Categories

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Is the Constitutionality of Healthcare just another Left wing Diversion?

I was watching the news and heard a plea from A ‘Tea Party’ spokesperson. They were asking for help to fight the health-care bill on the grounds it is unconstitutional to force us to purchase health-care insurance. Yes under the 5th amendment, there could be an argument for that case but, I think that’s exactly what the Left wing wants. If the provision to force people to purchase healthcare insurance is ruled to be unconstitutional, it will just fast-track Single Payer Government provided healthcare insurance.

What would happen if the bill passes but the provision requiring everyone to purchase health insurance is found to be unconstitutional? I’m sure the final bill will include a provision (as is included in almost all legal documents) that if any part of the document is found to be illegal or unconstitutional, only that part of the document will be null and void (or some similar legal speak .) That would mean all the rest of the bill would be in force. What would that do to the bill, whether it has a public option or not?

First, let’s look at a little history of Insurance. Although it can be argued that a form of insurance has been practiced since the beginning of human society, modern insurance was first used to spread the losses of an individual Mediterranean ship-owner over all the ship-owners. Actually the ship owners were paying for a possible loss in small installments over a long period. Insurance only works if there are enough insured paying in enough money to cover all the losses plus a reserve for future losses. So how does this work with health-care insurance?

The bill will require insurance companies to cover anyone who wants the insurance no matter how high the risk or if they have a preexisting condition. And it also will require the insurance to cost the same for all. Let’s see what will happen if any bill like this passes. I’m an overweight, diabetic, cancer survivor who has had heart surgery. Although I have quit smoking (going on my third year), I smoked for 45 yrs. The insurance will have to insure me at the same price as a young healthy person. If that young person is forced to buy insurance, then it might work as long as there are enough healthy people paying for insurance to cover all the sick old farts like me.

If the requirement forcing everyone to purchase insurance is found unconstitutional (and I believe it will), then only the high risk old farts like me or ones who just found out they have a need (maybe a young pregnant couple) will purchase insurance. Either the price will have to be increased to cover the costs or the companies will go out of business. I’m sure the final bill will have limits on price of insurance so the commercial insurance will start losing money. If that happens, all the companies will either go out of business or quit selling health insurance. Of course when that happens, the benevolent government will have to step in and provide health-care for everyone which is exactly what the left-wingers want.

I may be giving them a little too much credit but I don’t think so. Look how sneaky Pelosi tricked some of her blue-dog Democrats into voting for the healthcare bill. She intentionally left out the language to prevent government paid abortion so she could put it back in at the last minute giving them a cover for their constituents to explain why they voted yea not nay. I think the final bill will have the Public Option left out or with some kind of trigger (like if all the Insurance companies quit providing health insurance), and the requirement for everyone to buy health insurance removed. Pelosi and Reed will use this gimmick to get the conservative Democrats and maybe some Republicans to vote for the bill. Then she will let the far left in on the plan so she can get enough of their vote to get it passed.

There is no health bill proposed by either party at this time that won’t eventually turn into government provided healthcare. How do we stop this from happening? It seems the House and Senate, Republican and Democrat won’t listen to their constituents. The only thing they listen to is $$$!

Vote with your pocketbook. Let’s start a PAC and/or a 527, to support the replacement of any Senator or Congressman who votes for any of these health-care bills. Just maybe, if they realize there is a concerted effort from people across the nation and not just their constituents to ‘FIRE’ them, then hopefully they will get the hint. And if they don’t, then we WILL get them fired!

Although I have owned and operated a business I have no Idea how to start a Political Action Committee or a 527 but I am willing to give it a try. If you’re interested in helping me, please email me joe@thepolight.org/

I am just one voice. I have set up this blog site to publish the truth as I understand it. You might ‘see’ a different truth. That is why I encourage you to post your vision. I never edit other’s comments or block them. I want to hear your thoughts and reasoning. The real strength of our great country is the ability for everyone to voice their opinion no matter their position. The only contributions I have requested so far is your word but now I ask for your help. If you would like to join me in starting a P.A.C to help replace these career politicians who refuse to listen to their constituents; please donate a few dollars.

Let’s take our government back!

Of the People, By the People and For the People


6 comments to Is the Constitutionality of Healthcare just another Left wing Diversion?

  • I will never fully understand this almost religious devotion and loyalty to insurance companies. Their function in society is nothing more than a 30% tax on all healthcare expenses. If they were taken out of the picture, the American people would easily save that 30%. How is a CEO who makes $20 million/year equate to cheaper healthcare? If we don't like the taxes our govt levies on us, how is it that we can stomach the taxes levied on us by large corporations – health insurance, credit cards, banks etc etc etc.

    As far as universal healthcare, I look forward to removing the "middle man tax" on my healthcare expenses in the future. Outside than your unfounded fears, this is the best solution to high healthcare costs.

