Results 11 to 20 of 328
Thread: Constitutionality of Obamacare
-
09-17-2009, 02:39 PM #11
That was my first impression as well.
I acknowledge the issue, but to single it out based on constitutionality is singling out a specific tree from an entire forest and ignoring the rest.
Not that I am saying the question is invalid or even wrong. It is not. But it would certainly be interesting in coming up with a solution that harmonizes constitutionality with the US federal government as it exists today.Til shade is gone, til water is gone, Into the shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath.
To spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the Last Day
-
09-17-2009, 02:54 PM #12
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
- Posts
- 1,034
Thanked: 150The Consttitution grants authority to the Federal Government, and if the authority is not granted, then such power is reserved to the States. (see the 10th amendment). The Federal Government does not have the power to do anything it wants, unless limited by the Constitution. To the contrary, it only has the power to do those things allowed under the constitution.
I'm not saying that Obamacare is a bad idea, and I'm not saying that it is a good idea.
I want to hear opinions on whether or not it is legal. Where in the Constitution does it allow the Federal Government to create this system?
As far as trampling on the Constitution in the past, I agree. It is so soiled that you can hardly read it, but it is still the supreme law of the land. Brush the mud off, and read it.
-
09-17-2009, 02:57 PM #13
-
09-17-2009, 02:58 PM #14
Actually, to my way of thinking, its the starting point to bring the constitution back into focus and bring the country and government back in line with its founding principles. We have to start somewhere. Why not something front and center and then work backwards from there.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to JMS For This Useful Post:
nun2sharp (01-31-2011)
-
09-17-2009, 03:07 PM #15
For a guy who only went as far as grammar school and hasn't studied political science I can only give my impression. That is that we the people elect representatives from our individual states who, taking our best interests to heart, make laws and sometimes even constitutional amendments on our behalf. If these laws are thought to be unconstitutional they are challenged in court and if there is any validity to the challenge the law can be brought before the supreme court where the constitutionality will be decided.
That is my take anyway. I don't know if it is constitutional or not but I figure if we can spend billions fighting Iraqis and Afghans we might be able to afford to spend some on our own folks for health care as every other nation in the industrialized world does. Just a matter of priorities.Be careful how you treat people on your way up, you may meet them again on your way back down.
-
09-17-2009, 03:11 PM #16Be careful how you treat people on your way up, you may meet them again on your way back down.
-
09-17-2009, 03:29 PM #17
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Posts
- 179
Thanked: 43Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States
I think they could be using the general welfare clause as one means of legal justification under The Constitution.
These words by Thomas Jefferson are possible inspiration:
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government."
-
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to joscobo For This Useful Post:
irvintat (02-07-2011), JimmyHAD (09-17-2009), niftyshaving (01-31-2011), Philadelph (09-17-2009), Sticky (09-20-2009)
-
09-17-2009, 03:53 PM #18
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
- Posts
- 1,034
Thanked: 150
-
09-17-2009, 04:14 PM #19
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- North Idaho Redoubt
- Posts
- 27,025
- Blog Entries
- 1
Thanked: 13245Last edited by gssixgun; 09-17-2009 at 04:16 PM.
-
09-17-2009, 04:20 PM #20
I would have to agree with Jimmy on this.
I believe, the Constitution was meant to keep any one particular group, organization, person, or state from wielding to much power.
I don't think the constitution restricts, the Federal Government, or gives it the power, to create any socialized systems. The Constitution does however give the Legislative Branch of Government the ability to create laws and amendments, as the see fit.
The Congressmen and Senators are representatives of the citizens in there respective state's, whether we agree with them, or not. So if American keep voting in representatives that are willing to turn over more and more power to the federal government, they slowly relinquish their own rights as independent states, making the Federal Government more centralized.
My other understanding is that, (even though it is not in the constitution), our founders created this system in such a way that the Legislative Branch would argue, so much, that they would never be able to get anything done and not be able to pass any laws whatsoever. This is most likely due to the fear of having a centralized Government that would have the potential to become a monarchy.
I have not taken any political science classes. This is my understanding of how, a part of, our government works. If any of it is wrong please feel free to enlighten me.
This does not reflect my views on any Socialized Government Programs, currently or proposed.
I haven't been to Grammar School either, so Jimmy feel free to fix any mistakes.
Is National Health Insurance Constitutional? » The Foundry Hope this is okay to put here but thought it was a good article.Last edited by natepaint; 09-17-2009 at 04:34 PM.