Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance)

Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

shannie -> Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 3:45:07 PM)
Under the guise of "healthcare reform," it's proposed that the federal government has the right to force every American to buy a corporate product. Someone's finally asking, "Under what authority?" quote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126148236683801411.html?mod=article-outset-box Sen. John Ensign (R., Nev.) raised a point of order Tuesday against the bill, arguing that the Constitution doesn't give Congress latitude to force Americans to buy health coverage, as both the House and Senate bills do. "What's next?" Mr. Ensign said. "Will we consider legislation in the future requiring every American to buy a car? Will we consider legislation in the future requiring every American to buy a house?" Mr. Ensign isn't expected to succeed. But the effort dramatizes a criticism raised by Republicans and conservative activists. Under the Senate and House bills, Americans who don't receive health coverage through their employers must buy insurance if they can afford it.

vincentML -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 4:00:40 PM)
We are "forced"to buy automobile insurance and fire insurance on our homes if mortgaged. Curious why this is different.

popeye1250 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 4:46:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML We are "forced"to buy automobile insurance and fire insurance on our homes if mortgaged. Curious why this is different. Vincent, in the U.S. the mortgage holder of your auto or home require that we buy insurance to protect their interest in our property. For instance after your car is paid off all you need to cary is "liability" insurance to indemnify others if you damage them or their property.

Politesub53 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 4:58:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 For instance after your car is paid off all you need to cary is "liability" insurance to indemnify others if you damage them or their property. Still the same question applies, whats the difference between liability insurance and health insurance, with respect to the constitution ?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:01:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML We are "forced"to buy automobile insurance and fire insurance on our homes if mortgaged. Curious why this is different. You are "forced" to purchase liability coverage to protect others from you, not to protect yourself. You can also exempt yourself from purchasing coverage as an individual or corporation, by self insuring, or the purchase of a 'bond' to cover the State mandated liability requirement. Not comparable to the purchase of personal health insurance which, by definition, is personal. At least is was a personal decision until recently.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:06:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 For instance after your car is paid off all you need to cary is "liability" insurance to indemnify others if you damage them or their property. Still the same question applies, whats the difference between liability insurance and health insurance, with respect to the constitution ? Polite sub, I'm hearing that the position taken on raising this issue as one of a 'performance tax'; which would be unconstitutional. Similar to saying vegetables are good for your health and you must eat them, or pay a tax. Haven't thought about it enough to determine if it's a specious argument or not, but that's how I understand the argument being made.

Politesub53 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:20:17 PM)
I understand what you are saying Merc. I am just thinking about your constitution though, since this was in the thread title. If it is unconstitutional to be able to enforce one type of insurance, surely it applies to them all ?

breatheasone -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:22:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML We are "forced"to buy automobile insurance and fire insurance on our homes if mortgaged. Curious why this is different. Yes, if a home has a mortgage, or a car has a lien, one must insure that asset.

shannie -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:27:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I understand what you are saying Merc. I am just thinking about your constitution though, since this was in the thread title. If it is unconstitutional to be able to enforce one type of insurance, surely it applies to them all ? The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states. There are supposed to be limits on federal power. "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." It's one thing for the states to individually pass such laws, because the smaller state governments are supposed to be more receptive to the voice of the people. That was the premise behind our system of government, anyway. But it's an entirely different thing for the federal government to impose such a thing on the whole country.

Politesub53 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:32:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shannie The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states. Surely it is the same for third party liability with car insurance ? IE, a federal mandate.

Sanity -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:41:23 PM)
No one has to buy car insurance or homeowners insurance because no one has to buy a home or a car. quote: ORIGINAL: shannie quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I understand what you are saying Merc. I am just thinking about your constitution though, since this was in the thread title. If it is unconstitutional to be able to enforce one type of insurance, surely it applies to them all ? The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states. There are supposed to be limits on federal power. "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." It's one thing for the states to individually pass such laws, because the smaller state governments are supposed to be more receptive to the voice of the people. That was the premise behind our system of government, anyway. But it's an entirely different thing for the federal government to impose such a thing on the whole country.

pahunkboy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:45:41 PM)
My thoughts are that it is not allowed if we followed the constitution. Unless we clean up the HFCS out of the food supply- anything we do on this is mute.

shannie -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:54:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: shannie The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states. Surely it is the same for third party liability with car insurance ? IE, a federal mandate. No, auto insurance requirements are set by state law.

pahunkboy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:56:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shannie quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: shannie The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states. Surely it is the same for third party liability with car insurance ? IE, a federal mandate. No, auto insurance requirements are set by state law. That is a crock of shit too. If it was so good- then I would not then need un-insured coverage- so once again it is a red herring.

subfever -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 5:57:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy My thoughts are that it is not allowed if we followed the constitution. Unless we clean up the HFCS out of the food supply- anything we do on this is mute. I'm not sure I see the connection between High Fructose Corn Syrup in the food supply, and whether forcing the public to buy health insurance from corporations is constitutional.

TheHeretic -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 6:24:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shannie Under the guise of "healthcare reform," it's proposed that the federal government has the right to force every American to buy a corporate product. Someone's finally asking, "Under what authority?" Probably in the Commerce Clause, somewhere... [8\|] Actually, it seems like a good question. It would certainly be an interesting development if President Obama and the Democrats poured so much time, political capital, and outright bribery into getting this passed, only to have the Supreme Court drop them on their collective ass.

tazzygirl -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 6:27:15 PM)
The constitution does not require us to pay taxes to the IRS, but we do it.

pahunkboy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 6:37:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy My thoughts are that it is not allowed if we followed the constitution. Unless we clean up the HFCS out of the food supply- anything we do on this is mute. I'm not sure I see the connection between High Fructose Corn Syrup in the food supply, and whether forcing the public to buy health insurance from corporations is constitutional. Our health model is selling as many pills as the highest prices possible. Not on actually curing and being healthy. HFCS is only one component of this flawed model. Such leads to obese people and diabetis. Look at the public now compared to the 80s. That is HFSC. And to those who think that is confined to USA. Not anymore it isnt- watch as they too become obese. My point is the FDA=- is the food and DRUG industry. The model is to maximize the dollars brought in- starting with pharmaceuticals.... and on down the line. A healthy food supply would mean less sick people. The more sick people the better for our current model. Also look at how the food pyramid replaces the 4 food groups. The gorcery store pretty much tells the story. They do sell healthy food but it is like 3%.

shannie -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 6:39:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Probably in the Commerce Clause, somewhere... [8\|] Actually, it seems like a good question. It would certainly be an interesting development if President Obama and the Democrats poured so much time, political capital, and outright bribery into getting this passed, only to have the Supreme Court drop them on their collective ass. Yes, they'll definitely ride on the Commerce Clause when it's challenged. But yes, it would be interesting (and miraculous) indeed if the Supreme Court spoiled their corrupt little party....

kdsub -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/23/2009 7:14:00 PM)
How about tanks and cruise missiles...we own them even if we can't all play with them. Butch

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02