  • I wrote this letter to my Congressman and Ed Shultz on the MSNBC Show…

    Dear Sir…

    I am just wondering if you might consider this proposition to resolve the issues with the Health Care bill. My proposal would force the Insurance Industry into reforming by introducing legislation that would, in effect, regulate every aspect of the insurance business. Here is how it would be structured…
    •Rescind the anti-trust exemption to all of the insurance industry. This would remove the boundaries that insurance companies have now that gives that exclusive rights to everyone in their unique territory.
    •Make it a federal felony to discriminate against anyone on the basis of pre-conditions, race, gender, or sexual orientation. We can do this through the 'hate crimes' bill as an amendment, or as part of the new legislative law specifically designed for the insurance industry.
    •Grandfather the law to cover everyone that is currently without insurance, and offer a form of Medicare with a subsidized payment structure to cover the thirty-six million people unable to make the premium payments commensurate with income.
    My thoughts are that would easily be able to pass this law without stipulations about whether the money paid out by users is going to be used for an abortion. It would also relieve the issue of whether it is going to cost the government money to put this program in place.

    You thoughts, Sir…

    Rod Davis

  • Connecticut Man1

    I don't think the 5th Amendment is the applicable argument. The real arguments for it would be based on the preamble (promote the general welfare) clarified in Article 1, section 8 (PROVIDE for the… general welfare), the 16th Amendment, and the final piece of the puzzle would be the Declaration of Human Rights (not a treaty but a document meant to legally define human rights which was signed by the president and ratified by Congress), Article 25 Section 1, which declares basic healthcare a right.

    And bear in mind that the the earliest health care insurance for merchant marines that was originally signed into law was socialised medicine, so there is no honest argument that socialised health care was against the founding father's and The Constitution's intents:

    "It was in the context of this reality that, in July of 1798, Congress passed, and President John Adams signed into law an act "For the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen," establishing the Marine Hospital Service.

    This Federal government socialized healthcare insurance was funded by a tax that was withheld from the sailor’s pay, and then turned over to the government by the ship’s owner. This first payroll tax amounted to slightly over 1% of the sailor’s wages. An injured or sick sailor would make a claim, his record of payments would be confirmed, and he would be given a "chit" for admission to the local hospital. Some of these healthcare facilities were private, but in the larger ports Federal maritime hospitals were established.

    The history continues on from there, and I include links below for further study, but the relevant lesson has been learned. Yes, Americans, our Founders were very much for a socialized healthcare insurance system, and weren't against having government hospitals."

    Link: http://open.salon.com/blog/paul_j_orourke/2009/07

    And then there is the fact that single payer is not socialized healthcare but a hybrid between a socialized "single payer" and the "free market" providers. It is a very moderate solution to the clash of left and right ideologies that streamlines the payer system and still leaves the free market the ability to innovate, if you misguidedly believe the free market innovates in healthcare? All this, even though it is too easily arguable that the free market is not equipped to deal properly with the ever changing needs of providing for healthcare needs, never mind the disaster the free market has clearly become in paying for it.

  • I don't think the 5th Amendment is the applicable argument. The real arguments for it would be based on the preamble (promote the general welfare) clarified in Article 1, section 8 (PROVIDE for the… general welfare), the 16th Amendment, and the final piece of the puzzle would be the Declaration of Human Rights (not a treaty but a document meant to legally define human rights which was signed by the president and ratified by Congress), Article 25 Section 1, which declares basic healthcare a right.

    And bear in mind that the the earliest health care insurance for merchant marines that was originally signed into law was socialised medicine, so there is no honest argument that socialised health care was against the founding father's and The Constitution's intents:

    "It was in the context of this reality that, in July of 1798, Congress passed, and President John Adams signed into law an act "For the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen," establishing the Marine Hospital Service.

    This Federal government socialized healthcare insurance was funded by a tax that was withheld from the sailor’s pay, and then turned over to the government by the ship’s owner. This first payroll tax amounted to slightly over 1% of the sailor’s wages. An injured or sick sailor would make a claim, his record of payments would be confirmed, and he would be given a "chit" for admission to the local hospital. Some of these healthcare facilities were private, but in the larger ports Federal maritime hospitals were established.

    The history continues on from there, and I include links below for further study, but the relevant lesson has been learned. Yes, Americans, our Founders were very much for a socialized healthcare insurance system, and weren't against having government hospitals."

    Link: http://open.salon.com/blog/paul_j_orourke/2009/07

    And then there is the fact that single payer is not socialized healthcare but a hybrid between a socialized "single payer" and the "free market" providers. It is a very moderate solution to the clash of left and right ideologies that streamlines the payer system and still leaves the free market the ability to innovate, if you misguidedly believe the free market innovates in healthcare? All this, even though it is too easily arguable that the free market is not equipped to deal properly with the ever changing needs of providing for healthcare needs, never mind the disaster the free market has clearly become in paying for it.

    FYI: Sorry if this comment repeats, but the "intense debate" software you have seems to be messing up the posting.

  • Dan

    HC is not a right, it's a Privalige just the same as having a drivers license no different. And so long as one follws the rule and pays there fees/premiums you can continue to have that Privilege. Why should we the ones who do work, and pay for our Insurance because we want to have insurance have to pay in more to cover those who choose not to work, or refuse to work, and refuse to pay in form there pay checks to have insurance have the Privilege to sit back and let others pay there fair share for them ??? This Ideology is not how we as Americans were raised at least the majority of Americans were not raised to live this way by having others pay there way when they should get a job and pay for there own insurance, YES ?? It's a shame and this HCR Bill does nothing more for those who do not have insurance now or in the future but instead gives Big Pharma, and HC Insurance Co. more money and Americans less of what they had before doesn't it ? It's a shame now and will be when or if it is passed, period nothing more nothing less IMO !!!!

NOW