| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/12/2011 11:47:07 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Duplicate |
Posted on 08/12/2011 10:43:58 AM PDT by Keith in Iowa
While everyone here should celebrate, and this is indeed good news, keep this in mind:
Obama and his bots intend for this health care legislation to fail.
He has stated before, (I’ve even heard the speech several times) that he is in favor of single-payer health care for all and nothing less will be his goal.
The legislation that was passed, now commonly referred to as “Obamacare,” was intended to be a giant clusterf*ck.
That was the plan. Create a creeping govt takeover that is bound to be atrocious. When the system becomes really bad, the govt can step in with an “I told you private involvement will harm the US healthcare system.”
Suddenly we find ourselves with a government run plan.
I wouldn’t celebrate until after the looney left is out in 2012.
The usage of a severability clause in writing legislation is merely something Congress does for their own purposes and to hem in their internal opposition if a law has to be fixed after court action.
A court is not bound by that in making their ruling and in this past century has held that the body of the legislation can stand if there is a part that is unconstitutional. They take the postition that Congress makes the laws and congress can fix those items struck down.
No, the original lawsuit was in Florida brought by 26 states.
Judge Vinson, Florida, declared the law unconsitutional in January and more impotantly:
“Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void.”
The Obama admin decided to ignore the ruling.
The litigants (I believe) were set to bring a contempt of court case against the Obama admin, but Judge Vinson gave them a stay as long as the appeal occurred “quickly”
I am suprised at the severability ruling in the appeals court, but have not had time to read it yet, so I am not so sure.
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/newsrel.nsf/newsreleases/F126903192481A4E852578EA0062BCE8
August 12, 2011
Media Contact: Jenn Meale
Phone: (850) 245-0150
Attorney General Pam Bondi Declares Victory in Court’s Ruling that the Federal Health Care Mandate is Unconstitutional
TALLAHASSEE, Fla.–Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi today declared victory in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling that forcing Americans to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional.
“Today we have prevailed in preventing Congress from infringing on the individual liberty protected by the U.S. Constitution. The ruling by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upholds our position that the federal health care law exceeds Congress’ power,” stated Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“An appeals court ruled on Friday that President Barack Obama’s healthcare law requiring Americans to buy healthcare insurance or face a penalty was unconstitutional, a blow to the White House.”
Obama is Un-Constitutional...makes everything he has signed into law Un-Constitutional.
“An appeals court ruled on Friday that President Barack Obama’s healthcare law requiring Americans to buy healthcare insurance or face a penalty was unconstitutional, a blow to the White House.”
Obama is Un-Constitutional...makes everything he has signed into law Un-Constitutional.
“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”
There...some things need to be said twice to be heard loud and clear! :)
I agree.
However the mode of the bill was to poison the profitability of private healthcare.
I can go into detail as to how this is to occur, but leave it to be that the war is a financial one, and if successful (even if its repealed, much of the private healthcare industry is starting to crumble due to the last 15+ years of gov involvement as a payer) and the federal gov will be left with a decision on whether or not to “bail out” the private healthcare industry.
A capitalization program that would require more ink than the pacific ocean and would make all previous bail out and recapitalization plans look like pocket change.
If national bankruptcy was a concept, it will be a cold hard reality when trying to recapitalize healthcare.
Thanks very much longnamedfeather : )
PING PONG!
By 10 seconds...
And now suddenly the ModSquad is going to care about dupes?? :)
Possibly..another thought is that if they tossed the whole law out, because of no severability clause..the administration would ahve asked for an immediate stay...that decision woudl be viewd as political..and the courts liekt o lay low if possible..maybe this is the 11th Circuit’s CoA telling the Supremes to get up off theis asse and take the case NOW
The reuters article states that the 6th circuit court of appeals had already found the mandate constitutional. I take it the 6th circuit ruling applies to whatever states joined this suit, and the 11th circuit ruling applies to 26 states who joined this one?
There are times when a appeals court ruling only applies to the states within its jurisdiction, i.e. Alabama, Georgia, Florida. I’m just trying to understand.
“Obama would PREFER that the mandate be struck down. He can’t say that, but if he can get the mandate struck down with the rest of the law intact, then he knows that will completely destroy the private healthcare market in this country. Then there will be no alternative but for single-payer.”
Yeah, that sounds about right me thinks, and is typical of the sly skullduggery one should always expect, and watch out for from Leftist mindset.
I still don’t think I’ve ever seen anything in the Constitution that would support such legislation though. One would have to stretch “for the the good of...” waaaaay beyond reason. I believe even more than Commerce Clause.
Gotta yank those reins, and turn this pony about.
You think not? If every private insurer went belly up overnight, you don’t think that even a GOP House would feel compelled to do something to get coverage for people? It would be a complete disaster. That’s why I can’t understand why Boehner was trying to get the mandate thrown out as part of the debt ceiling negotiations. What was the point? The truth is that the mandate is pretty much an absolute requirement in order for the law as a whole to be valid in any way.
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.