Posted on 08/06/2010 8:04:09 AM PDT by sheikdetailfeather
Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum gives an update on his lawsuit over Obama's health care law
(Excerpt) Read more at video.foxnews.com ...
This health care thing is outrageous.
McCollum said there is no severability clause in the healthcare bill so if Florida wins on one part of the bill the whole bill goes down. This is what the Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli said as well.
Can you believe it? They NEVER forget the severability clause, but they did.
And they also had a problem with a requirement for Congressional aids to be on the program, but I think they’ll “fix” that.
If they pull some crap to get around their severability mistake, there’s gonna be civil unrest.
Now what? Now nobody is absolutely required to buy health insurance, but the insurance companies are still required to accept people with pre-existing conditions. Since the obvious best strategy is to wait until you get sick to buy insurance, only sick people will buy insurance. This is a recipe for driving the insurance companies out of business. It isn't "insurance" anymore when every policyholder has a claim. Isn't that what the Democrats wanted to start with? With insurance companies leaving the market, who is left to step in but the government? |
As mentioned above, they forgot to include a severability clause. With such a clause, part of the bill could be struck down and the rest remain intact.
But they didn't include one, which means the whole thing falls.
That’s why it’s important that there’s no severability clause. That type of clause basically hedges against challenges to the law by saying that if any part of the law is struck down, the rest of the law still applies. In this case, they may not have been able to agree on a severability clause, possibly due to lobbying from the insurers, who would certainly have seen how this law without the individual mandate would be their death knell.
Let’s hope that McCollum and Cuccinelli are right.
[Now what? Now nobody is absolutely required to buy health insurance, but the insurance companies are still required to accept people with pre-existing conditions.]
Because of a lack of severability clause, the whole bill goes way. But the wheels will already be in motion. So I agree, we are haded to a train wrck no matter what, there isn’t enough money to fund Obamacare (much less a full public solution), but the insurance companies will be bankrupt. So we will have a period of no public solution, but no private solution either.
Unless they simply “deem” it severable anyway.
Re: "So we will have a period of no public solution, but no private solution either."
I have already discussed with a few of my doctors the possibility of an "a la carte" or "concierge" arrangement. Laying the ground-work early, as it were.
Judge will hear Cuccinelli’s Case Against Federal Health Care Law - (Virginia)
(excerpt)
“This lawsuit is not about health care, it’s about our freedom and about standing up and calling on the federal government to follow the ultimate law of the land – the Constitution,” Cuccinelli said in a press release. “The government cannot draft an unwilling citizen into commerce just so it can regulate him under the Commerce Clause.”
I hope McCollum is the next governor of Florida.
bookmark for later read
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.
Has anyone thought ahead to where this all leads? Let's say that this ends up in the Supreme Court, and after a whole bunch of back-and-forth the 'mandate' clause is struck down.