PPACA and Scotus

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by icenine

....I am a product of Ohio public education Pete....

Misery loves company

Pete

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

If the concept of our government can't be grasped by us smart fellers we're finished and might as well be ruled by an ogilarchy. Aren't many here college grads?

On Washington, that obviously isn't applicable or it WOULD have been used. I'm just guessing here, the Feds have jurisdiction over that particular thing. I'll put $20 on it.

Rob, it isn't about insurance. Can the Feds force an individual to buy something? Stay tuned, the real masters of the universe are about to tell us.

Pete

Pete, if you had any conviction at all, you would bet ten grand that you are right. Actually, it would be a winner. The feds have maritime jurisdiction, and the health care mandate signed by GW affected sailors. Of course, the feds also have jurisdiction over interstate commerce. An industry that affects over 15% of our economy certainly has an impact on interstate commerce. Just as George was acting within the fed jurisdiction over the seas, the HCA is within the fed jurisdiction over interstate commerce.

Although the Constitution set limits on the scope of federal power, legislation over interstate commerce comes within the scope of that power.

Hey, my political science degree has to be good for something.

Regards,

D-Ray

[merrylander]

Don't ask me I dropped out after the tenth grade.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

If the concept of our government can't be grasped by us smart fellers we're finished and might as well be ruled by an ogilarchy. Aren't many here college grads?

On Washington, that obviously isn't applicable or it WOULD have been used. I'm just guessing here, the Feds have jurisdiction over that particular thing. I'll put $20 on it.

Rob, it isn't about insurance. Can the Feds force an individual to buy something? Stay tuned, the real masters of the universe are about to tell us.

Pete

Oh I grasp it all right, it is based on the Jack System as in screw you Jack I've got mine.

It really is about plain old fashioned greed and stupidity. We spend twice what any other industrialized nation does and some 45 million of our citizens get lousy health care.

Masters of the Universe my arse. A bunch of former ambulance chasers who sold out.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Pete, if you had any conviction at all, you would bet ten grand that you are right. Actually, it would be a winner. The feds have maritime jurisdiction, and the health care mandate signed by GW affected sailors. Of course, the feds also have jurisdiction over interstate commerce. An industry that affects over 15% of our economy certainly has an impact on interstate commerce. Just as George was acting within the fed jurisdiction over the seas, the HCA is within the fed jurisdiction over interstate commerce.

Although the Constitution set limits on the scope of federal power, legislation over interstate commerce comes within the scope of that power.

Hey, my political science degree has to be good for something.

Regards,

D-Ray

The difficult part is determining the extent of interstate commerce. What is or is not permitted by the federal government? I doubt that anyone would read the ICC such that any action by the government is permitted. Broadly construed the ICC would allow any and all actions by the government. That possibility, certainly wasn't the intention of the founders. The limits and enumeration of powers set by the text of the constitution would not be needed if they sought a central government without limits. Moreover, if one wants to expand the power of the federal government greatly, one can always use the amendment process.

[Oerets]

It gets back to the fact the people in charge seem to take care of themselves just fine on our dime.

But allow the people to have the same, now is something unthinkable. Seems to me having a healthy population is in the nations best interests. Good for the economy, what the Federal Government needs to be doing right?

I would like to hear from someone without insurance as to why there should not be coverage for all? Or is it just the fact you do not want to pay for it when you do get care?

People that are suspected to be working "off the books". Know that would be near impossible in the future if a mandate with insurance was implemented. Right on your IRS filings so no longer would it be possible to just show up to a hospital for care without getting a call from the IRS as to why no records of taxes paid.



Barney

[icenine]

I guess one cannot be working off the books and qualify for the subsidized health insurance for poor people without some major tax evasion....

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Oerets

I would like to hear from someone without insurance as to why there should not be coverage for all? Or is it just the fact you do not want to pay for it when you do get care? Barney

Another observation on insurance. Who thinks that having to choose between food and healthcare is OK? Or between dying and sacrificing your families home should the big C or any of the other diseases that regularly put people into bankruptcy? Pre existing condition denial of coverage determinations seem to be regular business practices of these giant healthcare companies. The sooner they are kicked out of the business of health, the healthier we will all be.

I have no doubt that the real question before the SCOTUS is who bails out the stockholders when Blue Cross/Shield and the rest of these vampires are gutted.
The lobbying by these so called heath maintenance organizations has been over the top IMO.

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by bobabode

I have no doubt that the real question before the SCOTUS is who bails out the stockholders when Blue Cross/Shield and the rest of these vampires are gutted.
The lobbying by these so called heath maintenance organizations has been over the top IMO.

I wounder just how much of a savings to the customers if the Insurance/healthcare industry was to be run as a non-profit? Say 35% cheaper maybe?




Barney

[barbara]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Another observation on insurance. Who thinks that having to choose between food and healthcare is OK? Or between dying and sacrificing your families home should the big C or any of the other diseases that regularly put people into bankruptcy? Pre existing condition denial of coverage determinations seem to be regular business practices of these giant healthcare companies. The sooner they are kicked out of the business of health, the healthier we will all be.

I have no doubt that the real question before the SCOTUS is who bails out the stockholders when Blue Cross/Shield and the rest of these vampires are gutted.
The lobbying by these so called heath maintenance organizations has been over the top IMO.

Exactly right.
Been there, done that.
Twice.
Was without ins for three days in my sixth month of pregnancy and gave birth...... We lost everything.
Husband suddenly became disabled and even with ins, we lost everything.
At this point, if it happens again, I'm too old to be able to recoup the loss. I'll have to learn how to fix cat food in a way that is palatable.