Published: Thursday, June 28 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
About half of the arm-chair experts on the Constitution of the United States are
happy. The other half of the expert pool is not. It was a 5 to 4 folks. If
only the issue was of the 9 to zero type. There is plenty of room for honest
debate. Again, it is not a 9 to zero issue.
Re: "The Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) may lead to
Congress regulating more than just health care."Yeah -- I'd
say so. The brakes are now officially off.At least Chief Justice
Roberts forced the regime to be honest. Obama joined a long line of executive
and legislative branch liberals that have stretched the Constitution's
Commerce Clause beyond all recognition. Mr. Justice Roberts has now forced them
into pushing their deranged, eurosocialist scams under the Taxing [and implied]
Spending clause.Since only Congress can lay and collect taxes,
it'll be interesting to see how the regime justifies bypassing Congress to
advance the liberal agenda during this lame duck period.
I called United Healthcare to ask what Hospital I needed to take my daughter to
to get stiches.The person I talked to was outside of Utah, and
could've even been out of the U.S.For that fact alone [and
there are 1,000s more] -It becomes Interstate Commerce.So it's
a Federal issue.Making the ruling Constitutional.In Plain
Fellow Utahns-Today the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.The American people know that this law violates our deepest constitutional
principles of limited government, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling
today. President Obama's $2.6 trillion health spending law is an
unprecedented power grab by this White House that will increase health care
costs, add to our skyrocketing national debt, and put Washington bureaucrats in
between patients and their doctors.This ruling doesn't change
the fact that a majority of the people of Utah and across America want this law
repealed. The American people will have the last word at the ballot box this
November. Let me be absolutely clear, I will continue the fight to
repeal this assault on individual liberty and limited government.SincerelySenator Orrin Hatch If we were being invaded by
extra-terrestrials Hatch could not do squat about it either.It's all about a GOP deregulated loophole called Interstate Commerce.Hatch could NOT figure this out in the US Senate for 36 years?.Live with it, it's the law, enjoy being taxed to death more.MY VIEWS.
Contra Hatch, I predict ACA will lower health costs, reduce the debt, and get
capricious insurance companies off my back. I know as much about it as
The working man will now pay more.
@procuradorfiscalthe regime? really I don't remember any
forceful takeover. try rolling back the rhetoric a little, people may actually
bother reading your post.
The bulk of the Act still stands, but the two key financial pillars were found
unconstitutional. The individual mandate as part of the Commerce and Necessary
and Proper Clauses was found to be unconstitutional, as was the mandate that all
50 states must join in the new medicaid program or loose all medicaid funding.
These two pillars were the funding mechanism for the Act. The key
funding mechanisms are gone, leaving the costs to the insurance companies ($450
Billion is the estimate) and to the taxpayers. It has been pointed out that if
one state does not accept the new medicaid program, then the new program will
not be financially feasible.So the two key pillars have fallen.
What you have left does not have adequate funding. Are you sure you really
think this is a win?
As a conservative lawmaker asked a conservative Supreme Court justice, "How
could you rule that such a bad law was legal?" The justice replied, "How
could you pass such a bad law?" John Roberts ruled that congress has the
power to impose taxes, not that the law was reasonable. Conservatives asked for
a strict constructionist and they have one. The liberal justices ruled on the
politics of the bill, not on its legality.
In plain English, John Roberts told Americans to get off their couches and do
something. In plain English to told us that actions have consequences. In
plain English, he told us that if we didn't like the ruling, then we need
to throw the bums out.In plain English, we were told that living in
America is not a spectator sport where 535 members of Congress, 1 President and
9 members of the Court throw the ball around. In plain English, we were told to
get out on the field and participate.In plain English, John Roberts
said, "follow me boys". He had the courage to call a tax a tax. He had
the courage to give back to Obama everything that Obama has given us. He had
the courage to take away from Obama any place to run, any place to hide and
anyone to blame.This day will go down in history as a red-letter day
because ONE MAN had the courage to tell us to wake up and be real Americans and
to tell Obama to pound sand.
worf said "The working man will now pay more."Good heavens.
Another entitlement junkie. I suppose besides free health care via the
emergency room (Reagan Care) you also expect the government to drill drill drill
in the vain hope that you can buy gas at $2/gallon.
Mike, you're really stretching, you know that? The same people who will
supposedly "get off their couches" to elect Romney wouldn't vote
for Obama if he were to pull their children out of a burning building.
What's really going to change there?And weren't you all
telling us earlier that the Supremes were certain to overturn it?
No one should be forced to buy insurance. Insurance shouldn't exist in the
provision of health care. Instead, everyone should have access to, and pay for,
health care. Care without the cost of profit, advertising, IT support, and a
host of people working to deny you access to the system. Care, not insurance.
This is a start, but no one should be forced to buy insurance. Because they
should not need it.
To prevent pollution, we should all be forced to buy a new car, or be fined
My My how the right forgets.The ultra conservative Heritage
Foundation was pushing the insurance mandate as a fix for healthcare back in the
90's. A bill was introduced and strongly supported by Orrin Hatch.Romney is on record as recommending his Mass. plan on a national level
(mandate with tax penalties and all)Making it obvious that any GOP
idea becomes unpalatable when championed by the other political side.Why is it so difficult to see that the uninsured are using health care when
needed and the bill is being paid by the taxpayers already.
HutteriteAmerican Fork, UTNo one should be forced to buy insurance.
Insurance shouldn't exist in the provision of health care. Instead,
everyone should have access to, and pay for, health care. Care without the cost
of profit, advertising, IT support, and a host of people working to deny you
access to the system. Care, not insurance. This is a start, but no one should be
forced to buy insurance. Because they should not need it.10:24 p.m.
June 28, 2012=================== Agreed!As a
FOR Profit corporation, Insurance Companies #1 priority is to their
Stockholders.Providing "Peace of mind" is a commodity they
sell.The actually $$$ to pay for your Healthcare is just an asset
they'll do everything in their power to avoid paying.==================================== @Mike RichardsSouth
Jordan, UtahIn plain Englisn, I could've sworn you were the one
saying the Supreme Court would strike this case down.In plain English, I
could've sworn you said the Supreme Court was just another activist group
who could not interpret the Constitution written in plain English.So, Which is it?Your twisting, rationalizing, hypocrasy now lacks
Procuradolfiscal..as ususal you are way off base. "Yeah -- I'd say so.
The brakes are now officially off." Have you ever taken a tax deduction for
your mortgage, for your kids? Then you've experienced the government using
it's taxing power to encourage specific behaviors. Actually,
for once I agree with Mike Richards. If you disagree with this ruling and law
then it's the Congress that can overtun it. I also agree with
Brother Schroder, that this law is unprecedented. Progress is always
unprecedented, that's the point of progress..go where you've never
been. Unprecedence is not a bad thing. Health care in America is broken. High
skills, mixed outcomes, exorbetent costs, and uneven access is not a successful
model. Something has to be done..somhow we need to do somehting we have never
@LDS Liberal,In Plain English, did I support the Supreme Court
ruling or not? That is the only question that you have to ask.In
Plain English, I am one of the few conservatives who has whole heartedly
supported John Roberts. In Plain English, I am one of the few who
said that John Roberts had the courage to rub Obama's nose in the mess that
Obama is responsible for.In Plain English, I applaud John Roberts
for telling us citizens that we had better turn Obama out of office along with
the others who voted for the Health Care Act.
It looks like some people are offended when their fellow citizens accept the
Supreme Court ruling without bellyaching. I've read posts by
Mike Richards before the decision and after the decision. It appears that he,
and many other conservatives, expected that the AFA would be overturned. It is
also very clear from several of his posts yesterday, that he accepted the ruling
without complaint.Isn't that what an American is expected to
do?Isn't that what anyone who believes in the system would
do?Yet, some people are offended when they see real patriotism at
work. In Plain English, Mike Richards hit a home run.---------John Roberts clearly told us that the AFA was a tax. It
is the largest tax ever placed on Americans and MOST of that tax will hit those
who are least able to pay it. That is what Obama and those in Congress who
supported the AFA have done for America.I'm sure that there
will be a list circulating, before the day is out, listing the names of EVERY
Senator and EVERY member of the House who voted for the AFA. They will be held
accountable by the PEOPLE.
What too many people forget -- or choose to ignore -- is the fact that we have
all been paying a hidden tax for years.A tax imposed on the rest of
us by those who do not have -- or can't afford -- health insurance.The other tax we have been paying goes directly to health insurance
companies. What is it? 30% of our premiums go for "administrative"
costs? Why is it that "administration" of insurance companies is so
costly while for Medicare it's something like 12%?Profit is a
dirty word for some people. Gouging is even dirtier. But isn't gouging what
is actually happening?All the ACA does is move the hidden tax from
the shadows and take it into the sunlight. But some of our politicians are like
vampires. They shun the light.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments