10th amendment protection for states

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by JimJones, Jul 1, 2009.

  1. JimJones
    Offline

    JimJones Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    57
    Thanks Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Tampa,Fl
    Ratings:
    +16
    In May I wrote a blog called Obama Challenges the 2nd Amendment and reported that the state of Montana was invoking the 10th amendment to protect their rights, as state to bare arms as they see fit. Texas is also working on passing the same legislation.

    It was just reported today via Fox News, an Interview with Bill Hemmer and Nancy Barto, which chairs Arizona’s Health and Human Services Committee, that the state of Arizona wants a state constitutional amendment that will allow their citizens’ to opt-out of any federal mandate tied to healthcare.

    Like Montana, the government of Arizona is sighting the 10th amendment. Hemmer, reported that there are 5 other states moving in this direction, IN. MN. ND WY NM.

    Barto told Bill Hemmer that the government “can’t compete and regulate at the same time.” This is a very true statement, as the government can change the rules as they see fit. This type of unwanted competition in our healthcare will make an uneven playing field for the insurance companies.

    Obama keeps talking about having another option, but there are already thousands of health insurance companies already out there. Why does one more make a difference? It really makes no difference what so ever based on competition. However, if the government comes in and has its price points to low, this will do two things. It will force the insurance companies to lower their prices where they might not be able to compete and employers’ will move their insurance coverage under the much cheaper government plan. This will make it hard for the insurance companies to stay in business. If this happens, where’s our private healthcare plan’s that Obama keeps saying that we can keep? For most of us it’s not up to us, it’s up to our employers’. If they move to the government plan so do all their employees. Of course, you can always change jobs! That’s if anyone is hiring.

    We need insurance reform not healthcare reform!

    -JimJones

    BorderlineIQ

    Jim Jones (BorderlineIQ) on Twitter

    Source: Fox News, BorderlineIQ.com
     
  2. caela
    Offline

    caela Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    154
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +22
    I personally applaud those states that are finally standing up and asserting their Constitutionally given rights! For too damned long states have simply let the Fed's walk all over them without so much as a peep while the right of the States, and their citizens, have been whittled away at incessantly.

    It's time for States to finally say "Stop."
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,255
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,218
    But what we are beginning to see is that employers want a change. They can no longer afford to provide the mandated health coverage and stay competetive in the global market. This is what killed the car companies, but that won't be the end. Soon it will hit every sector of business, and those companies will be moving operations overseas as much as possible. We have created the most unfriendly business environment in the world by forcing employers to pay for employees healthcare.
     
  4. Ozzimo
    Offline

    Ozzimo Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +4
    So why does Nevada forgo federal tax money in favor of legal gambling then? Couldn't they just assert a 10th amendment claim? I'm truthfully asking by the way, i don't know why....
     
  5. MaggieMae
    Offline

    MaggieMae Reality bits

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    24,043
    Thanks Received:
    1,599
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    I don't think they're calling for a "new" insurance company to be formed. Existing companies would bid for the government contract. Or, according to one of the other plans being considered, a variety of insurance companies would be involved in offering rates and coverage to a "pool" of people who would be choosing the same plan coverage at different levels depending on what the pool can afford.
     
  6. washingtonshirt
    Offline

    washingtonshirt Political Shirt King!

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    10
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Since when has health insurance or health care for that matter became a "right"? Although I admit that it would be nice to have "free healthcare" the truth is that nothing in life is free... and the greatest cost of "free healthcare" would be our personal liberties.
     
  7. KittenKoder
    Offline

    KittenKoder Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    23,281
    Thanks Received:
    1,711
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,714
    Which would basically raise the costs even more ... :eusa_whistle:
     
  8. Harry Dresden
    Offline

    Harry Dresden Latinum, Plantinum,Silver,Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    52,084
    Thanks Received:
    6,959
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Nv.
    Ratings:
    +13,690
    Jim has anyone told you that you look a lot like that great actor of the 30's...Cheetah...
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

the 10th amendment discussion board in favor of