D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11656
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:08 pm

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Michigan, Ohio, Tennesee, and Kentucky) has affirmed the constitutionality of the ACA health care law as an appropriate use of Congress's powers under the plenary Commerce Clause.

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/appeals-c...hcare-law-win-obama-172433945.html

Quote:
A federal judge in Michigan upheld the law as legal and the group appealed.

'SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECTS INTERSTATE COMMERCE'

By a 2-1 vote, the appeals court affirmed that ruling. It said those who opt out of buying health insurance were still engaging in commerce because they were paying for healthcare services on their own and thus the law was constitutional.

"Congress had a rational basis for concluding that, in the aggregate, the practice of self-insuring for the cost of healthcare substantially affects interstate commerce," the court majority ruled.

"The provision regulates active participation in the healthcare market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity," wrote Judge Boyce Martin, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979.

And before people complain that this was a liberal judge making a liberal ruling, you should take note who the third judge on the panel was:

Quote:
The other panel member who upheld the law was Judge Jeffrey Sutton who was appointed in 2003 by President George W. Bush.

You might remember him as one of the conservative judges on the short list for the US Supreme Court.
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:10 pm

This is going to end up in the Supreme Court no matter what so any lower court ruling is just a check point on the road there.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:13 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 1):
This is going to end up in the Supreme Court no matter what so any lower court ruling is just a check point on the road there.

Process wise - who needs to make the next move?
Step into my office, baby
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10890
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:14 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 1):
This is going to end up in the Supreme Court no matter what so any lower court ruling is just a check point on the road there.

Exactly this is a non-issue. Ultimately it ends in the SCOTUS and 5-4 it goes down. You can't force us to buy this crap.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
san747
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:20 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3):
You can't force us to buy this crap.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: why would ANYONE not want health insurance? You'd have to be a complete idiot to not want health coverage, especially knowing how incapacitating an unexpected crisis or accident can be financially. It's not crap, it's called being responsible.
Scotty doesn't know...
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:23 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 2):
Process wise - who needs to make the next move?

There is at least two other case working its way through the courts. In both of those the initial Judge ruled that the law was unconstitutional. On this case Thomas More Law Center was the plantiff so they will have to decide if they wish to pursue it.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:29 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 5):
On this case Thomas More Law Center was the plantiff so they will have to decide if they wish to pursue it.

OK so what if they don't? then it stops here?

Not counting the other 2 cases..
Step into my office, baby
 
User avatar
OA412
Crew
Posts: 3763
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:31 pm

Quoting san747 (Reply 4):
I've said it before and I'll say it again: why would ANYONE not want health insurance? You'd have to be a complete idiot to not want health coverage, especially knowing how incapacitating an unexpected crisis or accident can be financially. It's not crap, it's called being responsible.

You won't get anything resembling a satisfactory answer. Believe me, I've tried. I recall when the health care bill was initially passed, and people were griping about a loss of freedom (i.e. the freedom to not buy health insurance). Like now, all I could do was shake my head. What sort of BS freedom is the freedom to not buy health insurance?

Regardless, don't forget that many of those who are most vehemently opposed to the health care bill already have health insurance coverage through their employer, so it's not as though they actually have to worry about a hypothetical situation in which they are diagnosed with a catastrophic illness and must pay for all care out of their own pocket.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
And before people complain that this was a liberal judge making a liberal ruling, you should take note who the third judge on the panel was:

Quote:The other panel member who upheld the law was Judge Jeffrey Sutton who was appointed in 2003 by President George W. Bush.
You might remember him as one of the conservative judges on the short list for the US Supreme Court.

Funny how this part has been completely ignored.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6023
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:41 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3):
Exactly this is a non-issue. Ultimately it ends in the SCOTUS and 5-4 it goes down. You can't force us to buy this crap.

The funny thing is that this is what the Republican's were calling for during a previous universal healthcare push. Why is it now not desired? The other option is to just create a tax that everyone has to pay to cover their cost, at least in the "you buy it" option, you can decide more for yourself what you want.

As a responsible Republican I continue to support universal access to healthcare. It should not be a burden on business and as more and more businesses are reducing and abandoning their employee healthcare the USA becomes more disadvantaged in the world market. It also greatly impacts the USA capability as the more people that have access to healthcare, they more likely they are to be healthy and productive and the better the USA can compete in the world market.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10890
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:41 pm

Quoting san747 (Reply 4):
I've said it before and I'll say it again: why would ANYONE not want health insurance? You'd have to be a complete idiot to not want health coverage, especially knowing how incapacitating an unexpected crisis or accident can be financially. It's not crap, it's called being responsible.

