Where does the constitution give Congress power to set up national health care?

[thereisnospoon]

Republicans have a health care plan. They always have had it. It has two "phases":

Phase 1: Don't get sick.

Phase 2: If you get sick, die quickly.

I have health insurance and quite happy with it. I pay for mine, but should not be required to pay for yours

-Geaux

Should you be required to pay for veterans' healthcare?

Veterans SERVED the people of this country. And in doing so protect our freedom and risk paying the ultimate price. It is insulting and highly offensive for you to use Veterans as a pawn in your socialized medicine scheme.
And stop calling it "healthcare"...Its MEDICAL INSURANCE....
Now, if you believe people who are either unwilling or unable to purchase first dollar medical coverage, feel free to write a check.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The problem is most on the right oppose the ACA for purely partisan reasons, having nothing to do with concerns for ‘individual rights,’ and everything to do with humiliating the president should the Act be repealed.

The proof of this is the fact that conservatives have offered nothing to replace the ACA to achieve the Act’s goals, satisfied to allow millions of Americans to continue to suffer without health insurance and the related skyrocketing costs that adversely effect us all.

That's a nice story and popular Lib talking point. That's all it is because it just ain't true.\
The fact is there are more than a few ideas from the GOP AND more moderate democrats that have been floated around DC. Sadly the hard left liberal democrats have at every turn shot down any idea that is counter to Obama's wishes.
Now you may want to use that fallback position ( this is a personal agenda against Obama) but that gets you zero mileage.
ACA is a gigantic bureaucratic nightmare that does not come close to living up to the Administration's claims. One of those is the 50 million or so uninsured would now be insured. Actually ACA leaves over 20 million in that same position. And the other big fib, that we'd all be able to keep our current coverage.
Oh, one more cow chip on that pile of indignation. The cost. Obama's minion were able to get the main stream media to put out a number UNDER $1 trillion in order to push Obamacare. The true cost as reported by several sources inside the beltway have Obamacare costs at three times the original amount. And with LESS coverage.
Bronze plans cover only 60% of medical bills. Silver 70% and Gold 80%....Thing is, most people over 400% of poverty( threshold for subsidies) cannot afford the Gold or even Silver plan. So as their employer coverage is taken away as result of Obamacare, they go from $25 co-pays with anywhere from 80 to 100% coverage, to 60 or 70%...
You tell me, where's the money gonna come from?
Oh and before you start typing the word "lie", be advised..I have posted the links to this before and have them book marked..So if you want to spout off an call me a liar, save yourself the embarrassment. Don't.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So, it doesn't say that at all. That means your statement "You do understand that the US Constitution is a limiting document, do you not?" is not true.

Really?

"Our tenet ever was that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated, and that, as it was never meant that they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action; consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money. "
-- Thomas Jefferson letter to Albert Gallatin, 1817

There are quotes down both sides of the issue as to what was the intent, and none of that matter now. The only thing that does matter is what the Supreme Court has interpreted to mean of the constitution today. And clearly, they just looked at Obama care and except for a few provisions, gave it the nod. The Supreme Court's Obamacare Decision: Full Text - The Editors - The Atlantic

That was Jefferson's OPINION. Written long after the Constitution was ratified.
SCOTUS did not "give obamacare the nod"..The SCOTUS in a 5-4 decision, ruled Obamacare is a TAX.
And in doing so, permitted the ACA law to stand under Article 1 Section 8.
That in and of itself offers ACA no Congressional immunity from scrutiny or change.
In fact, the sponsors of the Law have; permitted waivers to some companies to not participate at all. Mc Donalds Corp for instance. Have permitted a one year delay for compliance by small and medium sized businesses.
At this point many on both sides of the aisle are having serious doubts as to whether or not ACA is even going to come close to working as intended.
In any event. You keep arguing the same point in the face of overwhelming facts contrary to your argument.
You insist( woefully inaccurately) that the federal government has broad and unlimited powers. You completely ignore the FACT that the US Constitution is a limiting document.
What the fuck do you think the Bill of Rights is? A free pass for government to do as it wishes by political fiat?
Would you feel better is say, the right to be secure in your person and papers from unreasonable searches and seizures meant nothing? Or how about your right to a speedy trial and to face your accuser and cross examine him? How about the cops one day kick down your door and haul you off to jail. You get no phone call. No right to speak to an attorney. No trial. You are considered guilty and are not given the opportunity to have your day in court.
You insist that it's ok for the government to do this because you claim the US Constitution does not limit the power of government.
Fine. You go on believing that.
I am not going to waste my time debating an irrational idea.
You are wrong and that's that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The lege passed it, the President signed it, and SCOTUS opined positively for it.

