Posted on 03/18/2016 10:00:56 AM PDT by Kaslin
All “progressives” are
Given the remote possibility that you haven’t seen the following information concerning the federal government’s limited power to regulate healthcare, you might find it interesting.
Regarding non-INTRAstate healthcare, please note the following. The Founding States had given the feds exclusive legislative control over state-owned land that a given state was willing to sell to the feds under the terms of the Constitution’s Clause 17 of Section 8 of Article I.
In fact, Obamacare supporters had referenced the sailor’s healthcare act of 1798 to argue that the feds can make laws mandating healthcare insurance. But what these low-information Obamacare supporters overlooked is that President Adams, who signed the act of 1798, was likely aware that Clause 17 specifically references dockyards. So the ship owners affected by the act of 1798 were presumably operating from federally owned dockyards, the land for such dockyards probably purchased under the terms of Clause 17, corrections welcome.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards [emphasis added], and other needful Buildings;--And
In fact, note that Thomas Jefferson had written that rich USA citizens solely paid the taxes necessary to run the country in its early days, the taxes being tariffs on imported goods.
“The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied [emphasis added]. … Our revenues liberated by the discharge of the public debt, and its surplus applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings.” —Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, 1811.
So since the federal government was financed solely by import tariffs, it’s no surprise that the feds had an interest in controlling dockyards.
On the other hand, regardless what lawless Obama’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices want everybody to think about Obamacare, they evidently ignored that previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices had repeatedly clarified that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for intrastate healthcare purposes.
With respect to the constitutionality of the Obamacare insurance mandate for example, note the fourth entry in the list below from Paul v. Virginia. In that case, state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that regulating insurance is not within the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), regardless if the parties negotiating the insurance policy are domiciled in different states.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]” - Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” - Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” -Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
” 4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract [emphasis added] of indemnity against loss.” - Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
”Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” - Linder v. United States, 1925.
Remember in November !
When patriots elect Trump, Cruz, or whatever conservative they elect, they also need to elect a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support the president, but also protect the states from unconstitutional federal government overreach as evidenced by unconstitutional federal healthcare programs, Obama’s and possibly Trump's.
Also, consider that such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
Do you hear the people sing, singing the songs of angry men?
It is a song of people who will not be slaves again!
The big sales pitch used to originally get support for ObamaCare was that this would NOT happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.