It's not Obama's decision. It's mine. You want the government telling what you eat? What light bulbs to buy? That you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle? I believe in liberty. I believe a person should decide what he does to his or her body. I believe a person has the right to die with dignity if they are terminally ill.

What I won't stand for is the government passing a health care law that does nothing to lower costs, nothing to promote over state line competition to give me chance to get it cheaper and then tax me when I don't buy theirs.

The SCOTUS majority also believes this and that is why this will die there which it should.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11656
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:43 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 1):
This is going to end up in the Supreme Court no matter what so any lower court ruling is just a check point on the road there.

You underestimate the power of the US Courts of Appeals.

Appellate courts don't have the powers to just all willy-nilly redo a case from start to finish. Especially the Supreme Court.
The rulings of a lower court are generally reviewed for legal errors.

Additionally, the Supreme Court rarely takes up cases from the Courts of Appeals without a circuit split (the exception being the Federal Circuit, which handles cases that other Courts of Appeals do not get, so there are no possible circuit splits).

Quoting OA412 (Reply 7):
Funny how this part has been completely ignored.

Not surprised. But they should realize that if one of the finest and most respected conservative constitutional scholars put his stamp of approval on this, 1) they should to, and 2) they should expect other courts to follow.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6023
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:50 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
It's not Obama's decision. It's mine.

It is NOT your decision, it is societies. And the society that is the USA has decided that we cannot just let you die after an auto accident, and that you cannot run around with deadly infections such as pneumonia, measles, and Tuberculous. That is not your choice, it is important that the USA protect its people and not let them "just die".

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
Ken777
Posts: 9048
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:05 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3):
You can't force us to buy this crap.

By "crap" I assume you mean private health insurance. We are in agreement that private insurance in the medical arena is crap.

So let's move to universal care for core level care. Then your rights will be totally protected, employers will have a better, healthier P&L and we can focus on improving some of our unacceptable performance levels, like being down with Cuba on infant mortality.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:06 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
You want the government telling what you eat? What light bulbs to buy? That you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle? I believe in liberty

But you are OK with Arizona telling you that you need to have proof that you are legally in the country at all times?
Step into my office, baby
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:07 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 6):
OK so what if they don't? then it stops here?

That case would. But as noted there are two others, one in which a majority of States are involved.

Quoting D L X (Reply 10):
You underestimate the power of the US Courts of Appeals.

On smaller caes you would have a point, on this, I highly doubt it.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10890
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:18 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 13):
But you are OK with Arizona telling you that you need to have proof that you are legally in the country at all times?

Yep, I am sure am. Especially in a state that is under seige by illegal immigration.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:20 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 15):
Yep, I am sure am. Especially in a state that is under seige by illegal immigration.

So you are OK, with the concept of government forcing you to act...

Quoting dxing (Reply 14):
Quoting mt99 (Reply 6):
OK so what if they don't? then it stops here?

That case would. But as noted there are two others, one in which a majority of States are involved.

Got it.. thanks!

[Edited 2011-06-29 14:21:36]
Step into my office, baby
 
Okie
Posts: 3553
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:30 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
It said those who opt out of buying health insurance were still engaging in commerce because they were paying for healthcare services on their own and thus the law was constitutional.


What, dead people engaging in commerce?
That would be a pretty weak argument.

Okie
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11656
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:32 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
It's not Obama's decision. It's mine.

not according to the Sixth Circuit!

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
The SCOTUS majority also believes this

False. SCOTUS is charged with answering this question and this question only: does Congress have the power to enact the health care law.

It does NOT have the power to answer whether it is a good idea.

Quoting dxing (Reply 14):
Quoting D L X (Reply 10):
You underestimate the power of the US Courts of Appeals.

On smaller caes you would have a point, on this, I highly doubt it.

On ALL cases, dxing.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10890
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:45 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 16):
So you are OK, with the concept of government forcing you to act...

So you think there is a direct comparison to proven you haven't snuck into the country illegally and being forced to buy something from the government... Ok..

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
not according to the Sixth Circuit!

