Obamacare Gets Thumbs Down by Death Panel

Townhall.com ^ | August 13, 2011 | John Ransom

[yldstrk]

“It’s just another example of the Obama administration passing laws that don’t even attempt to solve actual problems faced by the American people, but rather try to take advantage of problems faced by the American people by passing legislation that increases the reach of the federal government regardless of the consequences to personal liberty.”

That is it in a nutshell

[upchuck]

That second to last paragraph is an excellent summation. Wish I could figure a way to put that on a bumper sticker.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

I can never understand the “stops short of throwing out the entire law”.. I thought Congress failed to insert the severability clause, so any part ruled unconstitutional meant the entire act was room temperature.

[Sacajaweau]

Don’t be surprised if Obama himself says “No Obamacare” NOW as part of his election campaign. I know it sounds crazy...but I think it’s his best card.

[Sequoyah101]

Yes, it is “it” in a nutshell. I agree.

Tell me please, anybody, can you remember the last time, other than military action, the government did anything that was really good for the people of the United States.

1. Lowering taxes, that is our money to begin with. This has been done but it is just what should be.
2. Some breakthrough trade policy that facilitates the dominance of American business, jobs and prosperity?
3. Some policy that facilitates a technology that gives the United States a proprietary advantage over the rest of the world?
4. Some sweeping change in the laws that put less or no money in the pockets of lawyers and big business and more in the pockets of most? National Tort reform? Balanced Budget?, repeal of Base Line Budgeting?, Throw away the tax code?, replace the tax code with a Flat Tax?, Streamline the armed forces but make them stronger in the process?, Sweep the Federal Register of duplicate, outdated, unnecessary and downright burdensome and foolish rules? Allow insurance to be sold across state lines and introduce competition to both insurance and health care?

Anything? Anything at all? Anybody?

[DownInFlames]

How can an appeals judge even decide in favor of this law. Do tney need a refresher in the constitution for dimmies?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks for a break in the clouds and a ray of hope.

[PGalt]

...it effectively scrapped the legislation by denying it the source of its funding.

DEFUND domestic totalitarian collectives. Impeach, convict, imprison totalitarian legislators.

But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

"The Law" - Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850

[lionheart 247365]

Instead of having the 10 to 1 tax question , where everyone voted no taxes ,, they should have asked ,,, “ How many of you will vow to repeal 0bamacare ???

[lionheart 247365]

Instead of having the 10 to 1 tax question , where everyone voted no taxes ,, they should have asked ,,, “ How many of you will vow to repeal 0bamacare ???

[bboop]

I saw a bumpersticker yesterday that said:

LARGER GOVERNMENT
=
smaller citizen

(Dennis Prager University)

[upchuck]

Like that!

[Starboard]

“Don’t be surprised if Obama himself says “No Obamacare” NOW as part of his election campaign. I know it sounds crazy...but I think it’s his best card.”

I hope you’re right but doubt that the former “professor” of constitutional law will throw in the towel on his signature legislation. That would be too politically devastating for him. More likely that the Dems will contrive a slick work around that involves changes in agency regulations in the dead of night.

[ken21]

PTL!

[EandH Dad]

As I understand it; the bill was passed as a budget reconciliation because the mandate made it revenue neutral. Without the mandate, it has to pass the full House and Senate. Am I accurate on this? If so, what is the procedure on this? If, and when, the SCOTUS rules on this I believe Kagan has to recuse herself since she wrote the defense argument. This means at best/worst (depends on point of view) we could get a 4-4 tie and the 11th ruling stands. If he-who-will-not-be-named runs on the repeal then he has essentially resigned because you just can't look back on this and say “Oops, my bad.”.

[Sacajaweau]

Let's look at it from another direction....The court says "No, no"....and Obama has to accept that....so then he promises that no one will be left to dying in the streets. Well, duh....that's what we've been doing right along...so he will now be a hero for doing ZIP.

In my heart, I know there are many people who need help and my heart goes out to them...and if I can help, fine...but I really don't want to pay for every Tom, Dick and Mary.

[Starboard]

Then abolish this law without delay"

While the legal system grinds along slowly spending on Obamacare continues apace. In the meantime, hundreds of millions of dollars are being needlessly wasted in implementing the provisions of the legislation, which it now appears will not survive in its current form if at all. Given the dire financial condition of the country, the USSC should find a way to expedite the decision.

[Starboard]

Now that’s a great bumpersticker! Thanks for posting.

[TexasNative2000]

As I understand it; the bill was passed as a budget reconciliation because the mandate made it revenue neutral. Without the mandate, it has to pass the full House and Senate. Am I accurate on this?

Correct.