Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: free me
I've read the dissent. It doesn't matter what the dissent says. The dissent isn't the decision.
Deal with the decision and how best to use it!

@ S13830 Congressional Record

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, our committee and the HELP Committee have given a lot of thought to the provisions in this legislation. We also gave a lot of thought to the constitutionality of the provisions—how they work and the interrelationship between the power of Congress and the States and what States will be doing, particularly under the commerce clause and the tax-and-spending powers of the Constitution. It is very strongly our considered judgment, and that of many constitutional scholars who have looked at these provisions—and many articles have been put in the Record—that clearly these provisions are constitutional. The commerce clause is constitutional, the tax-and-spending clause, and the provisions clearly are constitutional.
I yield back my time.

S13832...

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the bill before us is clearly an appropriate exercise of the commerce clause. We further believe Congress has power to enact this legislation pursuant to the taxing and spending powers. This bill does not violate the 10th amendment because it is an appropriate exercise of powers delegated to the United States, and because our bill fundamentally gives States the choice to participate in the exchanges themselves or, if they do not choose to do so, to allow the Federal Government to set up the exchanges fully within the provisions as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the 10th amendment.
I urge my colleagues to vote against the point of order.

64 posted on 07/05/2012 9:32:24 PM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: philman_36

The dissent points out what is wrong with the decision.

The dissent also shows that 9 justices did NOT agree that the mandate would be legal had they just called it a tax. Which is what you wrote.

If you mean to say “join with me in pointing out to all voters how the SC just ruled obamacare’s mandate is a whopping big tax, especially on those making $120,000 and less” then no problem, already there.

Want me to point out to all I meet that many dems in congress have been calling it a tax all along? You got it.


65 posted on 07/05/2012 9:38:35 PM PDT by free me (Roberts killed America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson