BREAKING: Parts of healthcare law ruled unconstitutional

[sandorski]

This is one the major problems I and many had with the bill. I can't see how it is constitutional to force a person to buy insurance. And their comparison of this to car insurance doesn't fly because I only have to buy car insurance if I want to drive.

Do you want to Live?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Don't pay the tax penalty and see what happens.

Separate issue. I don't have a mortgage, so every year I get a tax penalty for not having one. I still pay all my taxes.

 

[bamacre]

Obama thought the mandate was a bad idea. Oh, but that was before he was elected.

 

[theeedude]

I keep reading from other sources that in the rush ram the bill through the dems forgot to decouple parts of the bill and therefore if any part of it is unconstitutional, the entire thing is.

Did you even read the ruling?

"Having found a portion of the Act to be invalid. . . the Court's next task is to determine whether this Section is severable from the balance of the enactment. ... The most recent guidance on the permissible scope of severance is found in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Co. Accounting Oversight Board. 'Generally speaking, when confronting a constitutional flaw in a statute, we try to limit the solution to the problem, severing any 'problematic portions while leaving the remainder intact.' ... [W]ithout the benefit of extensive expert testimony and significant supplementation of the record, this Court cannot determine what, if any, portion of the bill would not be able to survive independently. Therefore, this Court will hew closely to the time-honored rule to sever with circumspection . . . . Accordingly, this Court will sever only Section 1501 and directly-dependent provisions which make specific reference to Section 1501."

 

[ElFenix]

No additional taxes on someone with less than a certain income.

Also, any tax can then have a loophole figured out.

the republicans rightly called it a tax anyway.



just skimmed the decision, the change in the statute for this provision from 'tax' to 'penalty' was key. basic holding:

1) congress can't regulate inactivity as economic activity under commerce clause, and so cannot enact this 'penalty' under the necessary and proper clause supporting commerce clause power;
2) because congress showed it knew the difference between tax and penalty (there were other 'taxes' that were not changed from draft to final into 'penalties'), and because the supreme court jurisprudence that taxes and penalties are not interchangeable has never been overturned, and because the revenue effect is incidental to the regulatory effect, and finally because congress specifically intended it to be a penalty under the commerce clause, congress can't do this because it doesn't have the power under the commerce clause.

 

[sactoking]

Separate issue. I don't have a mortgage, so every year I get a tax penalty for not having one. I still pay all my taxes.

It's not a wholly separate issue. Getting thrown in jail for tax avoision b/c you refuse to pay all taxes is a separate issue. Getting thrown in jail for tax avoision b/c you refuse to pay the 2.5% penalty for not having insurance b/c you refuse to buy insurance is not a separate issue.

BTW- You don't get penalized for not having a mortgage. You get an advantage if you do have a mortgage. Framing the issue in the reverse just to paint yourself as some taxpaying martyr is dishonest.

 

[classy]

Do you want to Live?

Most health problems have zero to do with life and death consequences, so drop the drama queen act.

 

[Jiggz]

And yet it's constitutional for the government to force me to be a part of the gigantic ponzi scheme?

Only if you work or have a job that makes money. Otherwise, you don't have to contribute! That's not exactly forcing isn't it? and BTW, don't even mention car insurance, it's analogy has been long debunked.

 

[Ldir]

In 2 other cases Federal judges said it was ok.


Two other federal judges have ruled that the law passes constitutional muster. No judge has ruled the law unconstitutional. Many observers think Hudson will be the first.

That prediction is built partly on Hudson's roots in Republican politics. He was elected Arlington's commonwealth attorney as a Republican, briefly ran against U.S. Rep. James P. Moran (D-Va.) in 1991 and has received all of his appointments - as U.S. attorney, as a Fairfax County Circuit Court judge in 1998 and to the federal bench in 2002 - from Republicans.

It sounds like Hudson is one of those activist judges the right hates. I am glad Spidey wants to impeach him.

 

[sandorski]

Most health problems have zero to do with life and death consequences, so drop the drama queen act.

I guarantee you that at some point it will be Life/Death. You willing to forgo HealthCare when that time comes?

 

[MotF Bane]

Just another right wing judicial activist Bush appointee in Virginia. Nothing to see here, move along.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

 

[spidey07]

It sounds like Hudson is one of those activist judges the right hates. I am glad Spidey wants to impeach him.

