Virginia judge rules health care mandate unconstitutional



Good. My wife is in a position in which she can't get health insurance because of a health issue, and while the idea that under obama's plan she can't be denied healthcare sounds great, I still can't justify doing so by forcing millions of people to buy health insurance from private companies. It's just another monthly expense that many people will barely be able to afford.
 
"We are disappointed in today's ruling but continue to believe -- as other federal courts in Virginia and Michigan have found -- that (the law) is constitutional," Tracy Schmaler said. "There is clear and well-established legal precedent that Congress acted within its constitutional authority in passing this law and we are confident that we will ultimately prevail."
Click to expand...
What a load of bullshit. I'd love to hear the logic behind why they think this is within constitutional authority. Forcing citizens to purchase something they might not need, want or possibly can't afford from private companies, doesn't sound constitutional. It sounds like extortion.

Edit> Heh, what this guy said:

"Ultimately, we must ensure that no American will be forced by the federal government to purchase health insurance they may not need, want, or be able to afford," Cantor said. "In this challenging environment, we must not burden our states, employers, and families with the costs and uncertainty created by this unconstitutional law, and we must take all steps to resolve this issue immediately."
Click to expand...
 
muddyriver said:
I dont see the difference between forcing people to have auto insurance and this.
Click to expand...

Brilliant! While we're at it why don't we just let the idea that because they force us to buy one type of insurance, justify them to force us into buying other types of insurance!

Handset insurance for cell phones, check.
Bicycle insurance, check.
Wiping your ass insurance, check.
 
There's a difference between the health insurance bill and car insurance.

You're not required by law to own a car, but with health insurance you're required to have it.

Can you imagine what would happen if states required people who don't drive to have car insurance?
 
Kinda off-topic:

I remember when these healthcare threads were raging in STS. Some people liked the idea of guvment taking the reins. Others thought it was a horrible idea. There was talk about shortages, longer waits, etc.

Check this out.[1] If you're lazy, here's the scoop: we put a death row guy down in Oklahoma. Usually, they use sodium thiopental to sedate the condemned. Well, the state ran out of the drug.[2] Their solution? Why not just pump him with the stuff they use to euthanize animals?[3]

So, here we have the state. They can't seem to get their arms around the "logistical nightmare" of making sure their executioners have the right drugs.[4] And some of you are okay with letting them take the reins of healthcare? To dole out medical services and meds to hundreds of millions of people?

Arguments that miss the point:

1. "For what he did, he deserved to die." (lol okay)

2. "Those monsters don't deserve a easy death anyway." (moral call, I'll pass)

3. "The state says the drug they used on the guy is fine. Works perfectly. I believe 'em." (lol okay.)



Obligatory links: uno, dos, tres, cuatro, and cinco. "Think Norstad. Reason."


[1] longer version.

[2] They RAN OUT. WTF?

[3] If you care, it's called pentobarbital.

[4] A monkey could do a better job managing this "logistical nightmare." A stupid monkey, blind and uncomfortable with hemorrhoids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom