Published: Tuesday, Oct. 1 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
If Medicare is constitutional, Obamacare is constitutional. The Supreme Court
says that both of them are, and that's good enough for me.
As the author points out, Hamilton spoke with the intention to limit the power
of Congress with regard to the general welfare of nation, no doubt fearing that
things might run amok in that regard. But just as clearly, Hamilton believed in
the processes set forth in the Constitution. One clear process is that the
Supreme Court should rule on the Constitutionality of any law passed by the
Congress. In the case of the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court has done
just that and ruled that it is Constitutional. Call it a ruling in favor of a
tax or whatever you care to but the court ruled that it's provisions are
Constitutional.I know the Republicans were counting on the court to
say otherwise and they were disappointed by the decision. Just like I know the
Republicans hoped the last presidential election would be a rebuke to the Obama
Administration and they were just as disappointed. So now is the time for them
to buck up and accept reality - the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the ACA and
the American people made a choice in the national election to support the
leading proponent of the ACA.
The constitution specifically allows congress to do whatever is necessary and
proper to, among other things, promote the general welfare of the United States.
The Affordable Care Act (originally drafted by the extremely conservative
Heritage Foundation) promotes the general welfare of the United States.
Therefore its establishment is clearly within the specifically granted powers
found in the US Constitution. Alexander Hamilton was right. Brad Daw is not.
Not according the the supreme Court of the United States.
By this logic, wouldn't Medicare part D and No Child left Behind also fall
into that category?(along with hundreds, if not thousands of other
programs)Only 25 Republicans voted against Med Part D, the largest
entitlement expansion in decades.I find it curious (and partisan
perhaps) that so many want to use selective logic when dealing with things that
they don't want, by parties that they don't like.If the
logic was applied universally and uniformly, the GOP would have no true
following by conservatives.But, that is not the case. Why do you
think that is?
If the Republicans want so badly to remove the Affordable Care Act, they need to
take the Senate and the Presidency - then they can follow the constitutional
procedures to pass a new law or remove a law. The current law, which was passed
by the House, the Senate, signed by the President, and reviewed by the Supreme
Court, is now the law of the land. You not liking it does not change that fact.
Look -- If you want to live in 1787, that's fine by me.You are free to move to remote, unpopulated area, build your one room
cabin, dig a well, grow your own garden, use your gun to shoot
your food and protect yourself [if you have a neighbor - form that well TRAINED
militia also required], chop your wood, pay next to nothing in
taxes, live "free" and die. The rest of us understand
that the Founding Father were intentionally vague and allowed for
interpretations of the "intent" of the Constitution to allow for it to
stand the test of time and allow for...(here it is, I know you ultra-cons are
going to hate this)...PROGRESS.Guys like this will aruge we
can't have an Air Force because only "army" or "navy" is
Democrats don't care about the constitution one bit! Obamcare was passed
without one GOP vote, declared constitutional by the SCOTUS only as it was
declared a tax. Since then, Obama has illegally and unconstitutionally mandated
at least 17 changes in the law, without any congressional approval. Obama has
given waivers to financial supporters and themselves illegally! The GOP and
honest Americans everywhere are saying, "Wait a minute, I want an exemption
too"! But this mess is forced upon the middle class. But Obama and the
Democrats are outraged by some Americans wanting fairness and the rule of law
adhered to. Honesty, integrity and the rule of law applied equally and fairly to
which the Democrats object to. Note to you Demos, your phony and illegally
administered ACA is very unpopular and you can expect an uprising against your
party and you will lose at the polls future elections!
@ Joe Blow. Democrats and Obama are unfairly, unconstitutionally and illegally
changing the implementation of Obamacare as Obama has mandated at least 17
changes without congressional approval and has given waivers to his rich and
powerful friends and themselves. Why do you think Obamacare is so very unpopular
with the middle class? Now you know!
I'm with you, Brad. England picked and chose what he wanted to use of
Hamilton's statements to support the feds all inclusive interpretation of
the general welfare.With his interpretation there are no limits.
Just ask yourself this: Do you have more or less freedom today than you did
yesterday?All three branches of our government have run amok.
If people would read the Constitution before posting, they would clearly see
that Article 1, Section 8, lists the duties of the Federal Government; the
duties that require taxation. All other duties are left to the States,
according to the 10th Amendment. General Welfare is the phrase that
liberals love. They ignore the Constitution's limits and apply
"General Welfare" to anything that they want funded, which is totally
outside the duties of the Federal Government.Personal health care is
not covered in General Welfare. Medicare is personal welfare. ObamaCare is
personal welfare. Social Security, is personal welfare. We're illegally
taxed to fund those services.Judges that rule because of political
pressure or are too cowardly to oppose public opinion have given each family
bills that they cannot pay without destroying their ability to provide for
themselves; therefore, they become pawns to those who rule and reign in
Washington. The public has become so dependent on Washington that
they forget that they are Americans and that Americans have the responsibility
to provide for their own personal welfare.
MikeWe are all Americans whether we subscribe to your view of
Constitutional interpretation or not.
The Constitution clearly states that the best way to run the country is to have
millions of families uninsured and without access to healthcare. That way the
industry can make massive profits instead of helping the people who need it.
Americans, i.e, the People, are bound by the Constitution just as much as the
government is bound. Americans have no right to demand "services" from
the Federal Government that remove from them their personal responsibility to
provide for their own personal needs. The People have no right to demand that
other citizens open their wallets to pay for their doctor bills or for the
groceries or for their housing. The People have no right to take from the
general revenue of the United States to pay for those things that they cannot or
will not pay themselves.The Constitution protects the people from a
government that would take away our rights and our responsibilities. The Constitution protects the government from people who demand access to
general revenue funds, People who want to eat from a public trough, People who
want someone else to pay for their doctor visits, for their visits to the
grocery store, for their rent, for their education and for all the other
"personal welfare" duties that they have responsibility to handle
Mike,When I see you rant about any GOP proposal that does not fit
your narrow constitutional view, I will listen to you.You carp daily
about the Democrats. Are you suggesting that the GOP does not violate your
constitutional views?When have you ever ranted against them? Excuse
me if I view your Constitutional view as partisan and selective.I
also find it hilarious that many on the right blast Obama for
"illegally" postponing the implementation of the ACA while screaming
that they want to postpone it.
What clause talks about refusing to fund government to force legislation by a
@ One vote. I have a news flash for you. Those supporting Obamacare are the
minority! Check the polls. Not good news for your side. Expect a revolt at the
2014 elections and Democrats up for election will be sent packing! So much for
@MountanmanNews flash for you, if a law is unpopular enough there is
a legal way to repeal it. See Article I of the Constitution. Unless your copy
says something about a law being unpopular it can be ignored, my understanding
is it has to go through a process in which a new law is created saying the other
is repealed.Another one: The President ran on this in 08 and
won...and won reelection on it! More people voted for democrats than
republicans in the House races (see gerrymandering) and the Senate gained seats.
This revolted you expect to happen in 2014 should have probably happened in
2012 with the guy who repeated "Day 1 I will repeal Obamacare"Didn't happen. The last poll that counted validated the Affordable Care
Mountain from Id, The polls you cite do not tell the whole story. A substantial
amount polled believe Obamacare doesn't go far enough. Meaning they prefer
a single payer system to one that is primarily beneficial to the wealthy.
Coupled with those in favor the majority are in favor of changing the healthcare
system that is the most discriminatory in the industrialized world. As for you
Constitutional thumpers, when you are paid to interrupt the Constitution then I
will take your view seriously. Some of you continually pick and choose what you
believe and what you don't. I can only imagine how your pick and choose
tactics work in church.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments