Quantcast

Comments about ‘13 attorneys general, including Utah's Shurtleff, sue over health care overhaul’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 23 2010 10:49 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Lisa Simonsen Powell

This goes to show there is always choices in every situation. Instead of being in fear, let us all do something positive to fight back, such as the above action. And prayer doesn't ever hurt either. If ever there was a time to pray for our country..............

Slag0500

It is about time that some one stood up for the Constitution. The sold purpose of government is to protect us from crime and foreign invasion. All other purposes, such as health care, are unconstitutional and illegal use of taxpayer funds.

Anonymous

These state attorneys generals are spot on! I hope they seek to fast track this to the US Supreme Court. I also hope they seek an injunction to stop the implementation until the law suit is finalized in the US Supreme Court.

Dr. Bob




Thank you attorney generals!!!!!!!!


nuts

I feel like everyone is nuts. sue the fedeal government of elected people. That is the government. The crazy thing is the right says the fed is too powerfull when they are not in charge but it was okay to wire tap and torture when they are in power. pray for the people that did torture. if you believe in christ you dont torture anyone.

Anonymous

The National bar Association wishes to thank you for passing the attorney employment act. :-) At least, conservatives have gotten a lot of experience at being losers. One more time won't dash their selfish displays of egoism.

Put my name on it..

The bill will do nothing to drop the cost of healthcare!!!

Fed vs State

So what the opposition to this effort is really saying is that the Constitution isn't worth the paper it was written on. If your argument against this lawsuit succeeding is simply that federal law trumps state law (as is stated in this article), then I guess the feds can justify anything they want to force the states to do, despite what the Constitution allows. Isn't that interesting, fellow posters???

Be afraid, friends. Be afraid. Tyranny is not only at our gates, it has crashed thru them. And that central problem has nothing to do with which party is in charge.

Anonymous

"Legal experts say it has little chance of succeeding because, under the Constitution, federal laws trump state laws."

Seriously? That's the best the "legal experts" could come up with? What if the federal laws are unconstitutional?! It doesn't take a legal expert to know that unconstitutional federal laws can't trump state laws. And a federal law isn't constitutional just because it's a federal law.

Anonymous

Where can I donate!?! Support the constitution or all is lost!

What a waist of time and money

What a bunch of self-serving AG. This health care reform bill is a good thing for America.

Karl Hayes

The tenth amendment reads, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Regardless of current practice, the idea that federal law trumps state law doesn't come from the constitution. The tenth amendment does allow the states to prohibit the federal government from getting into areas that the constitution hasn't authorized it to govern, and this (health care) is one of those areas.

There is a word for forcing people turn over their money by intimidation, as this health care plan proposes to do via fines for those who don't sign up. It's RACKETEERING.

crichton007

If only as much time and effort were put into making sure that everyone had health care itself. What other wealthy industrialized nation allows any of its citizens to die or go bankrupt because they can't afford health care? What does that say about us as a nation? Who is there commenting here that is against this that had ever not had health care and needed it? I am not one who could sleep at night knowing that health care companies can use the practice of rescission or not cover people with pre-existing conditions to protect profits while people are allowed to die.

Desperation

It takes a nearly trillion dollar federal mandate forced down their throats for the people of the US (and this message board) to finally get serious about the constitution? The federal government has been abusing its constitutionally mandated limits for many decades and in recent years ONLY Congressman Ron Paul has fought against it. Now that the republicans are bothered by a democrat-passed law they will support the constitution? Well, hopefully they will remember state's rights the next time they are thinking about a bill usurping state's rights...

@crichton007

get a clue fella. When this law goes into effect and the consequences become apparent, there will be many who will be denied health care because of government beaurocrats deciding whats best and most cost effective. besides it is totally unsustainable! What is it with you supposed do-gooders? Don't you realise that the final result will break our systema and our health care. It will be worse than you ever imagined.

It sickens me . . .

. . . to have Shurtleff waste more of Utah's money in this ill-based and ill-founded law suit. Enough Mark -- start thinking about the good of Utah's citizens and stop the attempts to make political points to please the far right base. Sickening.

Anonymous

Utahns are a bunch of idiots! Doesn't a lawsuit cost more tax dollars?

ouch

I need to go to the emergency room. Someone just crammed something down my throat.

Blaine

I'm pleased that Utah's Attorney General has joined litigation to stop federal control over the health care and health insurance sectors of the US economy.

Whatever problems that exist in these sectors of the economy are a direct result of unwarranted and unwise government obstruction and manipulation of free enterprise. As President Regan said, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Congress and the President claim that they have authority to impose control over another 1/6th of the economy because the Constitution allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce. That claim manifests a profound and distorted misapplication and deliberate misunderstanding of the interstate commerce clause. The founders intended for the federal government to ensure that commerce between the states be unimpeded by tariffs and other restrictions -- not to impose total control over the economy!

I wholeheartedly support Utah's long-overdue fight against federal usurpation of power.

What a great use of money.

We have plenty. The economy has been great and we have more than enough to spend on losing litigation!

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments