Replies

HERE! @ [Page: S13830] (about 3/4 of the way down) Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the bill before us is clearly an appropriate exercise of the commerce clause. We further believe Congress has power to enact this legislation pursuant to the taxing and spending powers. This bill does not violate the 10th amendment because it is an appropriate exercise of powers delegated to the United States, and because our bill fundamentally gives States the choice to participate in the exchanges themselves or, if they do not choose to do so, to allow the Federal Government to set up the exchanges fully within the provisions as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the 10th amendment.

I urge my colleagues to vote against the point of order.

10:12:10 PM to 10:39:41 PM

It took me a whole 17 minutes to go back and refind that page after I read about it in the article the first time.
I didn't think I would have to go back and find it so I didn't really make a strong mental note of exactly where it was.

@The intent of the law was for it to not be a tax. That was argued in the House, in the Senate, and by the President.

I'm not trying to come down hard on you specifically, but statements just like yours tell me that people are speaking out on this without understanding at all what they're talking about.

Since I've shown your statement to be an outright falsehood would you care to amend your statement?

A better link...

@ S13830 Congressional Record

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, our committee and the HELP Committee have given a lot of thought to the provisions in this legislation. We also gave a lot of thought to the constitutionality of the provisions—how they work and the interrelationship between the power of Congress and the States and what States will be doing, particularly under the commerce clause and the tax-and-spending powers of the Constitution. It is very strongly our considered judgment, and that of many constitutional scholars who have looked at these provisions—and many articles have been put in the Record—that clearly these provisions are constitutional. The commerce clause is constitutional, the tax-and-spending clause, and the provisions clearly are constitutional.
I yield back my time.
Third column.

13832...

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the bill before us is clearly an appropriate exercise of the commerce clause. We further believe Congress has power to enact this legislation pursuant to the taxing and spending powers. This bill does not violate the 10th amendment because it is an appropriate exercise of powers delegated to the United States, and because our bill fundamentally gives States the choice to participate in the exchanges themselves or, if they do not choose to do so, to allow the Federal Government to set up the exchanges fully within the provisions as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the 10th amendment.
I urge my colleagues to vote against the point of order.