For now. SCOTUS will have the final word.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:50 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 19):

So you think there is a direct comparison to proven you haven't snuck into the country illegally and being forced to buy something from the government... Ok..

Yes. The concept is exactly the same. The government is forcing you to perform an action. Is it not? Why is it different?

You yourself are comparing the mandate to other stuff:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
You want the government telling what you eat? What light bulbs to buy? That you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle?

Why is it comparable to "forcing you to wear a helmet" but not to "forcing you to carry proof of citizenship"?

[Edited 2011-06-29 14:53:36]

[Edited 2011-06-29 14:54:08]
Step into my office, baby
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6023
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:54 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 19):
So you think there is a direct comparison to proven you haven't snuck into the country illegally and being forced to buy something from the government... Ok..

You are not being forced to buy something from the government. You are being to required to go to the free market and buy your own healthcare based on your preferences.

Now one thing I do wonder is what happens to foreigners in say Canada or Germany that are injured and have to seek medical care there? Since those nation provide healthcare to their citizens, how do the individual non-citizen seeking care get billed and how do those nations ensure they are paid?

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
san747
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:55 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
You want the government telling what you eat? What light bulbs to buy? That you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle?

Apples and oranges. Your choice on light bulbs/food affects no one but yourself. And the government already does all those things. You and I aren't eating meat with mice parts and dirt in it anymore because of government regulation. We're using light bulbs that last longer and use less energy, therefore lowering our costs, because of government regulation.

No one, including yourself, lives in a vaccum. Sometimes a little personal sacrifice and personal responsibility in the name of the greater good of all of your compatriots is a good thing- or have I lost sight of what it means to be an American?

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
I believe in liberty. I believe a person should decide what he does to his or her body. I believe a person has the right to die with dignity if they are terminally ill.

So do I, especially on that last point. I also believe that your liberty shouldn't infringe on others. Not having insurance puts unnecessary financial strain on everyone else. It's selfish and irresponsible, not "freedom."
Scotty doesn't know...
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:57 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
On ALL cases, dxing.

Are you seriously suggesting the Supreme Court won't take this case up?
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
Newark727
Posts: 1425
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:59 pm

Supreme Court has gotten very political. I'm betting they'll step in on this one.
 
GuitrThree
Posts: 1940
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:54 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:08 pm

Blah blah blah. When Obama has it handed to him, and the Senate goes right in 2012, all this becomes a non-issue when the budget busting bill gets voted out.
As Seen On FlightRadar24! Radar ==> F-KBNA5
 
goblin211
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 4:30 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:12 pm

Quoting OA412 (Reply 7):
What sort of BS freedom is the freedom to not buy health insurance?

It makes perfect sense but the wealthy don't like it. That's why any of this has any backing. Also, the doctors hate it because of some reason but I forget why? Can someone please remind me how doctors in particular are affected?
From the airport with love
 
N867DA
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 12:53 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:33 pm

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 24):
Supreme Court has gotten very political. I'm betting they'll step in on this one.

From what I gather, the court has always been political. The problem is that the court has been packed by people I disagree with on most issues. The country needs a chief justice like Earl Warren, but we're stuck with John Roberts. I expect very little good to come out of the court until it gets stacked the 'other way'.

I have to get car insurance because I use public roads. If I have no insurance and I have a heart attack, you'd bet your bottom dollar that I would either wake up in a hospital bed or meet my maker. Someone will pay for the cost of my healthcare, and that someone is the general public. The only alternative to mandatory health insurance is to make an easily identifiable DNR tag on every single person without insurance   .
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:36 pm

Quoting N867DA (Reply 27):
I have to get car insurance because I use public roads.

You get car insurance because you own a car. You could ride a bicycle on public roads and have no insurance.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
Ken777
Posts: 9048
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:14 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 14):
On smaller caes you would have a point, on this, I highly doubt it.

On any case as long as the USSC does not rule against their decision.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 19):
For now. SCOTUS will have the final word.

If they elect to take up the case(s).

If this is a clean decision they might take it.

Quoting dxing (Reply 23):
Are you seriously suggesting the Supreme Court won't take this case up?

The USSC is not required to take a case. They will take cases at their pleasure.

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 25):
When Obama has it handed to him, and the Senate goes right in 2012, all this becomes a non-issue when the budget busting bill gets voted out.

If that happened then Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. will be dead. The tax rate for the super rich will max out at 25% with more loopholes added. And the Lincoln Bedroom will probably be turned into the Koch Bedroom.
'
As far as jobs and the middle class, forgetaboutit.

