doesn't matter if this crony-capitalist system is implemented at the federal or state level, or even if Obamacare itself is repealed all together. The U.S. medical industry is one of, if not the most, heavily cartelized industries in the United States. As long as the government continues to impose restrictions on the abilities of individuals to exchange goods and services in regards to health care, the problem will continue to worsen, with or without Obamacare.I discussed crony capitalism, including how Obamacare is a prime example of it, with Hunter Lewis back in Episode 10 of the Lions of Liberty Podcast.Pentagon Official Afraid of Rand PaulWe have not been shy at this website about criticizing Rand Paul when appropriate, particularly concerning many of his foreign policy statements. While I find Rand's often unilateral defense of Israel troubling, a Pentagon official is worried about Rand's foreign policy stances for a different reason: he just doesn't want to bomb enough people! "Joseph Miller" (a pen name being used by an anonymous Pentagon official) writes an op-ed over at The Daily Caller explaining why Rand Paul's ideas "scare" him:

Sen. Rand Paul’s first real-time entrance into wartime decision-making in Iraq may have echoed the isolationist positions of his libertarian supporters — and the war-weary sentiment of much of America — but it also highlights a devotion to ideology over reality; politics over national interest. And more importantly, it makes clear that he should not be considered a serious candidate to lead this country.Paul’s foreign policy views are at best foolish and naïve, and at worst politicized and dangerous.On Iraq, Paul went on record to say that he is opposed to sending ground troops back into Iraq, despite the obvious signs that the situation — and the threat it poses to the United States – is quickly spiraling out of control. The problem is not the sentiment, which is shared by a large number of Americans: The problem is that any decision on what military  resources the United States is willing to bring to bear on its sworn enemies must not come based on some campaign commitment, but based on what the U.S., dealing with real-time facts, has decided its mission is; and what tools U.S. leadership has decided are required to achieve them.Both Paul and President Barack Obama share in this blatant error — they have both been wrong to take essential options off the table so early in crises.

Of course, "essential options" is code for "let's start re-start this Imperial war of aggression!"There are legitimate methods by which the U.S. government could demonstrate that its intentions in Iraq are legitimately about the freedom of the Iraqi people, but history as well as the United States' own flagrant disregard for individual rights here at home are decent indications that there is no reason to believe this to be so.Read the entire article, if you can bear it, at The Daily Caller.Why Is Your Broadband So Slow?I hear it - and experience it - all the time. "Why is my Netflix so dang slow!?" It's certainly a frustrating experience to be in the middle of one of your favorite shows only to experience the dreaded "buffering." One would think, in 2014, that the technology to provide super-fast broadband would already exist.Well, it does. So why don't we all have it already?The fine folks at Broadband Now have released a report detailing the various state laws that prevent various cities and municipalities from installing "blazing fast internet", as they describe it. As you might suspect, there is once again a crony-capitalist element at play:

According to FCC data released in 2013, over 39 million Americans have less than 2 wired broadband providers they can get broadband service from.Our team at Broadband Now has been obsessed with this fact because without a competitive market, companies have little incentive to treat their customers well or improve their infrastructure leading to poor customer service  [1] and questionable business practices. [2]Lucky for some consumers, municipalities across the country have been stepping into help underserved populations get access to better more competitive broadband service.While this introduction of new competition sounds like a win for consumers, incumbent providers have been leveraging their lobbying power at the state level to limit what municipalities can and can’t do.While this practice of lobbying has gained a lot of attention in recent years, it’s still more common than you’d expect.In fact according to OpenSecrets.org, large broadband providers, such as Comcast, Time Warner Cable, AT&T, and Verizon, are some of the top contributors to PACs and top spenders on lobbyists.With AT&T and Comcast each donating over $2M each to Political Action Committees (or PACs).  [3] [4]And for existing providers, money spent on lobbying and getting officials sympathetic to their interests elected, is money well spent. ( see update)It’s so effective that as of this writing, there are 19 states that ban or limit municipalities from offering competitive broadband services.

The cable and broadband industry is heavily regulated, and crony corporations push legislation at the federal, state and local level which help them maintain their stranglehold over the industry. This lack of competition naturally prevents true competition in the marketplace, distorting it to the point that we can't even conceive of how the industry would look in a true free market.As I discussed last week in regards to Comcast's embarrassing customer service call that recently went viral, the crony capitalist elements of the industry prevent customers from having the ability to really get what they want. And sometimes to even do something as simple as cancel their service!Read The Morning Roar every weekday Monday-Friday!The Lions of Liberty are on Twitter, Facebook & Google+Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!