Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
The decision is supposed to be based on constitutionality, not popularity.
Did the congress and the president have the right to pass a law requiring folks to buy health insurance?
It's already done......in Massachussetts and bears candidate Romneys signature.
If it's a violation of an American citizens individual, constitutional rights for the federal government to require me to have insurance, then how is it constitutional for the same to be done to American citizens in Massachussetts by Mitt Romney? Apparently it's constitutional when a Republican does it.
That being said, the SCOTUS is majority conservative. Therefore the constitution may very well be twisted to meet their agenda anyways. So, I kind of agree with you. It probably will be struck down. 
Dave |
The scope is entirely different wrt states and the federal government. Keep in mind that The Constitution is a limiting document. I suspect that a universal care law could be passed and withstand attacks, however, I'm also quite certain that the politcal will is not there to effectively pass such legislation; hence, the reality of making the system we have better by allowing more competition and reducing the micromanaging emanating from government.