Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where does it say in the constitution, that liberals are so fond of using for their gain and benefit and "be right" arguments", that American citizens are entitled to health care?
"Why don't you use the waiver provision to let you go set up your own plan?" the senator asked those who threaten health-care-related lawsuits. "Why would you just say you are going to sue everybody, when this bill gives you the authority and the legal counsel is on record as saying you can do it without an individual mandate?"
So what do the constitution hawks think about this?
Location: Midessa, Texas Home Yangzhou, Jiangsu temporarily
1,506 posts, read 4,281,122 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perkins Well
"Why don't you use the waiver provision to let you go set up your own plan?" the senator asked those who threaten health-care-related lawsuits. "Why would you just say you are going to sue everybody, when this bill gives you the authority and the legal counsel is on record as saying you can do it without an individual mandate?"
So what do the constitution hawks think about this?
The States don't need a waiver provision. The States can have a health care plan or not have one, the federal government cannot mandate they must have one.
So I guess the individual mandate is not required after all and hence the state lawsuits are essentially rubbish. A state can do without the individual mandate so long as they can achieve similar results, so now all those Republican Governors can show off their great ideas and implement their own systems! Of course, they know they can't hence the law suits.
This part of the bill is devilishly clever on the Democrats part.
"So let us review how the waiver language works now, because my reading of what we have in the bill now is, if a state can demonstrate that they can meet the criteria -- particularly on cost containment, improving the delivery system -- they can do it without an individual mandate..."
The States don't need a waiver provision. The States can have a health care plan or not have one, the federal government cannot mandate they must have one.
And since you didn't get it... this is specifically about federal government NOT mandating it.
Where does it say in the constitution, that liberals are so fond of using for their gain and benefit and "be right" arguments", that American citizens are entitled to health care?
Well, I really wish y'all would make up your mind. I've seen arguments placed from your side that it is a right, while others call it a privilege. Because if it is indeed just a privilege (like driving a car), then governments can impose restrictions and requirements.
The 10th Amendment is to Republicans what the 5th Amendment is to criminals.
Quote:
If the framers of the constitution had intended for the federal government to have this power then there would be no need for federalism,
Now that was one funny sentence. You'da thought that Yogi Bera had joined C-D.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
