That may be true, but in this case the bash is justified - this member of the "Class of '98" fully agrees.
If Newt thinks mandated purchase of anything meets the letter and the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, then he simply isn't qualified to head up any branch of the U.S. Government.
Couldn't agree with you more on that point.
My answer would start with getting the Govermnet out of the medical field, letting insurance companies compete like auto insurance companies do then rates would drop dramatically and more people could actually afford insurance against catastrophic events.
We also need to concentrate on changing the belief that every time you go to the doctor, a third party should pay for it.
I know one thing for certain, unless we're guaranteed that we're going to get a Tea Party ruled congress, we better get rid of obama.
Constantly bashing what we have to choose from is getting us no where. And that's all I see here lately is the same people posting negative articles over and over again....just makes me wonder what is going on here.
JMO or course.
It’s not the “mandated purchase” per see that is the problem. We have many places where we have to buy things — car insurance and a driver’s license and cars that meet specific standards in order to drive, for example (might well be the only example — that’s not a good way to start an argument now, is it....)
The problem here is the requirement to buy something that has nothing to do with a government service you wish to use, and for which the government has no compelling reason or “protection of other people’s rights” interest. With car insurance, you don’t have to drive on the taxpayer roads, and insurance is so that if you harm other people or their property, those people can be made whole.
Health insurance is only for yourself, and is only “needed” because government refuses to let people die if they get sick, and since government likes giving our money away but also likes to pretend otherwise, government is trying to force us to buy insurance simply to save the government money.
Of course, if the government had simply increased the medicare payroll tax by 5%, and then offered people a 5% tax credit if they purchased acceptable insurance, the plan would look just like hundreds of other “tax cuts” that too many conservatives seem to like way too much.
We are just fortunate the democrats were too scared to pass a tax increase. Because they had the votes, probably wouldn’t have lost any more seats than they did anyway, and there’d be NO constitutional question because the SC has long since decided that government is free to tax people and then give that money away to people for doing what government wants.
To show how ingrained THAT philosophy is, look at Cain’s 9-9-9 plan. He has a 9% income tax. But if you and your fellow citizens lobby your local government and make them do what Cain thinks would be best, you can get designated an “entitlement zone” (or whatever he calls it these days) and get 6% of that 9% rebated back to you. And so many people just love that idea — because what Cain wants to force you to do is something they think is good.
>> “If Newt thinks mandated purchase of anything meets the letter and the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, then he simply isn’t qualified to head up any branch of the U.S. Government.” <<
.
A M E N !