This is over, SS.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The two are mutually exclusive. Living or not, the US Constitution is indeed a limiting document. That is an inescapable fact.

I asked you before where in the Constitution is says it is a limiting document. So far you have failed to show the article. Still waiting.....................

It is a 'limiting document' in that it LIMITS the power of out federally centralized government

The article you're looking for is called the Tenth Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I posted same. He simply chooses to ignore it.
It's sort of like ..Hey, the sky is blue" And he says .."No it isn't. And you have not proved it so the sky is not blue"..Even though you've shown him a paint swatch called "sky blue" that precisely matches the color of the sky.
Anyone can be wrong yet keep insisting he's right. I have no time for morons like this.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It's not there and that means they don't have it - the states do. Obamacare is obviously unconstitutional as is 99% of what the feds do. The states need to grow a pair and scream about this.

Where did the Constitution give Congress power to set up a space program?

The FDA?

The NTSB?

Home-fucking-Land Security?

The Department of Health and Human Services. The Department of Education. The Department of Housing and Urban Development?


Umm, one of the duties of the federal govt is to provide for the common defense.
Homeland Security falls under that pretext.
But now you are simply splitting hairs in a desperate attempt to hang on to this silly notion that the federal government has the power to compel all citizens( adult) to buy insurance coverage CHOSEN by the federal government. That's commerce. SCOTUS said it isn't commerce
The plaintiffs argued that ACA is commerce.
SCOTUS in its 5-4 decision ruled that ACA is a tax and therefore under Article 1 Section 8 is Constitutional.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The guv has emminate domain besides time to put your trust in the Savior

Ever read the US Constitution? The eminent domain concept is acknowledged.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's not there and that means they don't have it - the states do. Obamacare is obviously unconstitutional as is 99% of what the feds do. The states need to grow a pair and scream about this.

This tired old states rights bullshit has been put to rest over and over again. The SCOTUS is where we hash this stuff out...oh yeah, and you people lost the Civil War...pardoned like common criminals

 

[thereisnospoon]

It's not there and that means they don't have it - the states do. Obamacare is obviously unconstitutional as is 99% of what the feds do. The states need to grow a pair and scream about this.

This tired old states rights bullshit has been put to rest over and over again. The SCOTUS is where we hash this stuff out...oh yeah, and you people lost the Civil War...pardoned like common criminals

HUH?..States Rights is bullshit?
And you have the gall to ask someone if they read the constitution?
You may have read it. You choose to ignore the parts with which you disagree.
And what the fuck was that childish add on comment about the civil war all about? Losing the argument comeback time for you?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have health insurance and quite happy with it. I pay for mine, but should not be required to pay for yours

-Geaux

Should you be required to pay for veterans' healthcare?

Veterans SERVED the people of this country. And in doing so protect our freedom and risk paying the ultimate price. It is insulting and highly offensive for you to use Veterans as a pawn in your socialized medicine scheme.
And stop calling it "healthcare"...Its MEDICAL INSURANCE....
Now, if you believe people who are either unwilling or unable to purchase first dollar medical coverage, feel free to write a check.

volunteer military with great benefits and pay. In peace time it's a sweet deal undeserving of lifetime benefits. There is no demand to serve anymore...bring back the draft along with a mandatory national service program (s)

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's not there and that means they don't have it - the states do. Obamacare is obviously unconstitutional as is 99% of what the feds do. The states need to grow a pair and scream about this.

This tired old states rights bullshit has been put to rest over and over again. The SCOTUS is where we hash this stuff out...oh yeah, and you people lost the Civil War...pardoned like common criminals

HUH?..States Rights is bullshit?
And you have the gall to ask someone if they read the constitution?
You may have read it. You choose to ignore the parts with which you disagree.
And what the fuck was that childish add on comment about the civil war all about? Losing the argument comeback time for you?

states rights versus that 99% ... states rights loose.
I ignore no parts of the USC...stop projecting. It's embarrasing to watch.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Tyrone should take the spoon feeder to a class on the 5th

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

The board notes you evaded the question so i will ask again. You claim the constitution gives the supreme court the authority to decide whether or not a law is constitutional - so show us where it says that.

The Court took that power unto itself in the most famous of court cases, Marbury v. Madison. Since that time it is now accepted by the nation that the Court has that power. Did the framers err in failing to put it in black and white or was it intentional? We may never know. There is evidence that it was assumed and the framers didn't spell it out. No matter, we now accept the idea that the Court does have that power.

So you admit it's not in the constitution - the court just gave the power to themselves. Do you favor discarding the entire constitution?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
But the supremacy of the Federal Constitution, Federal laws, and Federal courts is beyond dispute – as originally intended by the Framers, where the states and local jurisdictions are subject to the laws passed by Congress and the rulings made by Federal courts.

HAHAHA. You may not dispute it, but millions of americans do. They point to the tenth amendment and say when the feds go beyond the listed powers of congress, then the states have an obligation to say no.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

[

The board notes you evaded the question so i will ask again. You claim the constitution gives the supreme court the authority to decide whether or not a law is constitutional - so show us where it says that.

The Court took that power unto itself in the most famous of court cases, Marbury v. Madison. Since that time it is now accepted by the nation that the Court has that power. Did the framers err in failing to put it in black and white or was it intentional? We may never know. There is evidence that it was assumed and the framers didn't spell it out. No matter, we now accept the idea that the Court does have that power.

So you admit it's not in the constitution - the court just gave the power to themselves. Do you favor discarding the entire constitution?

The concept of the SCOTUS reviewing the Constitutionality of laws was NOT invented in Marbury/Madison. Read legal history people

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
That in and of itself offers ACA no Congressional immunity from scrutiny or change.
In fact, the sponsors of the Law have; permitted waivers to some companies to not participate at all. Mc Donalds Corp for instance. Have permitted a one year delay for compliance by small and medium sized businesses.
t.

It's not some companies, it's LOTS OF COMPANIES. Congressmen collected huge bribes from the health care industry for writing obamacare and now they're collecting more bribes for granting exemptions to it!!! They're all crooks and i say hang all 535 of them.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

[
But the supremacy of the Federal Constitution, Federal laws, and Federal courts is beyond dispute – as originally intended by the Framers, where the states and local jurisdictions are subject to the laws passed by Congress and the rulings made by Federal courts.

HAHAHA. You may not dispute it, but millions of americans do. They point to the tenth amendment and say when the feds go beyond the listed powers of congress, then the states have an obligation to say no.

yet another misreading and misinterpretation? Oy vey!



The framers and ratifiers argued over this stuff since very early on in the new republic. Arguments revealed they disagreed with each other and with you. Imagine that? But funny thing is the states rights tools lost almost every single battle in our relatively short history.

Difference now is a wider echo chamber on the web where any Tom, Dick, and Harriet is free to parade their ignorance and stupidity to a wider audience

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[ The concept of the SCOTUS reviewing the Constitutionality of laws was NOT invented in Marbury/Madison. Read legal history people

No one said that's when the concept was invented. But that's when the supreme court first stated it. The question americans have been asking ever since is - where is the constitutional justification for this enormous power grab.? THINK

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

[
That in and of itself offers ACA no Congressional immunity from scrutiny or change.
In fact, the sponsors of the Law have; permitted waivers to some companies to not participate at all. Mc Donalds Corp for instance. Have permitted a one year delay for compliance by small and medium sized businesses.
t.

It's not some companies, it's LOTS OF COMPANIES. Congressmen collected huge bribes from the health care industry for writing obamacare and now they're collecting more bribes for granting exemptions to it!!! They're all crooks and i say hang all 535 of them.

Proof positive that Dante's last post is spot on.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

[ The concept of the SCOTUS reviewing the Constitutionality of laws was NOT invented in Marbury/Madison. Read legal history people

No one said that's when the concept was invented. But that's when the supreme court first stated it. The question americans have been asking ever since is - where is the constitutional justification for this enormous power grab.? THINK

Funny thing is it was not considered an "enormous power grab" at the time.
It was NOT a new idea, and this is most of the reason why. Read the history of early legal issues in the early years of the republic