commerce clause? if you read anything about the commerce clause it involves interstate commerce not intrastate commerce. here is where the reality lies in this issue. the federal is trying to mandate health insurance for all by claiming if you don’t have it, you’ll have to pay a fine for not having it! you have folks that have enough money that does not want a health insurance plan. you also have folks that can’t afford any health insurance plan (like the homeless). now, if the law stated that health insurance needs to be available for all and not mandated to actually have, this would not have been an issue. granted we have business that deal in health insurance that are interstate, but individuals live in one residence or claim a particular state as their home of record. i can see the actual arguments will come into play and go to the US SUPREME COURT to dissolve this issue. the constitution says i have the right of pursuit for my happiness and that can be without having to purchase health insurance! but for my health, i do want it available without the liability of getting a fine in case i don’t get one.
Ok. Let’s just make it so only the people that need it buy it. The smell of adverse selection. That sounds like a real sound idea born of sensible insurance principles, right?
Let’s go back a bit further. Let’s go back to the Declaration of Independence which grants unalienable rights of life liberty and the pursuit oif happiness. Fast forward 230 years; in our current society which has seen a ton of scientific medical developments, in order to have the unalienable right of “life” you nneed, in this day and age, access to healthcare. We gain access via health insurance which helps defray the expenses. Without access to affrordable healthcare or affordable insurance for it, we are ultimately denied our right ot “life.”
Therefore, since the states have not made healthcare and/or affordable health insurance available to their citizens (except in few cases), and what they do have is mostly funded by the feds, I would concur that the healthcare law is fundamental to the values on which this society was founded, and is legal.
It would appear the states want control but with fed monies. Frankly, I would not trust my ability to get healthcare or get affordable health insurance to a state, or Medicare via state grants. We have seen how mean and niggardly some of the states have actually been very recently. Would you trust the states vs. a broad based national program with nationbal standards? I wouldn’t.
As for costs, sooner or later we will need some rationing or some brakes on multiple procedures that may not be effective. would I want states determining that? I don’t think so, especially in the wake of the spiteful Indiana law affecting planned parenthood.
The Constitution says nothing about the pursuit of happiness. And just because the Declaration of Independence proclaims your inalienable right to the pursit of happiness, doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want that makes you happy.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that intrastate activities that have a rational effect on interstate commerce fall within the purview of the Commerce Clause.
It will be interesting to see how the U.S. Supreme Court eventually rules in this case. These lower court rulings are interesting, but will not be the final say.
Arguments for and against have been made on this bill since it was proposed and ultimately passed in the dark of night behind closed doors and rammed down the throat of the American People even though a majority didn’t want it. This was the Progressive Socialists dream to impose universal healthcare no matter the cost. It is unconstitutional to mandate that people buy a product and is not a right for the government to force people to buy healthcare insurance. The faster this gets to the Supreme Court, the better.
Heathcare reform is simply an idea born out of need and not a Progressive Socialist agenda. Do you really think there are soocialists out there dreaming up this stuff? The need is real. It’s about people choosing between losing their homes or taking on an expensive medical procedure. It’s also about ending the practice of allowing the uninsured to flood our Emergency Rooms, thereby costing you and me (conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike) our hard earned money. Spare us the hyperbolic garbage.
You are entitled to your own opinion about the merits (or lack thereof) of the new health care law, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts as to how the bill was passed. It was not, as you say “passed in the dark of night behind closed doors and rammed down the throat of the American People even though a majority didn’t want it.”
The President promised health care reform when he ran for President and he was duly elected. The bill was offered earlly in his first term and was debated in the House and Senate for months. The House passed its version, the Senate passed its own version and the two chambers then had to work together to draft a common bill that both houses would pass.
This was voted on during the day, in open sessions of Congress. You can’t say it was unexpected since the President campaigned on doing exactly what he did.
Interestingly, the idea of a mandate to buy private health insurannce was an idea developed by current Republican members of the U.S. Senate when they were opposed to President Clinton’s efforts to reform health care. It seems the Republicans only like to talk about reform, but when it comes to actually doing it, they’re all talk and no action.
We already live in a Socialist America. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies…the list goes on and on. Like it or not, we are already socialists.
Other, the corrupt Progressive Socialist politicians on both sides of the aisle put the country in the position we find ourselves and that is “broke”. I think the last election proved that the country is still center right as evidenced by how many of the minon followers of Obama, Pelosi & Reid lost. Our politicians may be Socialists, but we aren’t. Time for them to move on, hopefully to Venezuela.
June 9, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Amazed says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
To Commen Sense who wrote:
You are entitled to your own opinion about the merits (or lack thereof) of the new health care law, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts as to how the bill was passed. It was not, as you say “passed in the dark of night behind closed doors and rammed down the throat of the American People even though a majority didn’t want it.”
Yes is sure was passed behind closed doors in the middle of the night! Where have you been? “We have to pass it so we can find out what’s in it.” Give me a break!
Other, you have your blinders on if you think there was any real debate on this bill. Behind closed doors, the Louisiana purchase and Nebraska kickback was agreed to along with the 2,700 page bill which was passed without anyone reading it on a straight party line vote. Perhaps you didn’t hear Nancy saying that she had to pass it so we could see what was in it. If it was so great, how come 2,000+ waivers have been granted to companies, unions and many in Pelosi’s district recently. When everyone saw what was in it, that is what fanned the flames to reject it. This is corruption at its highest level. No wonder we have all these lawsuits and challenges going on right now.
Thank you, Other Point of view. Just because the GOP keeps stating something ad nauseum and ad infinitum, does not make it so, i.e., “rammed down the throats” “the majority didn’t want it” etc.
Thank you forbpointing out that this was a stated goal of the current administration and they did what they said they were going to do with no help from the other side of the aisle.
BTW, polls today show that about the same njumber approve as disapprove despite GOP/Tea party revisionism.
And, while the Constitution does not say anything about the unalienable rights, how can you not consider those as central and fundamental to the ideas of this country? I think too many people forget that these ideas were a quantum leap at the time. It disheartens me no end to see the stupidity, cupidity, self indulgence and meanness that obtains among our purported elected officials…on all levels of government.
Just because your side lost the vote on the bill, just because the vote was along party lines, doesn’t mean the vote was not conducted without a full and fair debate on the issue. I don’t think you need the memory of an elephant to remember how this bill was debated ad naseum by Congress, in the newspapers and on TV by those on the left and the right.
It’s not like we woke up one day and found out “hey, Congress passed a health care law last night while the rest of the country was sleeping.”
To clarify what I was talking about regarding “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…” These rights are not central and fundamental to the ideas of THIS country. These are rights that, according to Thomas Jefferson, were God-given to ALL men (and women,and children…Jefferson ‘men’ meant humankind, not just adult males), everywhere in the world, not just THIS country. He said “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I meant also to point out that, since you were making a constitutional argument in your orginal post, that this was not part of the Constitution.
(p.s. sorry for the caps, I can’t italicize or underline for emphasis)
The methods used to pass this bill were corrupt and criminal and only the Progressive Leadership knew what was in it before it was voted on. Where was the transparency with the debate shown on Cspan as promised? Had the American People known what they were in for at the start, they may have been on the Capitol steps with pitchforks and torches. Pelosi, Reid & Obama pulled it off, but it remains to be seen whether it sticks.
Common Sense…”corrupt and criminal’?? Those are pretty strong words. Earlier you said Pelosi didn’t know what was in it,, that’s why they had to vote on it. Now you say that only the Progressive Leadership knew what was in it. You’re not making any sense. You might not remember the debates on the floor of the House. I do.
What part of the law do you not like? What part has you so angry, you suggest people would form mobs to stop it? It can’t be the mandate to purchase health insurance through private insurers. That part of the bill was an idea invented by Republicans during Clinton’s term. Health insurance company stock prices went up when the bill passed. In fact, the mandate doesn’t even go into effect until 2014. So what is so terrible about the bill that makes you so angry?
