Health-Law Mandate Ruled Unconstitutional

reply to post by majesticgent


tehehe thats all i will say

So, it goes on to "Obama's" Supreme Court? What are the chances this pathetic legislation will finally end?

reply to post by ChicagOpinion


I never ends. It will be re-introduced and re-re-introduced until the idea is so familiar that no one questions it any more.

It happened with our federal/private bank called the federal reserve. First there was the bank of the united states, and then BOTUS 2.0, which was killed off by American Hero Andrew Jackson. But eventually, we did end up with the treasury serving as a puppet for the private bank which runs the worlds economy.

It happened with the Federal income tax in the same way.

It is happening with healthcare now.

Originally posted by ChicagOpinion
So, it goes on to "Obama's" Supreme Court? What are the chances this pathetic legislation will finally end?

'Obama's' Supreme Court...

Only two of the Justices on the court have bee appointed by Obama. Two under Clinton. Two under Reagan. Two under Bush 43 and one under Bush 41.

Obama's Supreme Court only consists of 4 liberal appointed Justices and 5 conservative. To answer your question, the legislation will end by the Supreme Court ruling the public mandate unconstitutional and the remaining sections being reworked and passedinto law before Obama is ousted in Nov 2012.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


I don't agree with Obama in many things, but people think "thanks to the insurance sponsored tea parties" that Obama is the one that introduced the mandate people needs to understand that Obama bill was Universal health care modeled from UK and Canada, tea parties call it socialism and people bought into it, the mandate was written and pushed by Lobbyist from the health care mafia industry.

In order to get a compromised Republican agreed with this mandate and were able to push their version of the bill.

If the mandate becomes unconstitutional is not going to be a health care reform then the universal health care can be put in the table again.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by youdidntseeme

 

If the mandate becomes unconstitutional is not going to be a health care reform then the universal health care can be put in the table again.

I am in favor of universal health care, as I am universal education. The only problem I had in entirety was the mandate portion. I have little argument against the gvt making a service available to me, but govt forcing me t purchase the insurance was where I draw the line.

I have always equated it to a seatbelt law The govt should not be able to require me to wear a seatbelt (although I always do anyway, its called safety!) and they should not be able to enforce a penalty on me if I choose not to, because I am the only one who is being endangered.

A reform of the health care system is ok in my book, just do not mandate that I purchase smething that I may not want.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


I and many members in the ATS followed the health care reform from the beginning to the end, we saw the way that it metamorphosed into a bastard insurance pushed bill and how the right paid propaganda made the Universal version obscene. we warned many but the Tea parties made a good job at confusing the people, some people still think that the healthcare is going to provide with checks in the mail for those that can not afford the mandate, I got a word for them, medicaid that is where those that can not be mandate will fall into.

The health care reform that we have to be made into law if the supreme court doesn't do anything about it, is the version written and redacted by the Insurance companies themself.

It has nothing in it to help the poor or destitute (those will fall into Medicare) but to make slave of hard working Americans, regulations are none existent and whatever is there to control cost is easily exploitable as usual to benefit those that wrote the bill.

Obamacare was never really about health care. It was about GOVERNMENT CONTROL.

The US already has programs in place to address the issue of individuals not covered under company healthcare plans or those who "fall through the cracks" of the healthcare system. That was what Medicare and Medicaid were instituted for. If the government will CLEAN THEM UP (i.e., get rid of all the corruption in both programs) and exercise appropriate oversight when administering them...they wouldn't NEED a 2,000 page bill that pretty much covers EVERYTHING a government is NOT entitlted to do under the constitution and burdens generations to come with a crippling debt.

This is what KILLS me about the "Nanny State" government. Things aren't working quite right? Oh...well, we'll just create a NEW program and pour billions (we don't have) into THAT. Don't address the problems we already have that need fixing, just add more to the bureaucratic mess.

reply to post by ChicagOpinion


from what my father says (he is for obama i am not) its a 5-4 with conservatives holding the lead vs liberal thinkers but i dont have a source for that other then my old dad

Why is it you lot focus so much on the constitution, it was written a long time ago. Would you look at a 60 year old book of how to drive a car... of course you wouldn't because times and practices change. It is time to ditch the constitution and replace it with something that benefits America more.

reply to post by michael1983l


Like a mandate written by insurance companies to make slave by law the hard working Americans for life, right?

reply to post by marg6043


Just wanted to say that the current U.S. Healthcare plan is NOTHING like the Canadian system. It is in fact a uniquely engineered system that is built around the U.S. private health insurance and health care industries.

In Canada, the Federal govt. provides money to each province (similiar in many ways to individual states). Those provincial governments have authority to allocate the funding according to federal guidelines that are agreed to. These are changed and updated regularly in consultation with the Canadian Medical Association (i.e. physicians). Each province generally operates 1 agency, to which physicians and hospitals submit invoices for services provided, according to the health care agreements.

Canadians are not REQUIRED to purchase any insurance. That is the distinction between the U.S. plan and the Canadian system. Additional health insurance is available in Canada, to cover pharmaceutical purchases, dental, private rooms in a hospital, etc.

The Obama proposal is not socialized medicine, or universal healthcare by comparsion.

reply to post by surfin4it

Canadians are not REQUIRED to purchase any insurance.

Also worth a mention is that if for some reason someone doesn't have healthcare and they get into an accident or ill, they are not denied care. Someone comes along and sets up the healthcare right then and usually back dates it, so they're never billed for hospital services.

Some provinces there's a minimal monthly charge, if your income is low, they'll cover you free.

I heard that in the US they have to pay a deductible to get fixed up. Like we do with car insurance. I hope I heard wrong, because that just doesn't sound right.

In BC - probably the most expensive province - I could be wrong though. Saskatchewan is free.

Effective January 1, 2011, monthly rates are $60.50 for one person, $109.00 for a family of two and $121.00 for a family of three or more. From January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010 monthly rates were $57.00 for one person, $102.00 for a family of two and $114.00 for a family of three or more.

If you make less than $30,000 the rates are lower, less than $22,000 is free.

reply to post by surfin4it


The first proposal by Obama was indeed universal health care, the birth of the Tea parties were the result of the propaganda been paid by special interest to make people think that Obama wanted socialism, then congress been bought and sold to private interest will not have it, that is why in the beginning Insurance companies were up in arms about the health care reform original bill. Because they were going to lose big time with government intervention.

Been US a corrupt country when it comes to special interest and the whores we call politicians, millions were funneled by lobbyist to repeal the original bill and have insurance companies along with drug companies into the meetings while the bill was redacted.

In the beginning it was more than one bill and as usual the original was scraped(becaise the socialized health caremongering by the tea parties) and the Republican version that allowed insurance to dictate the outcome of the bill was passed.

The mandate was not in the original bill it was added to the final bill when the insurance companies won.

reply to post by snowspirit


That is what is killing the Massachusetts residents right now, the state never really regulated how insurance companies were to charge for out of pocket expenses and deductible, so many people are mandate by force to get insurance but can not afford to use them because the outrageous fees and deductible, the insurance companies are making a killing with the mandate insurance steady income.

reply to post by marg6043


The Supreme Court has proven itself to uphold the Constitution over and over again in recent years and they also have a very strong dislike for Obama ever since he tried to belittle them in person during his State of the Union speech.

I imagine they can't wait for this case so they can throw it back in his face.

reply to post by kro32


Yes you are right the record of the Supreme court speaks for itself, the always tend to side with the constitution, let hope they uphold the trend.

I could never figure out how a country keeping it's citizens healthy, could be considered socialism, and yet the US bailed out their corporations and banks, which is mostly welfare for the rich.

Certain things are good for a country as a whole, and healthy citizens would be one.

And paying a deductible to get fixed, is like equating a human with a car, or a house. Just weird.

I wonder how the healthcare works in the European countries, I wonder if it's similar to Canada's.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

I'm thinking the Supreme Court isn't Obama's best hope for salvation on anything, and never will be in his Presidency. I'm going to say that making total fools of Supreme Court Justices at his State of the Union Speech for the world to laugh at and ridicule was an offense that won't be forgotten. Judges are people too and they have feelings, hold grudges and get down right furious just like everyone else. Obama's speech writer would have done well to remember that on that speech. I'm sure the court will never forget it. This may have pretty well killed Obamacare. We'll see.

reply to post by snowspirit


That is the whole thing, the citizens of the nation are to be make money off, not to give to much for them, the health care reform in the form is right now is nothing but a big bailout that could not be achieved during the too big to fail give away, so they got it with the mandate clause in the bill.