Judge rules Obamacare unconstitutional, endangering coverage for 20 million

[DENNYINMI]

National defense against foreign aggressors is one of them.

Yet our current President is pulling out after his military national defense experts see the need to stay in an effort to vouchsafe our security by avoiding a re-grouping of despots and a concern for the safety of “other” human lives in that area of the world. Nevertheless…on a return to topic,

As an American I realize I am not an island, I am part of something much bigger than me, myself, and I. I have no difficulty understanding that charity may not be able to handle the multitude of needs and one catastrophic medical event could wipe out the life savings of an otherwise independent working family.

I’d tend to believe we’re in this together even though the mentality of the rugged individualists tarry on.

The monopoly of the insurance companies and their decisions based on profits, their CEO benefits, salaries and bonuses go unspoken yet we see the government as somehow the bad guy when they rule to regulate? hahaha, not I.

 

[ProVobis]

Allow free and open competition among insurors.

It’s state-regulated.

 

[ProVobis]

GDP is about to record the first full year averaging 3% or better since 2005.

Monetary inflation tends to do that. GDP by definition increases with circulated money supply. Doesn’t do well under sequesters which Obama was stuck with.

 

[Metis1]

Which is sorta funny in that political conservatives have long been for more state’s rights. But the Trump supporters are neither political conservatives nor fiscal conservatives in reality because if they were of the latter they sure wouldn’t have been in favor of the Trump tax-cuts that’s ramping up the deficit big time.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I realize it’s tempting to go political in these threads. Sometimes I do, but not always. This time I decline.

It might be worth considering that the only health insurance program the federal government actually runs is VA, and I think we know that’s not the best. All the rest are “farmed out” to insurance companies who actually administer those programs. And they’re patterned on the insurance companies’ systems.

And if we go full socialized medicine, will it be any different?

 

[Metis1]

Well, Medicare seems to be working out quite well according to surveys taken. Heck, even some the Tea Party people carried signs saying “Don’t touch my Medicare!” during protests of “big government”.

BTW, the one area of greatest inefficiency according to the GAO is with the defense budget, so should we get rid of our military?

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

If it is gone by government, it is then by coercion. As such, it is not compassion. It is not charity. It is solely government power.
As long as we recognize this, then we simply return to the fact that government does not do it well, does not do it economically, will use it Un political ways, will deny coverage when the individual is deemed not worthy for any reason, such as cost, age, severity of condition, health habits, etc.

The above quote is an excellent example of viewing government as an affront/opposition to the people. O’ contraire.

Our constitution is almost a near perfect document.

Within it’s preambles we see the words “We the People”
in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Because of the political division we have moved away from the truth that our “government” is not the bad guy. Our government is “We the People”…which includes the vulnerable, the poor, and those in need as well.

If we’ve forgotten that, I would suggest we need to be reminded. The incessant rampages of the government as the bad guy is faulty.

I actually agree with much of this.
As long as the general government stays within the enumerated powers. The single job of government is to secure the rights of the individual, “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity”. Government doesn’t create, assign, or provide rights. Rights are inherent in the individual. Government’s powers are clearly defined and limited. Within those facts, government is indeed to be cherished and defended.

The constitution states, “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress…” Herein granted! Nothing else. Nothing more. Just “herein granted”. Government has no power beyond what is granted to it in the constitution. The only legitimate way it gains additional power is through Article 5.
The general welfare is promoted under the enumerated powers “herein granted.” Not more than. Not when the a new idea pops up. “Herein granted”.

But stepping beyond that, government is the bad guy. Ronald Reagan was right. Government isn’t the solution, it is often the problem. When government claims to be “over the people”, more empowered than the people, claiming the power to grant and rescind individual rights, then it is the bad guy.

 

[JonNC]

DENNYINMI:

If we’ve forgotten that, I would suggest we need to be reminded. The incessant rampages of the government as the bad guy is faulty.

Exactly. In a constitutional republic based on democratic values, we are the government.

True, as long as government doesn’t overstep it’s enumerated powers, those powers “granted herein”.
We are the government because the individual is sovereign, the individual has inherent rights, none of which are granted, created, or provided by the government.

 

[JonNC]

Well, Medicare seems to be working out quite well according to surveys taken. Heck, even some the Tea Party people carried signs saying “Don’t touch my Medicare!” during protests of “big government”.

BTW, the one area of greatest inefficiency according to the GAO is with the defense budget, so should we get rid of our military?

For most senior Americans, Medicare has become the only option. The government has confiscated money from people all their lives. If you don’t sign up during your initial sign up time, there are penalties when to subsequently do.
Those Tea Partiers were really saying, “don’t touch the benefits you promised when you took my money”.

I certainly think there is room to improve and limit defense spending, but defense is an enumerated power, healthcare is not.