They were meant to be strong words. This Administration and the Progressive Leadership in Congress has taken the art of deception to a new level. The bill said the rejection of the mandates would result in a fine for not taking coverage. Now, the government lawyer in this case admits it is a tax. The President went on and on about if you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. Now, one third of all companies say they will drop coverage for employees in 2014. We now are up to 2000+ waivers granted to companies and unions and the list keeps growing. Premiums keep skyrocketing for Individuals and Groups across the country. Even AARP was granted a waiver from this plan after being a big supporter. No member of Congress or the Administration will be subject to the bill. If this bill and its onerous provisions is so great, why do you think it is being challenged so forcefully by over half the states in the country? The country is broke and if implemented fully, this bill will hasten the country’s demise.
Final point to refute Common Sense’s argument that this law was somehow the brain-child of the “Progressive Leadership” passed under cover of darkness with no one knowing its contents:
The proof that this story you tell is just not true is that progressives didn’t want the mandate. That was the compromise position after they could only get certain Republicans to sign onto the measure. Remember the Public Option? That was what the majority of Democrats wanted and didn’t get…because they compromised…during the debates on the bill. Moreover, real progressives wanted single-payer health care. That wasn’t even part of the debate. So if you think for a minute that the crrent plan was some sort of progressive dream law, you haven’t been paying attention to what progressives have been trying to do. This law doesn’t even come close.
There can be a difference between what you and a health insurance company consider healthy. Some insurers will say that you have a health condition if you smoke, are overweight, are taking prescriptions, or had a medical condition in the past. If this describes you, you may want to search and read “Penny Health Insurance” on the web.
commerce clause? if you read anything about the commerce clause it involves interstate commerce not intrastate commerce. here is where the reality lies in this issue. the federal is trying to mandate health insurance for all by claiming if you don’t have it, you’ll have to pay a fine for not having it! you have folks that have enough money that does not want a health insurance plan. you also have folks that can’t afford any health insurance plan (like the homeless). now, if the law stated that health insurance needs to be available for all and not mandated to actually have, this would not have been an issue. granted we have business that deal in health insurance that are interstate, but individuals live in one residence or claim a particular state as their home of record. i can see the actual arguments will come into play and go to the US SUPREME COURT to dissolve this issue. the constitution says i have the right of pursuit for my happiness and that can be without having to purchase health insurance! but for my health, i do want it available without the liability of getting a fine in case i don’t get one.
Ok. Let’s just make it so only the people that need it buy it. The smell of adverse selection. That sounds like a real sound idea born of sensible insurance principles, right?
Let’s go back a bit further. Let’s go back to the Declaration of Independence which grants unalienable rights of life liberty and the pursuit oif happiness. Fast forward 230 years; in our current society which has seen a ton of scientific medical developments, in order to have the unalienable right of “life” you nneed, in this day and age, access to healthcare. We gain access via health insurance which helps defray the expenses. Without access to affrordable healthcare or affordable insurance for it, we are ultimately denied our right ot “life.”
Therefore, since the states have not made healthcare and/or affordable health insurance available to their citizens (except in few cases), and what they do have is mostly funded by the feds, I would concur that the healthcare law is fundamental to the values on which this society was founded, and is legal.
It would appear the states want control but with fed monies. Frankly, I would not trust my ability to get healthcare or get affordable health insurance to a state, or Medicare via state grants. We have seen how mean and niggardly some of the states have actually been very recently. Would you trust the states vs. a broad based national program with nationbal standards? I wouldn’t.
As for costs, sooner or later we will need some rationing or some brakes on multiple procedures that may not be effective. would I want states determining that? I don’t think so, especially in the wake of the spiteful Indiana law affecting planned parenthood.
