That’s Sen. Reed that is being quoted.
It’s making people buy something they don’t want to buy. IOW ... a TAX!
Every congressbilgebag that votes for this is a traitor.
AFAIK, this has always been their talking point for this objection.
Maybe, if it costs you $10,000 to $15,000 to sign up, and you have to sign up every year.
So then, in the future, depending upon income or subsidies, it could be mandatory to:
buy a car(s),
a house(s),
a health club membership,
furniture,
add your own...
Most folks have a bike and like their own, but don't want the government to take their current bike and force them to buy a government designed bike.
Some very few people have no need of a bike. Too bad, the government is now forcing everyone to buy the government issued bike.
Brings to mind a visual:
Forcing people to buy ‘health insurance’ is an invitation to early death! (and unconstitutional)
draft? oh.. that’s what they have discussed for those doctors that decide to quit instead of working 80 hrs/week for 1/2 the pay
For what it’s worth, the draft is also unconstitutional (per the 13th Amendment).
Are they using as precedent to make us buy stuff, the Militia Act of 1792/95 as quoted below?
I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia... and ...shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder...
The Constitution has a mandate for the protection of the people with regard to their safety. It has no mandate for making sure that there is a money pool from the taxpayers for the lawyers to dip into with their malpractice lawsuits.
Just examine this: Is there anything in what the Democrats have put together that protects the moneys from the taxes they collect from gigantic lawsuits by malpractice lawyers? It looks to me like the Democrats are avoiding the real problem with medical costs: that being the malpractice lawsuits which is stealing from the country’s medical budget. Ask your doctor when you go next what percentage of what he charges you for a visit goes to insurance. When you find this out, you will be greatly shocked. I am not a doctor. I do civil engineering. If they were suing us like they are suing the doctors, I’d pump gas first.
This is incredible what the Democrats are doing to us. We are working hard to get along. They are going to tax us until there is nothing left to provide this plan. Look to your left, look to your right, where are these rich they are going to get all this magic money from? They’ve been taxing the rich for 50 years. Why do we keep getting hurt in the end?
Tax evader
Draft dodger
Insurance resister
Senator Reed is incorrigibly ignorant. Article I,Section 8 expressly gives Congress the power to raise an army. It further gives Congress implied authority to pass any law to carry out their delegated powers. A draft can definitely be seen as a “necessary and proper” function of the federal government in that it is one means of raising an army. To draw some tortured comparison between the constitutionality of the draft and compelling US citizens to purchase a government approved health care policy is idiocy.