Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

CINCINNATI (AP) — In the first ruling by a federal appeals court on President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, a panel in Cincinnati affirmed Wednesday that Congress can require Americans to have minimum insurance coverage.[/quote]

rest at:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-appeals-court- ... 00743.html

One Carter and one Dubya appointee said yes, the Reagan appointee said nay.

As the song goes...

Hopefully more rational thinking heads will prevail. After all if the gov't can tell a private citizen that he/she WILL buy something by force of law/jail-time/fine where will it end. Right now they are arguing that it is health care, but what about other things like government bonds (to bail our economy out..afterall we all live here don't we), a certain type of car (we all have to drive on the roads right?). Where will it stop....I think that unless this gets the brakes it will pave the way (even more) for an American that very few of us would recognize.

BULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLSHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT!!

Right what Spence said...obamacare is a Constitutional violation of the first order regardless of what any court says even SCOTUS...its all their opinion...I dont need their "scholarly wisdom" to help me read. I know what the Constitution says and the federal government forcing American citizens to buy anything is unConstitutional...period...end of sentence...

The real questions are these...if obamacare is so damned great, good, and fantastic, then why...

1. Have a couple of dozen states filed suits stating it is unConstitutional?
2. Have more than 1000 waivers been requested by and granted to businesses
3. Have several large businesses dropped their current health care since the fine incurred by the law is cheaper than providing obamacare insurance

Inquiring and bright minds want to know...

We as a nation need to oppose this POS as strongly as possible.....Liberal minded courts much like other crappola of their ilk are killing us.

mamabearCali wrote:Hopefully more rational thinking heads will prevail. After all if the gov't can tell a private citizen that he/she WILL buy something by force of law/jail-time/fine where will it end. Right now they are arguing that it is health care, but what about other things like government bonds (to bail our economy out..afterall we all live here don't we), a certain type of car (we all have to drive on the roads right?). Where will it stop....I think that unless this gets the brakes it will pave the way (even more) for an American that very few of us would recognize.

***************************************************************************************
Government forces you to do things all the time. You are required to purchase a license plate for your car. You are required to have liability insurance for your car, or post a fine. You are required to purchase indoor plumbing, that includes a toilet, in metropolitan areas.

You are required to buy a certain gauge wire for electrical improvements in your home. None of your other analogies are applicable. For example, There will never come a time when I have to have a bond and that's with 100% certainty.

Besides under the health care act you are not REQUIRED to purchase health insurance. You can elect to pay a fine instead.

I'm still wondering why a health insurance mandate was such a good idea when it was proposed by a right wing think tank, but now it's a bad idea. Governor, former Ambassador, and Republican Presidential candidate Huntsman was for a mandate until his legislature said no way. Newt Gingrich, the Newster, thought it was a good idea as well, he differed in that he wanted a bond posted instead of a fine for those did not purchase health care. And of course we know that the Republican front runner Mitt signed into law a health care act with an individual manadate.

I assume you have health care insurance. Are you happy that a portion of your insurance premiums, in the way of hospital costs go to support those who don't have health insurance? Are you happy with those who gamble on not needing it, then go to the Emergency room when they lose the gamble? I never thought I would see conservatives so passionate in defending people who are irresponsible. Here I thought personal responsibility was a big deal with conservatives. I guess I was wrong.

Gat6

VBshooter wrote:We as a nation need to oppose this POS as strongly as possible.....Liberal minded courts much like other crappola of their ilk are killing us.

**************************************************************************************
Since I didn't see liberal minded court defined in a dictionary, let me see if I can come up with one.

Liberal Minded Court: Any court that writes an opinion with which VBshooter opposes is a liberal minded court. Conversely, any court that writes an opinion with which VBshooter agrees is a constitutional court.

or

Liberal minded court: Any court that writes an opinion favorable to any law or action advanced by President Obama.

Did I get that right?
Gat6

zephyp wrote:Right what Spence said...obamacare is a Constitutional violation of the first order regardless of what any court says even SCOTUS...its all their opinion...I dont need their "scholarly wisdom" to help me read. I know what the Constitution says and the federal government forcing American citizens to buy anything is unConstitutional...period...end of sentence...

The real questions are these...if obamacare is so damned great, good, and fantastic, then why...

1. Have a couple of dozen states filed suits stating it is unConstitutional?
2. Have more than 1000 waivers been requested by and granted to businesses
3. Have several large businesses dropped their current health care since the fine incurred by the law is cheaper than providing obamacare insurance

Inquiring and bright minds want to know...

***********************************************************************************
OK Mr Z now that you're a constitutional lawyer what provision of the constitution and what previous cases show that the mandate is unconstitutional? It's odd that you would disagree with a SCOTUS opinion before you know what provisions of law, or previous cases they cite?

Just reading the constitution is way short of what goes into a SCOTUS, or lower court opinion. If that's all you're going to do your opinion would be irrelevant.

HHS.Gov says that approx 800 waivers have been granted. Such waivers are temporary and have to do with mini-plans that some corporations have for certain employees, usually part timers. The temporary waivers have been granted to not raise premiums before other parts of the act kick in in 2014. Why would you want the law to be inflexible during the phase in period?

Name the large businesses that previously covered their employees with health care insurance but as of this year do not.

I thought the states filed to challenge the constitutionality of the law. Surely you're not suggesting that filing means a law is unconstitutional are you? If you must have a reason that's easy it's called politics. Both sides have done the same.

Here's the meat of the opinion from the 6th:
“By regulating the practice of self-insuring for the cost of health care delivery, the minimum coverage provision is facially constitutional under the Commerce Clause for two independent reasons. First, the provision regulates economic activity that Congress had a rational basis to believe has substantial effects on interstate commerce. In addition, Congress had a rational basis to believe that the provision was essential to its larger economic scheme reforming the interstate markets in health care and health insurance.”

The 6th Circuit Appeals Court is generally considered to be a conservative court. The Judge who wrote the opinion was appointed by President George W. Bush. He used to clerk for SCOTUS Justice Scalia, and was a member of the Federalist Society. No one can call this a liberal leaning court opinion.

Gat6

gatlingun6 wrote:Government forces you to do things all the time. You are required to purchase a license plate for your car. You are required to have liability insurance for your car, or post a fine. You are required to purchase indoor plumbing, that includes a toilet, in metropolitan areas.

You are required to buy a certain gauge wire for electrical improvements in your home.
Gat6

Funny that every example you cite are state level requirements...

Regarding what part of the Constitution is applicable here...the powers of congress are enumerated...and those not specifically enumerated to congress are left to the people or the states....10th Amendment...

And I dont need to be a stinking lawyer to read and understand the Constitution. I could use that excuse for virtually all of the opinions you state. It is weak and lame. The day there is a Constitution here that the common man must have an uppity law degree to read and grasp is the day all has been lost...

zephyp wrote:Funny that every example you cite are state level requirements...

How is a health insurance mandate different from the FICA I've been paying my entire working life? Both are perfectly constitutional; last I checked Congress legislates laws and the Prez signs them, and this is another federal law like any other.

Kreutz wrote:

zephyp wrote:Funny that every example you cite are state level requirements...

How is a health insurance mandate different from the FICA I've been paying my entire working life? Both are perfectly constitutional; last I checked Congress legislates laws and the Prez signs them, and this is another federal law like any other.

FICA is no different...and they are both unConstitutional...last I checked the powers of congress are enumerated and that means limited...they can indeed pass any law they want but that doesnt mean its Constitutional....basically Congress can levy taxes for the defense of the nation and the welfare of the people...and the word welfare back then didnt mean handing out money to the citizens or taxing them for entitlements...many of the laws are unConstitutional....or not needed...16th Amendment for example...why did we need that one...ah so congress could tax us for anything their twisted little black hearts wanted to...Federal Reserve Act...one of the enumerated powers is that Congress coins money...not any more...abdicated to the Fed which isnt even a government entity...welfare - unconstitutional...food stamps same...foreign aid same...failing to protect our borders the same...and the list could on far beyond a massive buffer overflow...

But wait, there's more...tell them what it is DK !!!!!!!!!!!!

