Federal Judge Rules Parts of Obamacare Unconstitutional

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

EMS services should also ask for a valid credit card before sending out an ambulance.

Exactly, or proof of insurance

(btw, I'm not advocating this, but without a mandate it seems necessary)

Edited December 13, 2010 by Sousuke

[DEDixon 39]

no doubt in my mind that this is unconstitutional. it is a no brainer. with that said, the results due to this being unconstitutional doesn't make me happy. i like most parts of the HC law.

only trouble i see with wasington taxing us then giving us HC is that too many people in the US pay no federal taxes at all. i doubt this would change if washington ever ends up taxing us to provide HC.

[luckytxn 2,264]

I love the ruling. It was such a no brainer to begin with. I also loved how the Socialists received all that money from the health care industry and then made it where we were forced to buy their product at a much increased price. My premiums went so high now. The Socialists look like complete morons now to even try to pull this off. Life just got better from this ruling.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I love the ruling. It was such a no brainer to begin with. I also loved how the Socialists received all that money from the health care industry and then made it where we were forced to buy their product at a much increased price. My premiums went so high now. The Socialists look like complete morons now to even try to pull this off. Life just got better from this ruling.

Is life better? Do you think your premiums are going to go down now?

[Pooky 3,783]

A Federal Judge ruled against some parts of Arizona SB 1070, saying they were unconstitutional. The anti-Arizona people rejoiced that the Constitution had won out.

A Federal Judge rules against a part of the Healthcare Bill, saying it is unconstitutional. The pro-Healthcare Bill people complain that without that piece, the Bill won't work, regardless of constitutional standing.

There is a large overlap between the anti-Arizona people and the pro-Healthcare people. And those that fall in both camps are hypocrites.

[mawilson 2,133]

Is life better? Do you think your premiums are going to go down now?

Right

[Pooky 3,783]

Is life better? Do you think your premiums are going to go down now?

Alternatively, you could postulate that the President knew the Bill was going fail a Constitutional challenge, but signed it anyway, allowing the insurance companies to reset their policies, coverage and premiums to "adjust" for the new Bill, all the while knowing that once the Bill failed in Court, there was no way they could be forced to return to the previous state of affairs. All this could be just a massive ploy by the administration and the insurance companies to hike rates 30%+ and make a killing.

Man, do I need some chocolate in the worst way.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

A Federal Judge ruled against some parts of Arizona SB 1070, saying they were unconstitutional. The anti-Arizona people rejoiced that the Constitution had won out.

A Federal Judge rules against a part of the Healthcare Bill, saying it is unconstitutional. The pro-Healthcare Bill people complain that without that piece, the Bill won't work, regardless of constitutional standing.

There is a large overlap between the anti-Arizona people and the pro-Healthcare people. And those that fall in both camps are hypocrites.

This would assume that both laws are referencing the exact same elements of the constitution...they don't. Also if the argument was valid it would reverse well. There is a large overlap between pro SB 1070 and anti-Healthcare. Those that fall in both camps are hypocrites.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Sousuke

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Alternatively, you could postulate that the President knew the Bill was going fail a Constitutional challenge, but signed it anyway, allowing the insurance companies to reset their policies, coverage and premiums to "adjust" for the new Bill, all the while knowing that once the Bill failed in Court, there was no way they could be forced to return to the previous state of affairs. All this could be just a massive ploy by the administration and the insurance companies to hike rates 30%+ and make a killing.

Man, do I need some chocolate in the worst way.

Chocolate? Why's that? I'm sure you crave the tin foil it's wrapped in much more than the chocolate itself.

[Pooky 3,783]

This would assume that both laws are referencing the exact same elements of the Constitution...they don't.

Just a small repair.

So, how do we classify those who want AZ SB 1070 to succeed, but who also want better healthcare reform, i.e. a single payer system and not the pile of **** we are currently being saddled with?

[Pooky 3,783]

Chocolate? Why's that? I'm sure you crave the tin foil it's wrapped in much more than the chocolate itself.

You need a sense of humour transplant.

Even your attempted insults aren't funny any more.

Thing is, I doubt your health insurance covers it.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Just a small repair.

So, how do we classify those who want AZ SB 1070 to succeed, but who also want better healthcare reform, i.e. a single payer system and not the pile of **** we are currently being saddled with?

You act like the Constitution is one sentence. Its very easy for a group of people to agree on the interpretation of one section and disagree on another.

AZ SB 1070 is a question of State and Federal Law

Healthcare is a question of the powers of Congress

Its not like they are directly related.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Most of what they do in Washington all day long is unconstitutional. Are TSA pat-downs constitutional? Hell no.

Actually, they are. You consented to the search.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

You act like the Constitution is one sentence. Its very easy for a group of people to agree on the interpretation of one section and disagree on another.

AZ SB 1070 is a question of State and Federal Law

Healthcare is a question of the powers of Congress

Its not like they are directly related.

I think the point was that in one case they wanted to uphold the constitution as they interpreted it (strike down AZ SB1070) and in the other case they wanted to ignore it (in favor of allowing the individual mandate). Therein lies their hypocrisy.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

You may remember, back in the 1970s, Japanese cars where rather crappy, odd looking devices. Boy have they learned their lesson. And how? By checking out the competition, from the Germans to the British to the Americans, and then incorporated the best of it in their own designs.

Logic would dictate that we try to apply that mechanism to other challenges the US faces. We are one of the most powerful nations on planet Earth, with more money to burn on gas, food, war, than any other nation. So if there's a good health care system out there, why not copying it and have the happiest citizenry afterward?

By a wide margin the best health care system is the French one -- a single payer system -- followed by Great Britain and Sweden -- both of who have single payer systems as well. If you feel sick in France, you call a doctor on duty and he's visiting you at home in his car, courtesy of the French Government by the people, for the people. Free.

Of course, the French people get more satisfaction from knowing that their health or their education or their retirement is not going to be an issue than from the satisfaction of bombing the sh*t out of the Iraqi or Afghan people.

If we shut down the US's war machine, we could have free health care for every American for life. It's all about priorities. I, personally, would rather have no war and free health care than wars and sickness, but that's just me.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Just Bob