The Constitution says nothing about the pursuit of happiness. And just because the Declaration of Independence proclaims your inalienable right to the pursit of happiness, doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want that makes you happy.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that intrastate activities that have a rational effect on interstate commerce fall within the purview of the Commerce Clause.
It will be interesting to see how the U.S. Supreme Court eventually rules in this case. These lower court rulings are interesting, but will not be the final say.
Arguments for and against have been made on this bill since it was proposed and ultimately passed in the dark of night behind closed doors and rammed down the throat of the American People even though a majority didn’t want it. This was the Progressive Socialists dream to impose universal healthcare no matter the cost. It is unconstitutional to mandate that people buy a product and is not a right for the government to force people to buy healthcare insurance. The faster this gets to the Supreme Court, the better.
Heathcare reform is simply an idea born out of need and not a Progressive Socialist agenda. Do you really think there are soocialists out there dreaming up this stuff? The need is real. It’s about people choosing between losing their homes or taking on an expensive medical procedure. It’s also about ending the practice of allowing the uninsured to flood our Emergency Rooms, thereby costing you and me (conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike) our hard earned money. Spare us the hyperbolic garbage.
@ Common Sense,
You are entitled to your own opinion about the merits (or lack thereof) of the new health care law, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts as to how the bill was passed. It was not, as you say “passed in the dark of night behind closed doors and rammed down the throat of the American People even though a majority didn’t want it.”
The President promised health care reform when he ran for President and he was duly elected. The bill was offered earlly in his first term and was debated in the House and Senate for months. The House passed its version, the Senate passed its own version and the two chambers then had to work together to draft a common bill that both houses would pass.
This was voted on during the day, in open sessions of Congress. You can’t say it was unexpected since the President campaigned on doing exactly what he did.
Interestingly, the idea of a mandate to buy private health insurannce was an idea developed by current Republican members of the U.S. Senate when they were opposed to President Clinton’s efforts to reform health care. It seems the Republicans only like to talk about reform, but when it comes to actually doing it, they’re all talk and no action.
Whether it’s unconstitutional remaisn to be seen.
Good points. But, you forgot Medicare Part D. A 100% Republican creation start to finish. Oh yeah, it was unfunded too.
Yes and look where it got us! They say history repeats itself. Lets break that chain and do what is best for the country.
To respond to way above. Yes, if we keep moving in the direction we are headed, your and my children will live in a Socialist America! Think!
John,
We already live in a Socialist America. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies…the list goes on and on. Like it or not, we are already socialists.
Other, the corrupt Progressive Socialist politicians on both sides of the aisle put the country in the position we find ourselves and that is “broke”. I think the last election proved that the country is still center right as evidenced by how many of the minon followers of Obama, Pelosi & Reid lost. Our politicians may be Socialists, but we aren’t. Time for them to move on, hopefully to Venezuela.
To Commen Sense who wrote:
You are entitled to your own opinion about the merits (or lack thereof) of the new health care law, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts as to how the bill was passed. It was not, as you say “passed in the dark of night behind closed doors and rammed down the throat of the American People even though a majority didn’t want it.”
Yes is sure was passed behind closed doors in the middle of the night! Where have you been? “We have to pass it so we can find out what’s in it.” Give me a break!
Other, you have your blinders on if you think there was any real debate on this bill. Behind closed doors, the Louisiana purchase and Nebraska kickback was agreed to along with the 2,700 page bill which was passed without anyone reading it on a straight party line vote. Perhaps you didn’t hear Nancy saying that she had to pass it so we could see what was in it. If it was so great, how come 2,000+ waivers have been granted to companies, unions and many in Pelosi’s district recently. When everyone saw what was in it, that is what fanned the flames to reject it. This is corruption at its highest level. No wonder we have all these lawsuits and challenges going on right now.
Thank you, Other Point of view. Just because the GOP keeps stating something ad nauseum and ad infinitum, does not make it so, i.e., “rammed down the throats” “the majority didn’t want it” etc.
Thank you forbpointing out that this was a stated goal of the current administration and they did what they said they were going to do with no help from the other side of the aisle.
