Find Good Info
In: Health Insurance
10 Apr 2010The Obamacare bill has a mandate that we must buy health insurance. This is the 1st time in history that this has been done. Is this constitutional?
If they get away with this, mandate will they tell us that we next have to buy spinach or brocolli on every time we go food shopping?
This is about reference of insurance questions information.
21 Responses to Is the congressional health insurance mandate unconstitutional? Can they tell us we have to buy spinach next?
White House Watching
April 10th, 2010 at 8:26 pm
The libs laugh at the Constitution. They do not care.
Ken
April 10th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
BUT… BUT I HATE SPINIACH!
CURSE YOU OBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
Shovel Ready
April 10th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
The Supreme Court has basically stopped saying crap like Obamacare is unconstitutional. They should wake up.
guru
April 10th, 2010 at 10:17 pm
You can try. These issues have already been litigated through SCOTUS.
Invisible
April 10th, 2010 at 10:50 pm
It will be the FIRST time that the government requires us to buy a product as a condition to being alive and a US citizen
Hurrry!!! Call 911
April 10th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
It is unconstitutional and I expect it to fail the first court test if it even passes.
Millennium Force
April 11th, 2010 at 12:16 am
no
god it’s like you people don’t even know what logical fallacy means
Paul Grass
April 11th, 2010 at 12:44 am
if it becomes law and is upheld to be constitutional then, they can virtually tell you to buy what ever they wish at what ever price they want you to buy it for, it is an end to freedom of choice!
Gadfly
April 11th, 2010 at 1:22 am
If you think it’s unconstitutional, can you at least suggest a provision of the Constitution that you think has been violated? That would seem like a logical first step to a Constitutional argument, wouldn’t it?
lawrenceba549
April 11th, 2010 at 2:14 am
Well, to answer your headline question; many Constitutional scholars, both conservative and liberal, agree that such a mandate would have to be deemed unconstitutional by the fact that nothing in the Constitution gives Congress the power to compel a mandatory purchase on the population.
In answer to your second question, yes, it would mean Congress could do that if such measures are challenged unsuccessfully.
fbomonkey
April 11th, 2010 at 2:39 am
A lot of people will just pay the fine for not having insurance rather then have the insurance because it is a lot cheaper, then sign up for the insurance when they need it because no one can be turned away.
okiknowit
April 11th, 2010 at 3:15 am
It is most likely constitutional, but I suspect that will be tested in court.
I don’t recall reading anything about a right not to buy spinach in the constitution either, though forcing you to eat it might fall under cruel and unusual punishment.
Rancid Stench of BO
April 11th, 2010 at 3:18 am
yes
no
Viva Liberty! [the tao of viva]
April 11th, 2010 at 4:17 am
The Libs seem too busy hating the opposition to type a logical answer. This mandate is the scariest piece of legislation I’ve ever heard of. Anyone who doesn’t mind being criminalized for not owning health insurance is surely a slave to their master. This is wrong on so many levels. If you don’t understand that there is something very wrong here, get help.
Ready 2 Rumble
April 11th, 2010 at 4:23 am
They couldn’t care less about the constitution!
YB Logical
April 11th, 2010 at 5:08 am
Socialism creeps in, even as a thief in the night.
The masses continue sleeping, wrapped in the warm content of their dreams,
blissfully ignoring the shouts of alarm by those who are awakened by the subtle noises.
And as morning sheds the light of reality, the dreamers will rise,
sleepily searching for stolen freedoms.
Source(s):
observance, in an awakened state.
johnblacklove
April 11th, 2010 at 5:24 am
Yes, it is constitutional. The government can mandate you do many things: pay for health care, pay taxes, respect the Law, have ID, etc. These things can depend on the government’s decision therefore not on your willingness to cooperate.
Mike W
April 11th, 2010 at 5:31 am
I believe that it is unconstitutional, but don’t hold your breath waiting for the Supreme Court to overturn the law, if it passes. This is basically the same Supreme Court that said it was all right for a city council to force people out of their homes so that they could turn that land over to a private business.
29 characters to work with......
April 11th, 2010 at 6:24 am
The real problem inherent with this is that we are too far gone already to really do anything about bringing the United States governments back within the limits of the Constitution.
This is quite similar to Bush’s education “reforms”, there is no provision within the Constitution that would justify the No Child Left Behind Act, which is why it surprises me that no one has challenged it yet: after all nowhere in the Constitution is any branch of the federal government given authority over schools and education so it should be the role of the individual States via the 10th Amendment. The health care mandate is similar in that it is never mentioned in the Constitution as a power of the federal government and should therefore be within the realm of State governments or the citizens/people themselves.
The only real justification I can find is Article 1 section 8, which says…
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
The problem with using this as justification is that the specificity of such a “tax” would seem to violate Article 1, section 9 which says that “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” Also it would be an unprecedented, as far as i can tell, move to tax people for not doing something. That would seem to be closer to a fine than to a tax, meaning that such a provision would seem to violate the 5th Amendment.
Trekd
April 11th, 2010 at 7:08 am
That bill is half baked with no thoughtfulness on the average family. A $2,000 or $3,000 fine if you don’t get insurance? If a family can’t afford the insurance, how are they going to pay the fine?
We wanted government to help make our insurance affordable, not worse.
We need drug price regulation and outrageous court payouts.
Instead of bad doctors constantly getting sued all the time, take their licenses away from those bad doctors.
The Patriot
April 11th, 2010 at 7:57 am
Show me where it is prohibited? And if you want to show where it is allowed, show me where the Patriot act is allowed as well please.
I am always amazed how many Americans seem not to be aware about the real healthcare issues relying instead on FOX and other sources to spread lies about the healthcare system of the USA and those abroad. I mean, if healthcare in nations with universal coverage is so bad, why do they keep it?
Obama wants to make insurance more available to all and change the system so that it gives the American people value for money [1]. He also wants change so that the insurance companies find it harder to get out of paying for treatment. The system he is proposing looks similar to that which works in Taiwan where private companies are involved in providing healthcare [2].
Obama campaigned on reforming the healthcare system. He said he wanted to make insurance more available and he was elected by the American people to do this [3].
FACT – the US has higher death rates for kids both for kids aged under one and those under five than western European countries with universal health coverage [4].
FACT – American insurance companies push up prices and work to stop paying out claims on those they cover [5].
FACT – the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet [6].
That means that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in any western nation with universal health coverage.
If you do not like the policies that Obama was elected to bring in, he can always be voted out of office in 2012. But if you disagree with the facts, please let me know. I am always willing to learn, but please provide proof. None of those who disagree with me have been able to do that so far.