Welcome to PatsFans.com

Unconstitutional, Unseverable And Void!!!

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by shirtsleeve, Jan 31, 2011.

  1. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The mandate to purchase was found unconstitutional, and unseverable from the health care bill and thereby the whole act is void!!! Judge says only the SCUS can expand on the commerce clause to change this rulung.

    Buh Bye Obamacare!!!!
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,505
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

  3. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ---- JAG ----- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,493
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +25 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    Our President ... a supposed expert in Constitutional law ... has a hand in writing a bill that is not Constitutional and his eligibility itself may not be Constitutional ...

    You can't make this stuff up.:bricks::bricks::bricks:
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,505
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    His ARROGANCE is mind boggling.
  5. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ---- JAG ----- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,493
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +25 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey


    We are minions Harry ... not intelligent enough to know what is best for us.
  6. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Whereas the individual mandate does not kick in till 2014, the judge did not file an injunction to halt the whole thing AT THIS TIME. He guesses that this will be in front of the SCUS before then anyway.

    Therefore rules like not allowing the insurance companies to break their contracts with patients who fall ill by dropping them, or dismissing patients for pre existing conditions when they join in an open enrollment are still in effect.

    If he had enjoined, the govt would have filed an emergency appeal today in federal appellate court. This gives Congress and the POTUS time to fix this thing, and installing things like torte reform to lower costs to make this all work. Its a shame he did.

    The Federal govt should not have this over reach at all. Yes, they should be involved with companies manipulating and illegally voiding contracts. Other than that, its a States issue.

    Mass already has a pos universal health care system in place (and is exempt from Obamacare, but what about the taxes? this should be a separate line like SS and medicare on deductions to be truly exempt). But it is their right to do so, as much as I hate it. Other states choose not to. That is their right too. This is not an issue for the Federal government to concern itself with.
  7. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Fine with me. Now when will we be eliminating the VA, Congressional health benefits, and Medicare?

    This oughtta be lotsa fun!
  8. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ---- JAG ----- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,493
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +25 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    What did we expect from a bill crafted behind closed doors, without debate and public scrutiny. The democrats who voted for it were threatened with everything but the kitchen sink. All who voted for this bill should be tossed to the wolves.
  9. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Hopefully right after we eliminate so many departments and phifedoms, like the Dept of Education, for instance. Reagan wanted to eliminate it, but Congress prevented it. Its 30 years overdue.
  10. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    A bit over-dramatic, ya think? This and Riots in Europe because of healthcare?

    They really screwed up when they took the single-payer option off at the beginning. Either eliminate the middle man by replacement or don't do it at all. Health insurance companies suck as bad as anything the government would have come up with. All water under the bridge, though. Obama left the door open for this to happen. It's unbelieveable that he couldn't forsee this hapenning. Maybe he did. Maybe there's a reason for this cluster fukc.
  11. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Why after?

    Reagan was an idiot. Bad rationale for your position.

    I say get rid of Dept of Homeland Security first. Total waste.
  12. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    So what to all the old and disabled folks do without Medicaid??
  13. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,287
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +26 / 0 / -1

    Horrible bill to begin with. Hopefully this means the powers that be can get to work on something that would actually help control costs long term.
  14. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Not cool calling the gipper an idiot. If you are a small govt libertarian, like you claim, just watch HIS inauguration speech.

    I was just pointing out that this department has been on 30 years of borrowed time already, and is clearly clearly an overreach of the Federal govt. But yes, the Dept of Homeland Security is redundant and a financial drain. While we are there, we need to repeal the Patriot Act. That act and that no good no child left behind law are the key reasons for my disgust with W.

    Then we can eliminate the USDA and the farm subsidies it provides for non productiveness, and the Dept of Energy.
  15. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Activist Judges!
  16. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I already talked about this in another thread. Things like medicaid, medicare, food stamps, welfare and social security have to be phased out over a half century or more. Too many people are vested in the system now. Gotta give people as well as the states time to make choices to take care of themselves.
  17. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    If only there was a single payer....

    Is there a figure that shows what the yearly average is for those who already have insurance pay for healthcare, vs the dollar amount that a years worth of coverage costs?

    If insurers are making record profits (30%), I'd be willing to be that year after year, we pay more into providing healthcare than is payed out by insurers to hospitals, or they wouldnt be profitable.

    If thats the case, expand medicare for EVERYONE, eliminate the for profit insurance, especially now that it will be mandated and get back to teh roots of what healthcare should be about...

    TREATING SICK PEOPLE!
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011
  18. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    rofl!!!

    I agree. When a judge follows the constitution, it usually royally pisses off the fascist right or the socialist left! Its these people looking in the mirror and putting their face on the judge.
  19. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    But do not pay attention to his 8 years in office
  20. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    You miss the point. completely. Its not about treating sick people. Its about WHO is responsible for paying for it. Who is responsible for oversight? That is what its about. In Mass, we have almost the exact plan rejected by the judge today. Where its unconstitutional for the Federal government to act in this way, its totally legal for the States to do so. Mass has like I said. Mass also has a must treat law. Any public hospital MUST treat ALL patients, regardless of ability to pay. But since the legislation, this state run plan covers those people. Even the homeless. So crying out about the poor and sick is bs.

    What is correct is for the Federal government to step in again, under the commerce clause, to enforce contracts by the insurance companies, thus the the parts of the law that deal with dropped coverage and pre existing conditions. I've already talked about all of this.

    Why do we always look to a distant Federal government to do things it was never supposed to do, and we do not become active in our town and state do provide these things, where it is totally permitted to do so? It stumps me every time.
  21. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    A very mixed bag to be sure. Much like this POTUS, his first term started out with many victories of his ideals. Congress changed, things got bogged down, and after years of deregulation and eliminating beaurocracy, the last couple of years started to see those come back.

    He was the tipping point that won the cold war, though. PBS next Mon( i think?) Feb 7. His biography. Watch what Gorbachev said about him, and how his simple pro America idealism forced the Soviets hands and won the cold war. This from what was then the opposition. Big stuff.

    edit: I was then a college kid, a young Republican and an involved student for RR, active as many of this generation have been active for Obama. Just a personal reflection there.
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011
  22. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    The only system that makes sense to me is to remove the profit from healthcare insurance by expanding medicare. There isnt a single nation on Earth attempting to copy the for-profit system we have.

    I think you misunderstand me when I say "TREAT SICK PEOPLE". I mean that an insurer's main goal should be as such, not to make stockholders rich. The current "Obamacare (Bob Dole's plan) actually has to regulate insurers to spend a t least a certain percentage on actual care. The fact that they turn amazing profits, and don't provide quality care to the most healthy americans should turn everyone's stomach....but it doesn't. Most I hear defending the insurers are more apt to stand up for their right to turn a profit, than the patients right to not be ripped off and penny piunched when their health is on the line.

    Insurance companies have it SWEET. Not only do they get millions of more mandated customers...but ...when a person becomes too high of a risk, they are able to unload them onto medicare for all of us to pay for again.

    Even under Obamacare, the insurers win. They provide no service, and treat no symptoims. Yet act as a gatekeeper between your premiums and the payments to doctors. Its a scam. Mandating it, is also sad...but we need to work towards a single payer.

    As long as there is a middleman skimming money, denying services, and reducing payments to doctors...nobody wins, except insurance executives.
  23. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    #24 Jersey

    The judge showed that the prez is just too smart for himself :

    "“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday."

    Also, note the the prez claimed this was not a tax when getting votes so he can't use that to get out of this. The prez thinks every time he opens his mouth people realize how smart he is when, in reality, he's spinning a web so tangled he can't get out of it.

    We all want health care reform; but this bill was crap. Hopefully it will remain dead and they can attack the issue again in a bi-partisan way - like the prez claimed he was even though everyone realized it wasn't.
  24. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Single payer=government payer. Again, government at what level? The only way I see it is to get a distant Federal government, who is supposed to be constitutionally barred from such an overreach, out of the health care business completely. I am personally opposed to any single payer plan. But each of the Several States can legally take these actions. Mass ALREADY HAS. If you dont like the laws in your state, you can more easily change and affect them. If they dont change, you can vote with your feet. That is how this country was set up.

    Any comparison to a eurocentric socialist system is to ignore our system of government, our founding documents and American exceptionalism. It is to fall prey to progressive social engineering that has poisoned and twisted our country since Wilson.
  25. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Our basic disagreement is that you think of healthcare as a BUISNESS.

    I think of it as a service and part of the commons.



    Health insurers exist in most nations that provide a single payer system. You are more than welcome to opt out of government care and purchase private insurenace in England, Germany, Canada etc...

    Some poeple do just that, but most don't.
  26. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    I'm younger than you, so I wasn't politically aware for much of his administration, but at least you're honest in admitting his record was mixed, unlike many who deify him today.

    I will watch that program - thanks

    Let me ask you this: did he do anything to reduce government spending or increase individual liberties? What boggles my mind about so many Republicans is (i) how they focus on cutting taxes (good) but never focus on the spending part of the equation and (ii) how they focus on corporate deregulation (good -- to an extent) but at the same time have never met a criminal law they didn't applaud (yes, tongue in cheek).
  27. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    There's nothing wrong with for-profit insurance companies as long as there's a demand for it. Why shouldn't this industry exist?

    And given that it does, their main goal is, and should be, to produce profits for its owners. Hospitals and doctors treat sick people -- insurers pay for it as per the terms of their contracts.


    Do they, though? What kind of margins do they have (as an industry, over a reasonable period of time)?


    Here we agree. This is where regulation should play a role.

    There are too many insurers who try to cheat their customers (the insured). I have a friend who acknowledged that, when a family member was dying of cancer, he spent hours on the phone and writing letters and emails, on a weekly basis, pushing to make sure she got the best care possible uner the tems of her policy. He is a highly educated healthcare professional, and he still had to make an enormous effort, and employ tactics like namedropping (corporate CEOs) and ccing friends who were attorneys at large, "name-brand" firms, to get the care her policy warranted.

    Yet he somehow, when trying to make his personal experience fit w/the Republican platform, managed to spin this as evidence that the insured get proper benefits. Clearly it's the opposite -- yes, you can get them, but the insurance companies often try to deny them, and undoubtedly many people fail to get what their contracts would warrant. And leaves out the customers who don't understand the implications of the legalese they sign.

    There should be regulation and simplification. (I realize the latter is easier said than done, but I'm confident it's possible)


    ---------------------

    Can something that requires another person's services be part of the "commons"?
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011
  28. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    #24 Jersey

    Not really unless you consider opt out = pay the full amount and get nothing in return. If people in England could opt of out the service AND the taxes that pay for it a lot would.
  29. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    No, our basic disagreement is Who is responsible for this service. I firmly believe the individual is free and responsible for this service. Not any government. HOWEVER, I do recognise that townships and each of the SEVERAL STATES are free to implement government paid and mandated insurance on its people. I will say it again. Massachusetts has the individual mandate. Its legal and constitutional at the STATE level. I hate it, and try to vote against it and the people who support it. BUT, I am in a vast minority here. I represent between 10 and 20% of the population here. Good luck to me.

    So when I am done with the family court, which compels me to live here to maintain partial legal custody, I am moving. Gettin the hell outta dodge.

    Do you live in Mass?

    You just said, part of the commons. Constitutionally, at the Federal level, you do realize that there is NO SUCH THING!

    Separate your desire to take care of everyone, and your innate sense that we need someone to oversee things to make sure everyone shares the wealth fairly. Just for a minute. At what level of government would such sharing be legal? NOT at the Federal level.
  30. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    #24 Jersey

    HD is flat out wrong. Health insurance (all insurance) has low margins but makes a lot due to a large customer base; with such a large statistical sample their actuaries can give them very accurate numbers which is why they have relatively tiny profit margins but still make a lot of money.

Share This Page