BTW, polls today show that about the same njumber approve as disapprove despite GOP/Tea party revisionism.
And, while the Constitution does not say anything about the unalienable rights, how can you not consider those as central and fundamental to the ideas of this country? I think too many people forget that these ideas were a quantum leap at the time. It disheartens me no end to see the stupidity, cupidity, self indulgence and meanness that obtains among our purported elected officials…on all levels of government.
Just because your side lost the vote on the bill, just because the vote was along party lines, doesn’t mean the vote was not conducted without a full and fair debate on the issue. I don’t think you need the memory of an elephant to remember how this bill was debated ad naseum by Congress, in the newspapers and on TV by those on the left and the right.
It’s not like we woke up one day and found out “hey, Congress passed a health care law last night while the rest of the country was sleeping.”
Watcher,
To clarify what I was talking about regarding “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…” These rights are not central and fundamental to the ideas of THIS country. These are rights that, according to Thomas Jefferson, were God-given to ALL men (and women,and children…Jefferson ‘men’ meant humankind, not just adult males), everywhere in the world, not just THIS country. He said “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I meant also to point out that, since you were making a constitutional argument in your orginal post, that this was not part of the Constitution.
(p.s. sorry for the caps, I can’t italicize or underline for emphasis)
The methods used to pass this bill were corrupt and criminal and only the Progressive Leadership knew what was in it before it was voted on. Where was the transparency with the debate shown on Cspan as promised? Had the American People known what they were in for at the start, they may have been on the Capitol steps with pitchforks and torches. Pelosi, Reid & Obama pulled it off, but it remains to be seen whether it sticks.
There was nothing corrupt or criminal about the vote. You just don’t like the result.
Common Sense…”corrupt and criminal’?? Those are pretty strong words. Earlier you said Pelosi didn’t know what was in it,, that’s why they had to vote on it. Now you say that only the Progressive Leadership knew what was in it. You’re not making any sense. You might not remember the debates on the floor of the House. I do.
What part of the law do you not like? What part has you so angry, you suggest people would form mobs to stop it? It can’t be the mandate to purchase health insurance through private insurers. That part of the bill was an idea invented by Republicans during Clinton’s term. Health insurance company stock prices went up when the bill passed. In fact, the mandate doesn’t even go into effect until 2014. So what is so terrible about the bill that makes you so angry?
They were meant to be strong words. This Administration and the Progressive Leadership in Congress has taken the art of deception to a new level. The bill said the rejection of the mandates would result in a fine for not taking coverage. Now, the government lawyer in this case admits it is a tax. The President went on and on about if you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. Now, one third of all companies say they will drop coverage for employees in 2014. We now are up to 2000+ waivers granted to companies and unions and the list keeps growing. Premiums keep skyrocketing for Individuals and Groups across the country. Even AARP was granted a waiver from this plan after being a big supporter. No member of Congress or the Administration will be subject to the bill. If this bill and its onerous provisions is so great, why do you think it is being challenged so forcefully by over half the states in the country? The country is broke and if implemented fully, this bill will hasten the country’s demise.
Final point to refute Common Sense’s argument that this law was somehow the brain-child of the “Progressive Leadership” passed under cover of darkness with no one knowing its contents:
The proof that this story you tell is just not true is that progressives didn’t want the mandate. That was the compromise position after they could only get certain Republicans to sign onto the measure. Remember the Public Option? That was what the majority of Democrats wanted and didn’t get…because they compromised…during the debates on the bill. Moreover, real progressives wanted single-payer health care. That wasn’t even part of the debate. So if you think for a minute that the crrent plan was some sort of progressive dream law, you haven’t been paying attention to what progressives have been trying to do. This law doesn’t even come close.
There can be a difference between what you and a health insurance company consider healthy. Some insurers will say that you have a health condition if you smoke, are overweight, are taking prescriptions, or had a medical condition in the past. If this describes you, you may want to search and read “Penny Health Insurance” on the web.