Posted on 03/27/2012 1:13:49 PM PDT by Kaslin
Ask a liberal: If the government can force you to buy health insurance, can the government force you to buy a firearm?
And he'll reply, "No, of course not, that would be silly and unproductive -- like you, because you're right-wing scum, whereas I am an enlightened and bien-pensant human being."
But your point is well-taken, that the mandate is a reinvention of the French Grand Gabelle, the Salt Tax, the most hated tax in human history excepting perhaps the Turkish "Toll of Boys" (their levy of Christian children for service as janissaries, and for constant pressure to convert to Islam).
French taxpayers were forced to buy salt from the King at various onerous rates around the country, under a royal monopoly. Exact same idea as Obamacare.
Agreed.
And I have been fascinated by the suggestion that the “individual mandate” is a throw away. As I’ve said, it just didn’t occur to me. What I can’t quite get around is why did they not include a severability clause? Of course, the Court may still not throw the whole thing out but only the mandate, but not having that clause does make that a bit more problematic.
Nice insight all who saw this as a possible throw away.
Mitt Romney. Another Romneybot argument.
FUMR.
LLS
That is the real blackmail the Left counted on to bring the Supreme Court along when they passed Obamacare. Too many applecarts would be upset, and that is the argument that will swing "rusty gate" Kennedy, Kennedy of Lawrence vs. Texas, swinging their way again.
As long as we have a Supreme Court, we have a government of men, not a government of laws -- that is the damage John Marshall did.
Left-wing law isn't lawyering, it's conspiracy.
Remember the public bitch-slapping Obozo gave the Court during the SOTU address two years ago?
“Ask a liberal: If the government can force you to buy health insurance, can the government force you to buy a firearm?”
Oddly enough, liberals have brought this up as a justification for the ObamaCare mandate. President George Washington signed the Militia Act of 1792, which required able-bodied male citizens to buy a musket or firelock, etc.
http://www.salon.com/2010/03/25/militia/
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/2amteach/SOURCES.HTM#TOC33
The problem with this argument (for them) is that Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says that Congress shall have the power to:
“To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;”
So this is an express power given to Congress that does not rely on stretching out the interstate commerce clause to infinity.
RIghtwardHo, Thank you for your input. I have two serious, yet humorous, questions. Based on the assertion that Obamacare is constitutional, can a legislated and signed law compel ALL federal justices to wear orange jumpsuits, or better, striped tunics, like prisonors wear?
Second, why not legislate a law that all able bodied and minded adults HAVE to purchase a handgun?
If Congress exempts federal workers, which it has, if members of SCOTUS shall have their own healthcare, which it will, then o’bamacare is DOA.
IIRC, there is not a “severability (?)” clause written into the bill that would protect individual parts of the bill if the mandate is found unconstitutional.
If any part is found unconstitutional, I believe its dead.
“I believe that if the opinion doesn’t go her way that she will try to fiddle with the final text in order to achieve her end.”
And Kagan has a history of “fiddling with texts” going back to the partial birth abortion ban case.
Not according to Rush, but I hope it's so.
If the individual mandate stands America is over.
I’ll move at least my money elsewhere.
Reason - this court has in it's hands the biggest hot-potato in US history, and they don't want to be burned by destroying it entirely.
I think we'll see only the individual mandate given the ax - letting the whole of the rest of it stand, 'for further clarification.'
Me too, but there is a good chance. Here's some links via Bing:
I’ve had a judge try to teach the opposing side what arguments they should use. They ignored him and continued to misargue the case. They blew it over and over and over again. The judge in his ruling pointed this out to them and then ruled against me.
I’m a boring white collar man who stays in shape and drinks a few beers now and then. Do I pay exactly the same as they do?
Yes.
See: Maine individual market rates.
The health insurance market destroyed by Guaranteed Issue and Community Rating is now just coming back.
Do you think the Founders planned that just one man, Kennedy and his “swing” vote, should decide the fate of 300 million?
According to this article, they forgot to include it. I think those 3,000 pages were put together with an eye towards quantity, not quality.
http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/29/whoops-we-forgot-to-include-a
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.