Welcome to Socialism

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by theg33k

I wonder the constitutionality of a public healthcare option. I honestly don't believe the SCOTUS has the balls to nix that even if they believed it was wrong.

Much of what Congress has done over the last several decades is not supported by Constitutional authority.

[ducttape2]

Sick

[gsh341]

Originally Posted by theg33k

I wonder the constitutionality of a public healthcare option. I honestly don't believe the SCOTUS has the balls to nix that even if they believed it was wrong.

Originally Posted by XDConvert9mm

Much of what Congress has done over the last several decades is not supported by Constitutional authority.

That's why those morons need to be sent packing.

The bill the house just passed is not constitutional. Article 1 Section 8 specifies the things that the government is allowed to do. Health care is nowhere on the list.

We, the people, should file a class action lawsuit to bring it to SCOTUS for review.

[deadsoul]

Originally Posted by gsh341

That's why those morons need to be sent packing.

The bill the house just passed is not constitutional. Article 1 Section 8 specifies the things that the government is allowed to do. Health care is nowhere on the list.

We, the people, should file a class action lawsuit to bring it to SCOTUS for review.

provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States

How much of what Congress does falls under 'general welfare'? Is that the authority they use on, for example, interstate highways? Or do they use the much abused 'interstate commerce' clause?

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by gsh341

That's why those morons need to be sent packing.

The bill the house just passed is not constitutional. Article 1 Section 8 specifies the things that the government is allowed to do. Health care is nowhere on the list.

We, the people, should file a class action lawsuit to bring it to SCOTUS for review.

Agreed and no issues with any of the above.

[mbpe912]

God help us we need it !!

You will now see an upside down flag as my aviator. Untill we can gain control of our Country back from these left wing idiots. THIS IS MORE DISTRESS THAN THIS COUNTRY CAN HANDLE.

Don't forget who voted for it, if they live near you picket there office!

[ducttape2]

Just sent to my rep. I am PO'ed...

Please explain to me what section in the Constitution provides for Federal control of Healthcare?

It appears to me that the biggest reason for high health costs/complexity/lack of transparency has much to do with existing government intrution.

Currently, I have the option from my employer to choose a lower cost plan. However, elegibility requirements related to HSA and dependant day care accounts that my wife has will prevent me from taking the lower cost option. Our open enrolement periods do not line up and so there is no way for me to switch plans until next year, but we would have to forego our savings plans this coming year to prevent the overlap.
The entire structure of these accounts including the rediculous 'use-it-or-loose-it' provisions are not insurance company requirements, but requirements placed on them by the government.

I do not want any more government 'help' if this is any example of what we can look forward to with your monstrosity hatched this evening.
While our shared district may be a lifetime appointment for anyone with a D after their name, I will personally commit my efforts to making it harder and harder for your to get re-elected.

[ducttape2]

The 'general welfare' statement in the Constitution is in the PRE-amble.

In general it is the section that serves to explain the rest of the document.

General welfare is not an enumerated power.

[gsh341]

Originally Posted by deadsoul

How much of what Congress does falls under 'general welfare'? Is that the authority they use on, for example, interstate highways? Or do they use the much abused 'interstate commerce' clause?

The general welfare clause is not about the people per se, rather it's about maintaining civilized society and upholding the law.

Here's a decent case for this point of view.

The General Welfare Clause | from Reason to Freedom

We all know the meaning of words can change over time. In order to more accurately assess the meaning of the word "welfare", with respect to its use in the Constitution, I consulted a source from that period. I happened to own a reprint of the 1828 edition of Noah Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language. Here is how the word "welfare" was defined 40 years after it was written in the Constitution:

WEL´FARE, n. [well and fare, a good going; G. wohlfahrt; D. welvaard; Sw. valfart; Dan. velfærd.]
1. Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness; applied to persons.
2. Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government; applies to states.

[gsh341]

Originally Posted by ducttape2

The 'general welfare' statement in the Constitution is in the PRE-amble.

In general it is the section that serves to explain the rest of the document.

General welfare is not an enumerated power.

Actually, it is in Article 1, Section 8.

Section 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;

However, it was not intended to apply to individuals, only the states within the union. Notice that it states "of the United States" and not "of the citizens of the United States".