LOL! Upholding The Constitution to prevent government intrusion isn't activism.

Ruling that The Constitution ALLOWS government intrusion is. The Constitution PREVENTS the federal government from doing a lot of things, upholding that prevention isn't judicial activism.

Saying The Constitution ALLOWS government behavior, rather than prevent it is the different between a constitutional abiding judge and a liberal judicial activist. That's the very definition, using the judges to rule against the Constitution is judicial activism, the opposite is not.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Note that pre-existing condition exclusion rule was not struck down, only the individual mandate. This will bankrupt the health insurance industry.

Nope.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

It's not a wholly separate issue. Getting thrown in jail for tax avoision b/c you refuse to pay all taxes is a separate issue. Getting thrown in jail for tax avoision b/c you refuse to pay the 2.5% penalty for not having insurance b/c you refuse to buy insurance is not a separate issue.

BTW- You don't get penalized for not having a mortgage. You get an advantage if you do have a mortgage. Framing the issue in the reverse just to paint yourself as some taxpaying martyr is dishonest.

A tax deduction is a penalty for everyone that can't take advantage of it. They are in all practicality subsidizing the deduction for others. Regardless, there is nothing in this bill that criminalizes not getting health insurance. The criminality of tax avoision is a separate issue.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Why do you hate the Constitution?

He's an authoritarian. Look at it his way. He needs to find any excuse to promote government control for whatever reason.

Psst. Ask him this question-

"If government ever did take control of health care and created regulations that had the unintended consequence of harming a patient, should the physician do what's best for the patient or follow the regulation, and what consequence ought to be if he chooses the patient's well being?"

I dare ya!

 

[MotF Bane]

Sure thing HR!

Senseamp, if government ever did take control of health care and created regulations that had the unintended consequence of harming a patient, should the physician do what's best for the patient or follow the regulation, and what consequence ought to be if he chooses the patient's well being?

 

[theeedude]

Nope.

People will just wait till they get sick and by coverage then. Insurance is not going to be profitable business model if only the sick get it.

 

[theeedude]

Sure thing HR!

Senseamp, if government ever did take control of health care and created regulations that had the unintended consequence of harming a patient, should the physician do what's best for the patient or follow the regulation, and what consequence ought to be if he chooses the patient's well being?

I am not going to advocate breaking the law. If you are interested in the consequences, read the penalties outlined in the specific law you are interested in.

 

[rudeguy]

WIN!

Now the Dem's are pissed at Obama because he wants tax cuts for the rich.
The Republicans are pissed because he wants to pork up the tax cuts.
Obama's health care is getting struck down in court.
Now all he has left to do is use the word "Whitey" in a speech and he is a lock in for a one term president.

 

[sunzt]

Awesome. Can we impeach him for this?

Sorry, impeachment is reserved only for presidents who get blowjobs from fat intern chicks.

 

[MotF Bane]

I am not going to advocate breaking the law. If you are interested in the consequences, read the penalties outlined in the specific law you are interested in.

Thank you for at least answering, I didn't expect you would. However, that means for all your high-minded talk about making sure everyone has healthcare, how this is good for the public as a whole, better for the country... really, all you care about is the power of the government, and perhaps the reduction of corporate profit margins. The wellness of people as individuals is irrelevant. You are disgusting.

 

[theeedude]

Thank you for at least answering, I didn't expect you would. However, that means for all your high-minded talk about making sure everyone has healthcare, how this is good for the public as a whole, better for the country... really, all you care about is the power of the government, and perhaps the reduction of corporate profit margins. The wellness of people as individuals is irrelevant. You are disgusting.

You are welcome. You appear to have a pathological contempt for our representative democracy and for the laws passed by the people's elected representatives.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

You are welcome. You appear to have a pathological contempt for our representative democracy and for the laws passed by the people's elected representatives.

LOL! As do you, but only if they were passed/authored by the "other" side.

 

[MotF Bane]

You are welcome. You appear to have a pathological contempt for our representative democracy and for the laws passed by the people's elected representatives.

Better a contempt for a corrupt and tyrannical government than a hypocritical contempt for the wellbeing of American citizens.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Better a contempt for a corrupt and tyrannical government than a hypocritical contempt for the wellbeing of American citizens.

"I was only following orders"