Posted on 03/27/2010 4:28:13 AM PDT by Son House
Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen Thursday morning announced that his office is seeking the required authorization to bring an action to contest certain provisions of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Van Hollen says the major problem is the law's requirement that individuals purchase health insurance or face a fine.
"That's unprecedented," he said. "No federal court to our knowledge has ever made a decision that that is an appropriate constitutional reach."
He says if that's allowed to stand the federal government could compel us to buy almost anything.
"They could say that everyone who can afford to buy an automobile must buy a General Motors automobile or be penalized under the Internal Revenue Service code," he said.
The leader of one liberal group scoffed at the idea.
"If you were to ask him to speculate on something he would be unwilling to do so, but now he's putting out fantastical theories in order to advance the Republican agenda," Scot Ross, executive director of One Wisconsin Now, said.
Scott Hassett, Van Hollen's Democratic opponent this fall, says challenges to the health care law are doomed to fail.
"There's a long line of cases going back to 1937 that have upheld similar actions," he said
Hassett says Van Hollen is playing partisan politics - a charge Van Hollen denied.
"Whenever I do something they don't like I'm being partisan," he said. "When I do something they like I'm being reasonable."
Assembly Majority Leader Tom Nelson, (D) Kaukauna, says Van Hollen is standing in the way of democracy.
"What they're trying to do is take a piece of legislation that was passed by an elected body and go to the courts to try to stop this," Nelson said.
Speaker Michael Sheridan and Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker both said they have no interest in authorizing the lawsuit.
"Right now, as it stands, our number one priority is job creation," Nelson said. "So we have more than enough work to try to get these bills passed and try to get people back to work."
Early Thursday afternoon, Governor Jim Doyle sent a letter to Van Hollen, denying his request.
Assembly Majority Leader Tom Nelson, (D) Kaukauna, "What they're trying to do is take a piece of legislation that was passed by an elected body and go to the courts to try to stop this,"Right on, buddy!
And just because it's a majority of the people that are not Democrats and know this bill fails on it Constitutionality, doesn't mean they shouldn't stand up for their Constitutional rights in court.
“Right now, as it stands, our number one priority is job creation,” Nelson said. “So we have more than enough work to try to get these bills passed and try to get people back to work.”
Don’t worry about the Constutionality, we’re busy with
Jobs, jobs, jobs. Go away son, ya bother me!
God these people are sickening.
“crossing the lines in terms of unconstitutionality”
State of Illinois
Senate Transcript March 30, 2001
Page 87
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf
Obama “And if we’re placing a burden on the doctor that says you have to keep alive even a previable child as long as possible and give them as much medical attention as — as is necessary to keep that child alive, then we’re probably crossing the lines in terms of unconstitutionality.”
tar and feathers
lots of tar and feathers
“They could say that everyone who can afford to buy an automobile must buy a General Motors automobile or be penalized under the Internal Revenue Service code,”
And if the precedent of mandated health insurance sticks, such laws ARE coming, ao that the commies in Washington can force us to pay for houses for the homeless, or those evicted.
Then there will be the law that every person residing in America MUST register as a citizen. So there will be no more illegal aliens to argue about.
Then the minimum size of the the houses will decrease to force all city dwellers into “Kruschev Blocks.” (I lived in one for two years near Vladivostok.)And then there will be a MAXIMUM size of dwelling mandated! The justification will be over-population and the environment.
Then because the housing will be kept to a bare minimum by mandate(!) the mandate to limit the size of families will be passed. This is already being taught and forced to a degree by the mandate of smaller cars! I would have to have THREE of the cars they now want us to buy for my family. . . and thus three licensed drivers. So drivers licenses will be limited to two per household, once licenses are effectively federalized. . . . errr . . . NATIONALIZED!
If mandated health insurance sticks we actually have NO more “federal” government. No more effective 10th amendment.
The full impact of the precedent of nationalized health care goes all the way to the one-child policy and totalitarianism.
Didn’t some early U.S. city laws require people to have jobs or they would be run out of town or arrested? Since
that was struck down why wouldn’t this be?
“Didn’t some early U.S. city laws require people to have jobs or they would be run out of town or arrested?”
A Russian went into a car dealership in Moscow to buy a car on April 2, 1956. He was told it would be delivered on April 2, 1966.
The Russian car buyer asked, “Will that be in the morning or afternoon?”
The dealer, surprised, asked, “You have to wait ten years and you are worried about the time of day of the delivery?”
The car buyer answered, “Well, you see, the plumber is coming that morning to fix the toilet.”
While it would be nice for every state to be able to sue, all it takes is one to stop this whole Communist takeover.
Then the minimum size of the the houses will decrease to force all city dwellers into “Kruschev Blocks.”
^
You’ve certainly got an eye for the future, under Democrats. I’ve seen some huge European apartment buildings in Germany, so I could only guess these are about the same with dingy little apartments
At least in that situation, someone could leave that town and go to another place. In the Obamanightmarecare there are no other options. There are no other cities to go to. There are no options.
Sounds like the jackass party in Wisc is terrified of this political hot potato. Polls are strongly against DeathCare up there and Feinstien is loosing to his GOP challenger now. Through in the AG wanting to sue. The jackass’s are not trying to shoutdown the AG as well as the people in Wisc.
If the jackasses are so confident that challenges will not be succuessful, why don’t they step aside and let the GOP embarrass itself? The jackasses want to shout down and silence the GOP on this subject QUICKLY because DeathCare is EXPLOSIVE. It was widely unpopular a month ago and it is getting moreso with eachpassing day. It is a chain reaction.
The Jackasses are trying to shout down and embarrass the opposition. BUT YOU CANNOT SHOUT DOWN TRUE ANGER AND WRATH ESPECIALLY WHEN IT IS ROOTED IN PRINCIPLE AND FACTS.
This is your Waterloo Jackasses and it is getting worse with each passing day!
And don’t get me started on Comrade Doyle.
Just like segregation, eh?
Yeah, and they were actually some jobs to be filled too.
In our country that far out date will be when you can go to the doctor or retire.
Why doesn’t the GOP just say this who health care bill is illegal and Marxist and refuse to accept it. Close down the white house.
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.