Quoting goblin211 (Reply 26):
Can someone please remind me how doctors in particular are affected?

Pretty simple. Their patients with pre-existing conditions can now get insurance just like the rest of us.
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11656
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:48 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 23):
Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
On ALL cases, dxing.

Are you seriously suggesting the Supreme Court won't take this case up?

Without a circuit split, it is unlikely. That has been my experience.

And even with a circuit split, the Supreme Court will not poo-poo the ruling of the Sixth Circuit, especially with Sutton in the majority.

More on Judge Sutton: he used to be one of the nation's leading conservative lawyer advocates. Clerked for Scalia, and is known as the anchor of the conservative judges on Sixth Circuit.

And people are still certain the Supreme Court will reverse? If that doesn't tell you anything, nothing will.
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:53 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 29):
The USSC is not required to take a case. They will take cases at their pleasure.

As I asked DLX, are you seriously suggesting they will not take this case? Name your bet.

Quoting D L X (Reply 30):
And people are still certain the Supreme Court will reverse? If that doesn't tell you anything, nothing will.

Name your bet.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8626
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:07 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 29):
Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 25):When Obama has it handed to him, and the Senate goes right in 2012, all this becomes a non-issue when the budget busting bill gets voted out.

If that happened then Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. will be dead. The tax rate for the super rich will max out at 25% with more loopholes added. And the Lincoln Bedroom will probably be turned into the Koch Bedroom.'As far as jobs and the middle class, forgetaboutit.

I have to wonder, I know many people are kind of uniformed. I am trying to be kind here. I would have to say that for the Presidency and congress to go to the right, the term stupid would then apply to them. Not being kind here. What is that saying about power and corruption? Let us hope the poor huddled masses can figure it out, or back to the company store for us all.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
exFATboy
Posts: 1887
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:15 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:18 am

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
It said those who opt out of buying health insurance were still engaging in commerce because they were paying for healthcare services on their own and thus the law was constitutional.

"Congress had a rational basis for concluding that, in the aggregate, the practice of self-insuring for the cost of healthcare substantially affects interstate commerce," the court majority ruled.

I have two problems with this logic:

(1) There's a difference between "commerce" and "interstate commerce". If I pay the doc-in-the-box down the street $50 to stitch up a cut, how is that "interstate commerce"? Congress has - well, at least if you actually read the Constitution - the power only to regulate interstate commerce.

(2) If you pay for something on your own now, how does that lead logically to the idea that you should be compelled to buy it through a different channel just because Congress wants you to?

Quoting san747 (Reply 4):
I've said it before and I'll say it again: why would ANYONE not want health insurance? You'd have to be a complete idiot to not want health coverage, especially knowing how incapacitating an unexpected crisis or accident can be financially. It's not crap, it's called being responsible.

I don't think there's anyone who doesn't want health insurance, it's that there are a lot of people who simply cannot afford health insurance. I don't have health insurance right now, because I'm unemployed and just don't have the scratch. It really is that simple, and it amazes me just how many people I encounter that simply can't bloody understand that.

If the ACA's plan for subsidies and insurance cost reduction actually works, most of the opposition to the mandate will melt away, because people like me won't be put in a position of choosing between buying food and paying the Blue Cross bill. But right now the public has no faith that this will actually work.

I actually support the idea of a socialized medical system that provides a basic level of coverage to all Americans, and I consider myself a conservative.

(And to those who say that being a conservative and believing in some level of social medicine is incompatible, I'll say three words: Sir. Winston. Churchill.)

But I also believe in the Constitution, and in federalism, and that if Congress wants to pass laws that can't be supported without throwing logic to the winds and concluding that every transaction in this country is somehow "interstate", then we need to actually amend the Constitution.
 
cws818
Posts: 824
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:42 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:02 am

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
That you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle? I believe in liberty.

Then you have the liberty to stay out of California on your motorcycle.
volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3400
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:07 am

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3):
Exactly this is a non-issue. Ultimately it ends in the SCOTUS and 5-4 it goes down. You can't force us to buy this crap.

Considering how this current court tends to rule in the favour of corporate interests they might rule in favour of it because it grants insurance companies 50 million new customers in theory.

Quoting tugger (Reply 8):
The funny thing is that this is what the Republican's were calling for during a previous universal healthcare push. Why is it now not desired? The other option is to just create a tax that everyone has to pay to cover their cost, at least in the "you buy it" option, you can decide more for yourself what you want.

Its simple its because a democrat president and congress proposed it.
I would seriously bet if Obama endorsed eliminating all income taxes and went to a VAT only the GOP would be against it. Look how quickly they changed their tones about Libya earlier this year once Obama wanted to do some intervening.

The GOP (or at least the people who speak for it now) do not have an interest in compromising with the democrats in whats good for the people. They get in power again by Obama failing even if that means hurting the country.

Bill Maher every week on his show every week some time now makes a point that policies that Reagan had were liberal by the standards of the GOP, its pretty funny.

Quoting tugger (Reply 21):
Now one thing I do wonder is what happens to foreigners in say Canada or Germany that are injured and have to seek medical care there?

You get treated and if its minor (aka broken bone) you might get off without paying but for something like surgery you would have to pay and I would reckon most health insurance policies have out of country coverage or you are a pretty reckless traveler not to purchase it.

However if you need an emergency procedure in Canada we are not going to let you die, there are some contingencies built into the system I'm sure because that kind of thing happening would be really rare.
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9832
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:22 am

Quoting san747 (Reply 4):

I've said it before and I'll say it again: why would ANYONE not want health insurance? You'd have to be a complete idiot to not want health coverage, especially knowing how incapacitating an unexpected crisis or accident can be financially. It's not crap, it's called being responsible.
Quoting OA412 (Reply 7):

You won't get anything resembling a satisfactory answer. Believe me, I've tried. I recall when the health care bill was initially passed, and people were griping about a loss of freedom (i.e. the freedom to not buy health insurance). Like now, all I could do was shake my head. What sort of BS freedom is the freedom to not buy health insurance?

What part of Unconstitutional do you not understand? I agree, everyone should have insurance, and I even support the idea of individual mandates - but it is not part of the Federal Government's enumerated powers. So we have a choice:

1) Do it properly, and pass a Constitutional Amendment, if you can get the votes for it.
2) Let the states handle it.
3) Ignore the Constitution and enforce an unconstitutional law anyway, further undermining the idea that we are a nation of laws.

This guy put it very well:

Quote:
Obama and, it seems, many courts, would like to pretend that while the Constitution generally speaks of enumerated and limited powers -- all other powers, such a the police power, reserved for the people and the states -- that the Commerce Clause generally is a "Take-Back" clause that essentially calls bullshit on everything else in the Constitution... this one brief clause renders all 4400 other words in the Constitution null and void, because the Commerce Clause says, it is contended, that the federal government may do anything so long as, in the aggregate, it "affects interstate commerce," which, as is often pointed out, applies to everything.

Having sex with your wife? This affects interstate commerce, as you might wind up creating the ultimate economic effect -- a child; a future one-man army of economic activity, labor, investment, and consumption... Can we mandate that people have more children? Seems to me we could fix some of the demographic problems with SS and MediCare if only people had more children.

Oh, it's probably much too late for that; but could we have mandated this 20 years ago? Probably, this new ruling says.

At any rate, the anti-ObamaCare lawyer had a simple question:

If the framers of the Constitution meant for this one clause to have such omnipotent power, trumping everything else, establishing well-nigh plenary power of the federal government over every aspect of human existence --

Why did no one seem to think it necessary to add even the most gentle limitation on such a far-reaching power?

In other words, if this Clause means what it is, apparently straight-faced, contended to mean, and therefore is the only real clause in the Constitution at all -- why did no one think to elaborate upon it?

Why all that wasted time on Amendments and specific powers of Congress, the President, and the Courts, when the only real grant of power in the Constitution is the Commerce Clause?

Answers? Take your choice:

1. Because the Founders wanted to disguise an unlimited grant of power to the federal government in a six or seven word clause and so hid Supreme Unchecked Federal Power amid a 4400 word smoke-and-mirrors deception.

2. Um, they never intended it to mean anything like this, but only what it was taken to mean for 150 years, that is, as federal rules-making regarding tariffs and other state-created impediments to unfettered trade of goods across state boundaries.

Your choice.
http://minx.cc/?post=318215
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:24 pm

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 24):
Supreme Court has gotten very political. I'm betting they'll step in on this one.

Very likely indeed.

Also of note is Judge Sutton's comment on p. 51 of the opinion. "Not every intrusive law is a constitutionally intrusive law. And even the most powerful intuition about the meaning of the Constitution must be matched with a textual and enforceable theory of constitutional limits, and the activity/inactivity dichotomy does not work with respect to health insurance in many settings, if any of them."

Also, on p. 37: "The nature of this challenge--a pre-enforcement facial attack on the individual mandate in all if its settings, as opposed to just some of them--favors the government . . . ." The judge then explains why facial challenges are disfavored, the obstacles the claimants face in a facial challenge and why the claimants fail to overcome those obstacles.

Also notable is that the majority disagreed with the government's argument that this law fell under the taxing and spending powers.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
exFATboy
Posts: 1887
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:15 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:26 pm

Quoting texan (Reply 37):
Also notable is that the majority disagreed with the government's argument that this law fell under the taxing and spending powers.

So far, every court ruling that I've seen, whether it upheld or rejected the mandate on the interstate-commerce-clause argument, has rejected the tax-power argument.
 
User avatar
OA412
Crew
Posts: 3763
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:54 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 36):
What part of Unconstitutional do you not understand? I agree, everyone should have insurance, and I even support the idea of individual mandates - but it is not part of the Federal Government's enumerated powers. So we have a choice:

1) Do it properly, and pass a Constitutional Amendment, if you can get the votes for it.
2) Let the states handle it.
3) Ignore the Constitution and enforce an unconstitutional law anyway, further undermining the idea that we are a nation of laws.

So you're going to ignore the fact that the healthcare actl has not yet been determined to be unconstitutional, and that a conservative justice just upheld the law as being constitutional?

Someone please correct me if I've misinterpreted this ruling, but that is what my understanding is.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 36):
This guy put it very well:

Seriously? You're using that as your source? If I, or someone else, referrenced something like the Huffington Post or Media Matters, you'd be the first one yelling bias.

[Edited 2011-06-30 14:17:54]
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:04 pm

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 38):
So far, every court ruling that I've seen, whether it upheld or rejected the mandate on the interstate-commerce-clause argument, has rejected the tax-power argument.

I admit to not having read all of the lower court arguments. Did the lower courts also explain how a law such as this could be constitutional under the taxing and spending powers, had Congress passed the law under those powers or implemented a 'healthcare tax'? That's probably what I found most interesting about Sutton's opinion.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11656
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:41 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 36):
What part of Unconstitutional do you not understand?

The part where the US Court of Appeals said it was Constitutional.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 39):
So you're going to ignore the fact that the healthcare actl has not yet been determined to be unconstitutional, and that a conservative justice just upheld the law as being constitutional?

Someone please correct me if I've misinterpreted this ruling, but that is what my understanding is.

No, you have it correct.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9832
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:47 am

Quoting OA412 (Reply 39):
So you're going to ignore the fact that the healthcare actl has not yet been determined to be unconstitutional, and that a conservative justice just upheld the law as being constitutional?
Quoting D L X (Reply 41):

The part where the US Court of Appeals said it was Constitutional.

So you think that the concept of enumerated powers is BS, and that the Constitution allows the federal government to pretty much do anything it wants, and that the Commerce clause basically voids the rest of the Constitution?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11656
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:32 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 42):
So you think that the concept of enumerated powers is BS, and that the Constitution allows the federal government to pretty much do anything it wants, and that the Commerce clause basically voids the rest of the Constitution?

No.

We've had this discussion verbatim before, so you should know what I believe. I believe three things:

1) regulating interstate commerce is an enumerated power.
2) when the Constitution was drafted, Americans rarely interacted with Americans outside their states, meaning that there wasn't much for the feds to regulate back then. Now, almost none of us live lives confined to a state. It is OUR MODERN ACTIVITY that has changed, not the Constitutional interpretation, that is bringing so much more activity within federal regulability.
3) health care is interstate commerce, and the Court of Appeals agrees with me.
 
GuitrThree
Posts: 1940
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:54 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:05 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 32):

I have to wonder, I know many people are kind of uniformed. I am trying to be kind here. I would have to say that for the Presidency and congress to go to the right, the term stupid would then apply to them. Not being kind here. What is that saying about power and corruption? Let us hope the poor huddled masses can figure it out, or back to the company store for us all.

Remember now, that the economy was humming along until the Democrats took over the Senate and House in 2006. Then it tanked. That is fact.

