bodypilot90 0 #1 December 23, 2009 It's about time! QuoteDecember 22, 2009 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senators Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) and John Ensign (R-Nevada), raised a Constitutional Point of Order on the Senate floor against the Democrat health care takeover bill on behalf of the Steering Committee, a caucus of conservative senators. The Senate will vote tomorrow on the bill’s constitutionality. “I am incredibly concerned that the Democrats’ proposed individual mandate provision takes away too much freedom and choice from Americans across the country,” said Senator Ensign. “As an American, I felt the obligation to stand up for the individual freedom of every citizen to make their own decision on this issue. I don’t believe Congress has the legal authority to force this mandate on its citizens.” “Forcing every American to purchase a product is absolutely inconsistent with our Constitution and the freedoms our Founding Fathers hoped to protect,” said Senator DeMint. “This is not at all like car insurance, you can choose not to drive but Americans will have no choice whether to buy government-approved insurance. This is nothing more than a bailout and takeover of insurance companies. We’re forcing Americans to buy insurance under penalty of law and then Washington bureaucrats will then dictate what these companies can sell to Americans. This is not liberty, it is tyranny of good intentions by elites in Washington who think they can plan our lives better than we can.” Americans who fail to buy health insurance, according to the Democrats’ bill, would be subject to financial penalties. The senators believe the bill is unconstitutional because the insurance mandate is not authorized by any of the limited enumerated powers granted to the federal government. The individual mandate also likely violates the “takings” clause of the 5th Amendment. The Democrats’ healthcare reform bill requires Americans to buy health insurance “whether or not they ever visit a doctor, get a prescription or have an operation.” If an American chooses not to buy health insurance coverage, they will face rapidly increasing taxes that will rise to $750 or 2% of their taxable income, whichever is greater. The Congressional Budget Office once stated “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.” A legal study by scholars at the nonpartisan Heritage Foundation concluded: “An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party, with tax penalties to enforce it, is unprecedented-- not just in scope but in kind--and unconstitutional as a matter of first principles and under any reasonable reading of judicial precedents.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #2 December 23, 2009 Quote“I am incredibly concerned that the Democrats’ proposed individual mandate provision takes away too much freedom and choice from Americans across the country,” said Senator Ensign. What an asshole. He showed his true colors. He's all for taking freedom and choice, just not "too much." If the Supreme Court, in its living breathing Constitutional reinterpretations, can give the thumbs up to the feds to ban my pissing in my back yard on the grounds that it could affect interstate commerce, then this will pass muster, as well. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #3 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuote“I am incredibly concerned that the Democrats’ proposed individual mandate provision takes away too much freedom and choice from Americans across the country,” said Senator Ensign. What an asshole. He showed his true colors. He's all for taking freedom and choice, just not "too much." If the Supreme Court, in its living breathing Constitutional reinterpretations, can give the thumbs up to the feds to ban my pissing in my back yard on the grounds that it could affect interstate commerce, then this will pass muster, as well. there is another issue (Ithink it is on page 1023) in the senate health bill that says that furure congresses cannot undue parts of the health care bill. sounds to me like unconstitutional things are spread through out the bill. but why would they worry about the constitution? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #4 December 23, 2009 QuoteIf the Supreme Court, in its living breathing Constitutional reinterpretations, can give the thumbs up to the feds to ban my pissing in my back yard on the grounds that it could affect interstate commerce, That could only occur if your property abutted a state border, and your schlong could reach across into your next door neighbor's yard. So what are you trying to claim here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #5 December 23, 2009 Last time I checked the Constitution, the Supreme Court (and NOT the Senate) decided on the constitutionality of things. I suppose Ensign will do anything to distract from his sex scandal.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #6 December 23, 2009 Oh WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH More right wing whining when they cant do didly squat. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #7 December 23, 2009 Quote Last time I checked the Constitution, the Supreme Court (and NOT the Senate) decided on the constitutionality of things. I suppose Ensign will do anything to distract from his sex scandal. Ok... what does the sex scandel have to do with this? To all..... do you really think that this health care bill should be granted under the constitution? If it passes I will deal with it but to bring back a point.... in what way is it okay to put in wording that states it cannot be changed or undone?Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #8 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuote Last time I checked the Constitution, the Supreme Court (and NOT the Senate) decided on the constitutionality of things. I suppose Ensign will do anything to distract from his sex scandal. Ok... what does the sex scandel have to do with this? DISTRACTION, I already mentioned that.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #9 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuote Last time I checked the Constitution, the Supreme Court (and NOT the Senate) decided on the constitutionality of things. I suppose Ensign will do anything to distract from his sex scandal. Ok... what does the sex scandel have to do with this? To all..... do you really think that this health care bill should be granted under the constitution? If it passes I will deal with it but to bring back a point.... in what way is it okay to put in wording that states it cannot be changed or undone? Can you confirm this wording is actually in there? I looked up the pages mentioned earlier and all I found was what appeared to be limits on debate, etc.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #10 December 23, 2009 Quotedo you really think that this health care bill should be granted under the constitution? Are you asking if the Constitution gives Congress sufficient power to pass healthcare reform legislation? If so, then yes, Congress is sufficiently empowered by the Constitution.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 December 23, 2009 Congress voting on the constitutionality of their own bill means about as much as the fox voting on the security of the henhouse. I fully expect a SC challenge to the healthcare bills, but this doesn't mean jack.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #12 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuotedo you really think that this health care bill should be granted under the constitution? Are you asking if the Constitution gives Congress sufficient power to pass healthcare reform legislation? If so, then yes, Congress is sufficiently empowered by the Constitution. They can pass legislation - they can't mandate purchase of an item or service. THAT is where it will be challenged.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #13 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuotedo you really think that this health care bill should be granted under the constitution? Are you asking if the Constitution gives Congress sufficient power to pass healthcare reform legislation? If so, then yes, Congress is sufficiently empowered by the Constitution. They can pass legislation - they can't mandate purchase of an item or service. THAT is where it will be challenged. That is what I mean and I also agree that if it is passed it will go to the SC.Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #14 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotedo you really think that this health care bill should be granted under the constitution? Are you asking if the Constitution gives Congress sufficient power to pass healthcare reform legislation? If so, then yes, Congress is sufficiently empowered by the Constitution. They can pass legislation - they can't mandate purchase of an item or service. THAT is where it will be challenged. That is what I mean and I also agree that if it is passed it will go to the SC. In 2020? First you have to get someone with proper standing. That might be someone who choose not to get insurance before, refuses to now, and gets penalized. (but when do penalties first get charged) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #15 December 23, 2009 QuoteThey can pass legislation - they can't mandate purchase of an item or service. THAT is where it will be challenged. Are you suggesting that all of the states that mandate purchase of auto insurance are doing so Unconstitutionally?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 150 #16 December 23, 2009 it means, they've tried pretty much everything else to stop this freight train, so now we have to try 'constitutionality' nice try, The government, the last time I checked, is run by the people for the people, so if the people WANT health care reform, then the people GET health care reform. No I do not think this bill is that great, but it is a step in the right direction. I expect everyone will be required to buy health insurance, and the insurance companies will fuck it all up, and the government will then take the next step - single payer. So rather than 'constitutional arguments', maybe they could instead spend their efforts trying to do some thing 'for the people' my $0.02 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #17 December 23, 2009 Quote… the government will then take the next step - single payer. We can only hope.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #18 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteThey can pass legislation - they can't mandate purchase of an item or service. THAT is where it will be challenged. Are you suggesting that all of the states that mandate purchase of auto insurance are doing so Unconstitutionally? I don't have to purchase insurance if I don't own a car. I don't have to purchase auto insurance if I own a car and keep it on my private property.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 December 23, 2009 Quoteit means, they've tried pretty much everything else to stop this freight train, so now we have to try 'constitutionality' nice try, The government, the last time I checked, is run by the people for the people, so if the people WANT health care reform, then the people GET health care reform. No I do not think this bill is that great, but it is a step in the right direction. I expect everyone will be required to buy health insurance, and the insurance companies will fuck it all up, and the government will then take the next step - single payer. So rather than 'constitutional arguments', maybe they could instead spend their efforts trying to do some thing 'for the people' my $0.02 Well, then, since the polls show that the majority DON'T want this, they should just kill the bill.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #20 December 23, 2009 Quote Quote … the government will then take the next step - single payer. We can only hope. Yes, because they've done SUCH a great job with medicare. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #21 December 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteThey can pass legislation - they can't mandate purchase of an item or service. THAT is where it will be challenged. Are you suggesting that all of the states that mandate purchase of auto insurance are doing so Unconstitutionally? I don't have to purchase insurance if I don't own a car. I don't have to purchase auto insurance if I own a car and keep it on my private property. If you don't have insurance, even if you don't own a car, you will be penalized for that when you do obtain insurance. (In some states, if you have a licensed vehicle, insurance is required whether that vehicle leaves your property or not.)Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #22 December 23, 2009 Quote Yes, because they've done SUCH a great job with medicare. Medicare's admin costs are much lower than the private insurance industry.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #23 December 23, 2009 Quote Quote Yes, because they've done SUCH a great job with medicare. Medicare's admin costs are much lower than the private insurance industry. As a percentage of total cost? Sure. As an amount per person covered, not so much. timerealclearpolitics.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/admincosts1.gif They also deny roughly 70% more claims than private insurance.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #24 December 24, 2009 Quoteit means, they've tried pretty much everything else to stop this freight train, so now we have to try 'constitutionality' nice try, The government, the last time I checked, is run by the people for the people, so if the people WANT health care reform, then the people GET health care reform. No I do not think this bill is that great, but it is a step in the right direction. I expect everyone will be required to buy health insurance, and the insurance companies will fuck it all up, and the government will then take the next step - single payer. So rather than 'constitutional arguments', maybe they could instead spend their efforts trying to do some thing 'for the people' my $0.02 So the Patriot Act was fine because that's what the people wanted? The Constitution does matter, as do minority wishes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #25 December 24, 2009 Quote More right wing whining when they cant do didly squat. The day it passes I'll probably even read Fox "news". Should be fun!* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
