Read the Burwell oral argument transcript from March 4. There is an interesting segment from (roughly) pages 14 to 18 involving Breyer, Kennedy, Scalia, Sotomayor, and attorney Michael A. Carvin, on the consequences of holding the federal exchange invalid upon certain federalist principles. The elimination of subsidies to the non-participating states’ citizens would presumably have a coercive effect upon the states. I’ll post something more on all of this later. The decision is expected in June.
Powering this software “generator” appears to require more human effort and input than People’s headline lets on though it is nonetheless amusing. The text result reads something like remedial freshman poetry (perhaps the inexact nature of the program’s vocabulary inadvertently mimics the abstractions and allusions of amateurish verse).
I do wonder what the corporate publishing world is making of this. If the executives indeed believe that words are cheaper and less meaningful than pennies, the answer may be painfully obvious.
While publishers and information providers chase new technologies to rework or transform their capabilities, we learn that the IRS relies upon software applications in use during the Kennedy Administration.
Tip of the hat to ATR. (However, I wonder if this is as “bad” a thing as ATR believes.)
The Supreme Court’s February/March argument calendar includes the case of King v. Burwell on March 4. King centers on the issue of statutory authority for a federal health care exchange. For those who have used the exchange, received credits, or are otherwise impacted, it appears that another tax year has begun bearing the fruits of uncertainty.