 

[pnewton]

I certainly think there is room to improve and limit defense spending, but defense is an enumerated power, healthcare is not.

You keep saying this as if the Supreme Court has ruled healthcare programs and other social services as unconstitutional based on it not being an enumerated power. We do not get to be our own interpreter of the Constitution. Unless the Supreme court defines a program as unconstitutional for not falling with in the power of the federal government, anyone’s personal opinion is not relevant to reality.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well, Medicare seems to be working out quite well according to surveys taken.

I believe it’s due to go insolvent soon, though.

I don’t think it would be any injustice to anyone if it was means tested. I can’t see any justification in the healthcare of Rush Limbaugh or Al Gore being paid by some worker who can barely keep his family afloat.

 

[Inisfallen]

I don’t think it would be any injustice to anyone if it was means tested.

I think I agree with you. That said, insurance obviously works better the more inclusive the pool of insureds is. I don’t pretend to know what the best means to get to the best outcome is.

 

[ProVobis]

Those Tea Partiers were really saying, “don’t touch the benefits you promised when you took my money”.

Or they just didn’t see their dependence on government. Just like the farmers and ranchers buying government flood insurance and now needing farm subsidies.

 

[ProVobis]

I can’t see any justification in the healthcare of Rush Limbaugh

I’d bet Rush would shout to reduce payroll taxes if Medicare and/or SS were means tested.

 

[DENNYINMI]

True, as long as government doesn’t overstep it’s enumerated powers, those powers “granted herein”.
We are the government because the individual is sovereign, the individual has inherent rights, none of which are granted, created, or provided by the government.

I’m happy you mention this because this begs the question of what is considered an inherent right.

From a Catholic teaching perspective we acknowledge health care as an inherent right because it deals with the dignity of a person. It is also a moral issue. And for those that cannot afford health care or work jobs that do not provide it? I would then suggest to you that the government (as big and bad and as intrusive as some believe it to be) have stepped in to regulate what corporations consisting of individuals have made a mess of. Caps on lifetime medical care, sky high premiums, refusal of care or refusal of access due to a pre-existing condition.

The individual is sovereign in our society until the rights of others are tread on.

I’ve said this too many times to count, our government has put regulations and laws in place due to reactionary necessity. In other words, not because someone might do someone wrong, but because they did!~ Hence, we are a re-actionary government, hardly pro-active.

We see our government in the aforementioned action with child labor laws, environmental labor laws, CDC guidelines regarding the food and health industry and much more. All a result of a reaction to a wrong.

I thank them for that. Unfortunately, health care has required a regulatory standard. How dare they collect premiums for junk insurance, deny care, or fail to be there when a person needs them most. BIG corporate profit has proven it’s greed, and Uncle Sam has had to re-act to it again.

 

[pnewton]

I think I agree with you. That said, insurance obviously works better the more inclusive the pool of insureds is.

This is the problem with health insurance, and why it is both complicated and controversial. Regular insurance is based on risk. A person living on a hill does not pay the same for flood insurance as a person living on the beach because the risk for the former is negligible and for the latter significant.

In health, a seventy year old diabetic would not have the same risk as a college student. If premiums mirrored the rest of insurance, then the older person would pay premiums through the roof, and the latter a bare minimum. However, that would mean the ones who need insurance the most can afford it the least, and the one who would probably need little to no service would contribute very little to the pool.

If health was unimportant, and for those who are not pro-life, this is simply a matter of free enterprise and economics. For those who are pro-life, utilitarian solutions should not be satisfactory.

 

[Inisfallen]

A person living on a hill does not pay the same for flood insurance as a person living on the beach because the risk for the former is negligible and for the latter significant.

Tell me about it. I live on the waterfront (in NYC).

If health was unimportant, and for those who are not pro-life, this is simply a matter of free enterprise and economics. For those who are pro-life, utilitarian solutions should not be satisfactory.

And there it is, in a nutshell.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

I certainly think there is room to improve and limit defense spending, but defense is an enumerated power, healthcare is not.

You keep saying this as if the Supreme Court has ruled healthcare programs and other social services as unconstitutional based on it not being an enumerated power. We do not get to be our own interpreter of the Constitution. Unless the Supreme court defines a program as unconstitutional for not falling with in the power of the federal government, anyone’s personal opinion is not relevant to reality.

That doesn’t make it enumerated. The SCOTUS might say it is constitutional, but that doesn’t make it enumerated.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Those Tea Partiers were really saying, “don’t touch the benefits you promised when you took my money”.

Or they just didn’t see their dependence on government. Just like the farmers and ranchers buying government flood insurance and now needing farm subsidies.

I think we said the same thing. They’re dependent, in part, because the government has taken their money for decades.

 

[Inisfallen]

That doesn’t make it enumerated. The SCOTUS might say it is constitutional, but that doesn’t make it enumerated.

No, but it makes it constitutional.