Now, on top of that, we have a President who bashes all kinds of companies, from jet makers, to non-union shops. Basically, any employer that doesn't follow the "green economy" rules and isn't a big union deal. Yet unemployment continues to be in the tank.

And yet you come here and spout something about when corporations are thriving, it hurts everyone. Ok. Yes. Now I know what you meant "the term stupid would apply." Oh, yea, I'm just trying to be "kind" here too.

Hope and change. Yea. Still waiting on that one.
As Seen On FlightRadar24! Radar ==> F-KBNA5
 
BAKJet
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:58 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:31 am

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
That you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle?

So I take it you don't like the "click it or ticket" laws. I mean who wouldn't want the freedom to die in a car crash that they might otherwise walk away from with only scrapes and bruises.Or the law banning the use of asbestos. We should all have the right to give ourselves, our families and any future owners of our homes cancer. Or the law banning the use of DDT, because everyone should have the right to cause permanent damage to the world's ecosystems. Or, you know, speed limits, since who wants the government telling us how fast we can go. Plus, we should have the right to kill whatever we want, so you must really hate the endangered species act. In addition, the TSA must get on your nerves even more that they get on everyone else's nerves, because it's so outrageous that the government is trying to tell us what we can and cannot bring on a plane. Also, I'd guess the fact that murder is illegal might even annoy you a little, since shouldn't we have the right to kill whoever we want.

I mean, the whole point of a government is to tell us what we can and can't do, that's how we remain a civilized society, so don't even open that can of worms, unless, of course, you truly do believe that anarchy is best.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:41 am

Quoting BAKJet (Reply 45):

You obviously don't understand his argument, he isn't talking about laws affecting others. Wearing a motorcycle helmet or not only kills yourself, while "killing whoever you want" obviously affects others...
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
BAKJet
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:58 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:59 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46):
he isn't talking about laws affecting others.

Then how does his argument apply to the healthcare reform bill?
 
nonrevman
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:33 am

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Sat Jul 02, 2011 2:18 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
health care is interstate commerce, and the Court of Appeals agrees with me.

Here is the Webster definition of commerce:

The exchange or buying and selling of commodities; esp. the exchange of merchandise, on a large scale, between different places or communities; extended trade or traffic.

The healthcare mandate is not only attempting to regulate all commerce regarding healthcare, it is also trying to regulate the LACK of commerce, which would accurately describe a person who does not purchase healthcare insurance. Nowhere in the US Constitution does the federal government have the right to force you to buy something. In the late 1700's, that would have been indentified as "tyranny"

At present time,my family does have health insurance for all members. The biggest concern I have about the mandate is that if one of us were to lose our jobs, we would not be able to afford health care insurance for everyone. Naturally, I would place food, clothing, and shelter in a higher priority above healthcare insurance. To many of the people in this country, the mandate is going to be no problem until something happens to their paycheck, which is entirely possible in today's world. With the road we are going down right now, there is not going to be enough people to pay for those who cannot (think social security). I cannot possibly see how the Supreme Court can view inaction as "commerce", which is what the healthcare law hinges on. One can only hope that the justices are not bought out by special interests in the way that the executive and legislative branches are.

This is not to say that healthcare needs to be fixed in this country. It just needs to be done lawfully, and hopefully not something jammed through a single-party Congress and presidency.
 
JakeOrion
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:13 pm

RE: US Court Of Appeals Affirms Health Care Law

Sat Jul 02, 2011 2:45 am

Quoting nonrevman (Reply 48):
It just needs to be done lawfully, and hopefully not something jammed through a single-party Congress and presidency.

Easy.

First, we must either modify or eliminate the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 and stipulate to the states that insurance companies should have the right to sell their insurance in any state, regardless of where the main office is. This encourages competition to keep the prices down.

Second, tort reform for these ridiculous malpractice lawsuits. A panel of at least three doctors (randomly chosen for each case [exemption of best friends, etc.]) can decide if the doctor committed malpractice or did everything possible to assist the patient. If they find the doctor guilty, send it criminal court. If innocent, let the insurance companies duke it out.

Third, us. As in we the people. "I have a boo-boo on my finger! I need to see the surgeon right away!" This also drives up costs. I seriously think a first-aid course should be mandatory in middle school. Nothing serious, determine an injury requires a trip to the hospital or not, and how to treat light injuries properly.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests