| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Health care unconstitutional! https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4949 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Uncle Fester [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Health care unconstitutional! |
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/13/ ... 1&iref=BN1 up and up to SCOTUS it will go. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Health care unconstitutional! |
Huzzah! |
|
| Author: | Screeling [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Take that, hippies! |
|
| Author: | Raltar [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I was very pleased to hear this on the radio this morning. Hopefully some good comes of it. |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 5:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It doesn't mean much since this wasn't a Supreme Court ruling. |
|
| Author: | Micheal [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
A provision of the HC reform has been ruled unconstitutional by a lower court judge. Not the whole thing. Temper your enthusiasm for it's demise with a little reading comprehension. SCotUS will almost certainly rule just on that provision's constitutionality alone. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Without the Gov't claiming the authority to control inactivity through the commerce clause, do you think the rest is even remotely able to be instituted with any chance of solvency? We've already seen the insurance companies raise rates at a quicker pace than before, and that's with the assurances of the Gov't that there will be 30 million new premium payers. How do you think the Gov't will be able justify mandates like dependents until 26 and pre-existing conditions must be insured without it? |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Health care unconstitutional! |
If Democrats had their way, just how far does "interstate commerce" go? Does it mean you can regulate every part of a person's life? I don't think the framers of the Constitution intended Communism. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Probably whatever they need it to. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 9:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Micheal wrote: A provision of the HC reform has been ruled unconstitutional by a lower court judge. Not the whole thing. Temper your enthusiasm for it's demise with a little reading comprehension. SCotUS will almost certainly rule just on that provision's constitutionality alone. I'm perfectly aware. However it's the most Heinous and far reaching part. Do you think it's okay for the government to force you to buy something "or else"? If not then this should be cause for rejoicing. |
|
| Author: | Micheal [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good Lord no. I think the whole think is a horrible mish-mash and it seals the decline of the United States as the big dog among nations. We won't be able to afford to be such anymore. Learn Mandarin or Cantonese, we'll all be needing to soon enough. My comment wasn't meant to support HCR, it was about the SCotUS process and that nothing is guaranteed from having a Supreme Court Review of a lower judge's call. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 1:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's going to be reviewed by the SC, without a doubt. There have already been a number of conflicting rulings in lower courts, with more to come. |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The system is so inefficient. It would be much better if the Supreme Court would tell them if it's unconstitutional before they sign it into law. |
|
| Author: | Colphax [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I just wonder if there's going to be blowback that affects the insurance industry as a whole. If the government cannot require people to buy health insurance, how can it require other types of insurance to be purchased, like home or car insurance? |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Health care unconstitutional! |
1. Maybe it can't. Doesn't mean its not a good idea to carry them. Lots of people carry health insurance now. 2. What government requires you to have home insurance. Some leinholders make you carry it as part of your contract with them. 3. The kind of insurance required to carry on your car is for if you damage someone elses property or body with your driving privilege. There are ways to avoid a penalty other than buying insurance. Don't have a personal car or prove to the state you are able to handle such incidents on your own. |
|
| Author: | Hannibal [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
With this provision more than likely to be stricken, i believe that a CBO review would have to be conducted on the remaining law (if any of it survives). If it doesnt meet the budget requirements with this provision gone, it goes back to congress I think? And with a new congress, it gets either scrapped or redone how the republicans want it. Not sure of all the procedural hurdles that are coming. |
|
| Author: | Rafael [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 8:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Colphax wrote: I just wonder if there's going to be blowback that affects the insurance industry as a whole. If the government cannot require people to buy health insurance, how can it require other types of insurance to be purchased, like home or car insurance? Car insurance isn't mandated by the Federal Government. It is legally required by State governments which is Constitutional. Insurance is also typically required as a provision lien holders for purchasing a house or car. That has nothing to do with any law, that is just private contract. |
|
| Author: | Ladas [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 8:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
No to mention, owning and operating a car on public roads (which requires insurance to cover damage to other people) is optional and elective. |
|
| Author: | Rynar [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Health care unconstitutional! |
Rafael wrote: Colphax wrote: I just wonder if there's going to be blowback that affects the insurance industry as a whole. If the government cannot require people to buy health insurance, how can it require other types of insurance to be purchased, like home or car insurance? Car insurance isn't mandated by the Federal Government. It is legally required by State governments which is Constitutional. Insurance is also typically required as a provision lien holders for purchasing a house or car. That has nothing to do with any law, that is just private contract. Think in terms of federal supremacy, and how is is being applied to gun bans. |
|
| Author: | Hannibal [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Arent homeowners who live near a flood plain required to have FEMA flood insurance, or is that only mandated by States? |
|
| Author: | Xequecal [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 11:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Health care unconstitutional! |
Not exactly. You can't get a mortgage without insurance, that's just a provision every lender has. To address the fact that no insurance company would ever insure anyone in a flood zone, and therefore prevent anyone in such a zone from getting a mortgage, FEMA flood insurance was created. You technically don't have to buy it, but its the only one you can get and no bank will loan to you without it. |
|
| Author: | Dash [ Tue Dec 14, 2010 11:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Health care unconstitutional! |
Good video on the subject and the commerce clause: |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|