If obamacare, welfare, and all the other laws you included in your statement are kosher and Constitutional then so is my big fat paycheck and generous benefits and even more so those of congress !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Write that down in your little black book, roll it up into a big fat joint, sit back and smoke it down bud...you and all your liberal buddies asked for it...

zephyp wrote:FICA is no different...and they are both unConstitutional...last I checked the powers of congress are enumerated and that means limited...they can indeed pass any law they want but that doesnt mean its Constitutional....basically Congress can levy taxes for the defense of the nation and the welfare of the people...and the word welfare back then didnt mean handing out money to the citizens or taxing them for entitlements...many of the laws are unConstitutional....or not needed...16th Amendment for example...why did we need that one...ah so congress could tax us for anything their twisted little black hearts wanted to...Federal Reserve Act...one of the enumerated powers is that Congress coins money...not any more...abdicated to the Fed which isnt even a government entity...welfare - unconstitutional...food stamps same...foreign aid same...failing to protect our borders the same...and the list could on far beyond a massive buffer overflow...

Thats my point actually, what does it matter anymore? The income tax is going on, what 100 years old now?

Being given the choice between buying health insurance and not being a burden or paying a small fine seems positively benign, I don't understand the uproar; its really just one more law.

Its not so much a "liberal" thing as it is browbeaten apathy and fear of prison btw.

Kreutz wrote:
Being given the choice between buying health insurance and not being a burden or paying a small fine seems positively benign, I don't understand the uproar; its really just one more law.

What's one more degree?, said the frog in the pot.

What's one more straw?, said the camel.

Palladin wrote:

Kreutz wrote:
Being given the choice between buying health insurance and not being a burden or paying a small fine seems positively benign, I don't understand the uproar; its really just one more law.

What's one more degree?, said the frog in the pot.

What's one more straw?, said the camel.

Either SCOTUS will yea or nay it and the law will react accordingly. Its the system we all seem to praise when it works in our favor.

gatlingun6 wrote:***************************************************************************************
Government forces you to do things all the time. You are required to purchase a license plate for your car. You are required to have liability insurance for your car, or post a fine....Gat6

I wish liberals would stop using this comparison, because it does not work.
You are NOT required to purchase a license plate If you choose not to own a car. You are NOT required to have liability insurance If you choose not to own a car or drive a car.

Kreutz wrote:Being given the choice between buying health insurance and not being a burden or paying a small fine seems positively benign, I don't understand the uproar; its really just one more law.

The uproar is being FORCED by the federal government to either buy health insurance or pay a fine...its kinda like me holding a gun on you for money...watch the gun or pay me money...either way its extortion by the government.

The big problem is this -- if they get away with this then what is next and where does it stop...

gatlingun6 wrote:Government forces you to do things all the time. You are required to purchase a license plate for your car. You are required to have liability insurance for your car, or post a fine. You are required to purchase indoor plumbing, that includes a toilet, in metropolitan areas. You are required to buy a certain gauge wire for electrical improvements in your home. None of your other analogies are applicable. For example, There will never come a time when I have to have a bond and that's with 100% certainty.

If you buy a car yes you are required to buy various things, if you build a house there is housing code. However this requirement you get have imposed on you just because you are alive--entirely different.

gatlingun6 wrote:Besides under the health care act you are not REQUIRED to purchase health insurance. You can elect to pay a fine instead.

A rose by any other name...and really you want to government to be able to fine you for MORE things? Thanks I pay enough taxes already.

gatlingun6 wrote:I assume you have health care insurance. Are you happy that a portion of your insurance premiums, in the way of hospital costs go to support those who don't have health insurance? Are you happy with those who gamble on not needing it, then go to the Emergency room when they lose the gamble? I never thought I would see conservatives so passionate in defending people who are irresponsible. Here I thought personal responsibility was a big deal with conservatives. I guess I was wrong.

Gat6

Yes, I do, but I did not always have it. I see how the post office runs, and the DMV, and God forbid one time I had to have my name changed on my SS card, that social security office was a nightmare from the pits of hell. So I want the government to have as little to do as possible with my health care and how I acquire it. We have been told already that my health insurance premiums will go up dramatically (or we will have to reduce our coverage) when Obamacare hits the fan. So no matter how you slice it we will always be paying for those who refuse to pay, just with the government version we get to pay more FUN!

@mamabear - ah yes the good ole SS office where you can see more mexicans than anywhere else on both sides of the counter...speeky you english...