|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Administrators
Last Login: 8/14/2007 2:51:08 PM
Posts: 2,
Post ID: 96456
|
|
11/3/2009 12:00:00 AM
Let's discuss 'People's forum — Bringing up the uninsured issue ruins the debate on health care reform'.
To bring up the 47 million uninsured Americans has got to be the best way to destroy legitimate debate on health care reform ("Public option needs to be passed," People's Forum, Oct. 25).
-from
the Truth
Click here to view the story
|
|
|
|
|
Master Contributor
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 10/2/2007 2:51:02 PM
Posts: 748,
Post ID: 96457
|
|
| Mr. Barna, constitutionally health care is not a right, and there is a very good reason. You have no more "right" to demand the skills of your doctor neighbor for free than I have the right to demand your skills for my benefit without cost. Oh, you say that the doctor will be paid by the government or the taxpayers? Just where is that money coming from?
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:08:48 AM
Posts: 3,566,
Post ID: 96464
|
|
Randy states that the issue is a radical move to make government larger. I don't think that represents my issue on this subject. The 47 million unemployed number, as Randi stated, is three years old. We all know that number is much larger now and we all hope the number decreases soon. Based on the three year old numbers from the Department of Labor, we would see 146 million workers, more or less, in this country. We would also see a financial number floating around that would be the employer and employee contributions to the health care industry. If that number is calculated at $600 per month, the cost of the average health insurance policy at that time, there is a lot of money that could be used for a system of health care. Balance that against an industry that employs 5 million people, the health insurance industry. Also balance the current private business interest, with no need to curb there expenses, against the amount of money leaving the economy that is just burnt up in insurance cost. Something must change. The cost factor is growing. The guidelines are non exsistant. We are not, as workers and as employers, getting are moneys worth now.
"I think I have wasted an hour of your time and I apologize for that". Glen Beck
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:01:19 AM
Posts: 3,241,
Post ID: 96467
|
|
| Where do you find health insurance being a Constitutionally protected right?
|
|
|
|
|
Guru-in-Training
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 11/3/2008 12:39:33 PM
Posts: 934,
Post ID: 96470
|
|
Admin (11/3/2009)
11/3/2009 12:00:00 AM Let's discuss 'People's forum — Bringing up the uninsured issue ruins the debate on health care reform'. To bring up the 47 million uninsured Americans has got to be the best way to destroy legitimate debate on health care reform ("Public option needs to be passed," People's Forum, Oct. 25). -from the Truth Click here to view the story Health care IS NOT a Constitutional right and the 47 million "uninsured" is a false number. It's not more but extremely less (more like 12 million). You, my friend, are completely misinformed and misguided by the very government (and the media it runs) you wish to takeover 1/6 of our economy. You are wrong and our government will fail us yet again should this massive pile become law.
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:08:48 AM
Posts: 3,566,
Post ID: 96475
|
|
The constitutionality of this endeavors seems to be in the air. Only the Supreme Court can decide that issue and not until there is a law passed, can they then be brought into the picture. At this point there is not a law on the floor that has been agreed to by both houses. What happens if the language in the new bill, leads to the acceptance by the states, for the responsibility of health care? That, some consider, a legal way to skip the constitutional battle. But, if this is not constitutional, neither are the laws that have been passed since 1930, like Medicare, Social Security, Aid for Children and many more health related Federal Programs passed and backed by both parties over the last 40 years. Do you really believe that anyone in this government will sweep away all those laws? More over, would that mean the return of all that money to the tax payers who participated in those programs? Explain how you would see this constitutionality issue being a stumbling point to the bill not yet proposed?
"I think I have wasted an hour of your time and I apologize for that". Glen Beck
|
|
|
|
|
Master Contributor
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 10/2/2007 2:51:02 PM
Posts: 748,
Post ID: 96477
|
|
elwood (11/3/2009)
The constitutionality of this endeavors seems to be in the air. Only the Supreme Court can decide that issue and not until there is a law passed, can they then be brought into the picture. At this point there is not a law on the floor that has been agreed to by both houses. What happens if the language in the new bill, leads to the acceptance by the states, for the responsibility of health care? That, some consider, a legal way to skip the constitutional battle. But, if this is not constitutional, neither are the laws that have been passed since 1930, like Medicare, Social Security, Aid for Children and many more health related Federal Programs passed and backed by both parties over the last 40 years. Do you really believe that anyone in this government will sweep away all those laws? More over, would that mean the return of all that money to the tax payers who participated in those programs? Explain how you would see this constitutionality issue being a stumbling point to the bill not yet proposed?
Your points of ignoring the constitution are precisely why this country is in deep sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:01:19 AM
Posts: 3,241,
Post ID: 96479
|
|
| Thanks elwood, but i really would like to know where those who say it is Constitutionally protected feel that protection comes from. I don't think that it is but I am open to new ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:08:48 AM
Posts: 3,566,
Post ID: 96487
|
|
miller4 (11/3/2009)
Thanks elwood, but i really would like to know where those who say it is Constitutionally protected feel that protection comes from. I don't think that it is but I am open to new ideas.It comes from 40 years of case law that supports this type of issue. This does not mean that I support or disapprove of the constitutional question, way above my pay grade, it just means that there is a past practice that would make your argument very hard to press forward.
"I think I have wasted an hour of your time and I apologize for that". Glen Beck
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Guru
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/8/2008 10:30:59 PM
Posts: 1,325,
Post ID: 96493
|
|
| A senate snake gets cornered on the question: CNSNews.com) – Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) would not say what part of the Constitution grants Congress the power to force every American to buy health insurance--as all of the health care overhaul bills currently do.
Leahy, whose committee is responsible for vetting Supreme Court nominees, was asked by CNSNews.com where in the Constitution Congress is specifically granted the authority to require that every American purchase health insurance. Leahy answered by saying that “nobody questions” Congress’ authority for such an action.
CNSNews.com: "Where, in your opinion, does the Constitution give specific authority for Congress to give an individual mandate for health insurance?"
Sen. Leahy: "We have plenty of authority. Are you saying there is no authority?"
CNSNews.com: "I’m asking--"
Sen. Leahy: "Why would you say there is no authority? I mean, there’s no question there’s authority. Nobody questions that."
|
|
|
|