Do you think it would be Unconstitutional if

[Sheldon]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

 

[jillian]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

legally, do you think providing a minimum standard of health insurance is different from providing a minimum wage?

for the record, i'm pretty sure that any company of more than 50 employees already has to provide some type of health insurance. i could be wrong about that. it's been a while since i thought about it.

 

[Two Thumbs]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

Yes, it's a vst over step.

How the hell did a major benny that was offered by employers in the 80's some how become a right?

I don't get it.

Health care insurance is something you buy. It can't be forced on any of us for any reason, and trying to backdoor it by forcing employers to do so is simply immoral.

 

[gekaap]

Yes, it would be legal for the federal government to do that.

Which then leads into the question, if the federal government can require a person (corporations are considered "people" under the law) to buy health insurance for someone else, why can it not require a person to buy health insurance for themselves.

 

[Grace]

What about those that can't afford to buy it themselves? We already have to choose between meds or a roof over our heads. Being required to purchase health insurance from greedy companies will make us have to choose food over insurance. Oh. Wait. I think that's already being done. (sarcasm).

 

[syrenn]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

San Francisco is doing it. A new charge is appearing on restaurant bills. it is called "health care charge." Restaurants not wanting to raise the cost of a meal instead are tacking it onto the bottom line bill. The people in this city voted for it, so the restaurants are showing customers what they voted for.

 

[Two Thumbs]

What about those that can't afford to buy it themselves? We already have to choose between meds or a roof over our heads. Being required to purchase health insurance from greedy companies will make us have to choose food over insurance. Oh. Wait. I think that's already being done. (sarcasm).

They had that worked out already.

for the truly poor, welfare. most already get it, they would just get more.

for those that are working poor, you're fined, if you can't afford the fine, it comes out of your tax return. If your return isn't enough? Well they left that part out, but eventually you will get arrested for stealing from the government.

 

[Bern80]

Yes, it would be legal for the federal government to do that.

Which then leads into the question, if the federal government can require a person (corporations are considered "people" under the law) to buy health insurance for someone else, why can it not require a person to buy health insurance for themselves.

If you believe that then there are ther questins that need to be answered;

Does the fed have the authority to require people to purchase things?

If so, what DON'T they have the authority to make you do?

If not, under what precedent can they make you do x but not y?

If so, what is the point of a document (the constitution) meant to limit the power of government?

 

[The Infidel]

What about those that can't afford to buy it themselves? We already have to choose between meds or a roof over our heads. Being required to purchase health insurance from greedy companies will make us have to choose food over insurance. Oh. Wait. I think that's already being done. (sarcasm).

Why is it that folks can afford a cellies and cable tv, but cant be depended upon to take care of buying HC insurance for their families?

 

[xotoxi]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

Yes, it's a vst over step.

How the hell did a major benny that was offered by employers in the 80's some how become a right?

I don't get it.

Health care insurance is something you buy. It can't be forced on any of us for any reason, and trying to backdoor it by forcing employers to do so is simply immoral.

I think that Health Insurance should be completely voluntary.

I also think that pre-payment or proof of insurance should be provided prior to receiving medical care.

 

[Grace]

What about those that can't afford to buy it themselves? We already have to choose between meds or a roof over our heads. Being required to purchase health insurance from greedy companies will make us have to choose food over insurance. Oh. Wait. I think that's already being done. (sarcasm).

They had that worked out already.

for the truly poor, welfare. most already get it, they would just get more.

for those that are working poor, you're fined, if you can't afford the fine, it comes out of your tax return. If your return isn't enough? Well they left that part out, but eventually you will get arrested for stealing from the government.

Some loopholes are left. I guess, since I don't work (can't find a job and if I did find a job, it has to be one I can do..which means limited movement on joints) which means I don't have a tax return due to not working, I get to be a ward of the state in a jail cell so others who can't afford insurance over food chose insurance and can pay my keep in that cell as they themselves starve to death.
Makes perfect sense to me.

I've never been on welfare. Don't plan to start.

 

[Two Thumbs]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

Yes, it's a vst over step.

How the hell did a major benny that was offered by employers in the 80's some how become a right?

I don't get it.

Health care insurance is something you buy. It can't be forced on any of us for any reason, and trying to backdoor it by forcing employers to do so is simply immoral.

I think that Health Insurance should be completely voluntary.

I also think that pre-payment or proof of insurance should be provided prior to receiving medical care.

Some people really are money dumb and poor. What many people don't know is that you can set up a payment plan to help pay off bills, there are also some charities around to helpfoot the bill. If it's not paid, the hospital can write it off as a loss come tax time, not all of it, but most.

pfft, the barter system worked wonders for many years.
My grandma had a box full of recipies that were in multiple languages b/c grandpa (a doctor) took them in trade for his services.

 

[Two Thumbs]

What about those that can't afford to buy it themselves? We already have to choose between meds or a roof over our heads. Being required to purchase health insurance from greedy companies will make us have to choose food over insurance. Oh. Wait. I think that's already being done. (sarcasm).

They had that worked out already.

for the truly poor, welfare. most already get it, they would just get more.

for those that are working poor, you're fined, if you can't afford the fine, it comes out of your tax return. If your return isn't enough? Well they left that part out, but eventually you will get arrested for stealing from the government.

Some loopholes are left. I guess, since I don't work (can't find a job and if I did find a job, it has to be one I can do..which means limited movement on joints) which means I don't have a tax return due to not working, I get to be a ward of the state in a jail cell so others who can't afford insurance over food chose insurance and can pay my keep in that cell as they themselves starve to death.
Makes perfect sense to me.

I've never been on welfare. Don't plan to start.

ouch, sounds ruff. My sis-in-law has scoliosis, can't work anymore and lives with us as another dependant.

In your case, if you simply can't pay, and are below the line you will get health care foisted upon you. Welfare, the government will put you on it, no choice. you know, "For your own good".

Aint that a kick in the teeth.

 

[gekaap]

What about those that can't afford to buy it themselves? We already have to choose between meds or a roof over our heads. Being required to purchase health insurance from greedy companies will make us have to choose food over insurance. Oh. Wait. I think that's already being done. (sarcasm).

Uh, I think you missed the point. The OP is asking about the constitutionality of requiring companies to provide minimum standards of health coverage.

 

[gekaap]

I also think that pre-payment or proof of insurance should be provided prior to receiving medical care.

If you've ever noticed, when you go to the doctor's office one of the first things they do is ask you about insurance. Pre-pay for services is a matter for the individual business to decide, but would generally be contrary to normal business practices. You pay the mechanic after he fixes the car. You pay the dry cleaning bill after your clothes are cleaned. You pay the barber after he's cut your hair. You pay the taxi driver after you've reached your destination.

When it comes to emergency care, addressing payment before hand is often not feasible. If you were having a heart attack, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want to have your treatment delayed so that you can fill out paper work put down a down payment.

 

[draper]

I also think that pre-payment or proof of insurance should be provided prior to receiving medical care.

.

Um, the triage nurse in the ER demanding proof of insurance while a patient is dying/bleeding to death is going to lose her registration with the board of nursing.

 

[syrenn]

I also think that pre-payment or proof of insurance should be provided prior to receiving medical care.

.

Um, the triage nurse in the ER demanding proof of insurance while a patient is dying/bleeding to death is going to lose her registration with the board of nursing.

Someone bleeding to death is a true emergency, while someone with a cold is not.

triage.

 

[draper]

.

Um, the triage nurse in the ER demanding proof of insurance while a patient is dying/bleeding to death is going to lose her registration with the board of nursing.

Someone bleeding to death is a true emergency, while someone with a cold is not.

triage.

What about the uninsured woman with the lump in her breast? What about the guy with stroke level blood pressure that could be controlled with blood pressure medication he can't afford?

They're not true emergencies either, just ticking time bombs that in the long run will cost the government more money in medicaid payments because early intervention was unavailable. When that guy strokes out and has paralysis in half his body, he will be in a long term care facility for years. Oh, and for arguments sake, lets just say both patients also don't have cable tv or a fancy cell phone.

 

[Cecilie1200]

the Federal government required all employers to provide a minimum standard of health insurance?

I think Hawai'i has got that requirement right now. But could the Feds do it?

And I guess the bigger question is, if it is Constitutional could it be part of the answer to health care reform?

Well, here's a quick way to figure out if that would be Unconstitutional. Get a copy of the Constitution and read it. See it in there anywhere? No? Then it's Unconstitutional.

See how easy that was?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes, it would be legal for the federal government to do that.

Oh, yeah? Based on what law, exactly? Cite it for us, please.

Which then leads into the question, if the federal government can require a person (corporations are considered "people" under the law) to buy health insurance for someone else, why can it not require a person to buy health insurance for themselves.

It doesn't lead to any question until you can show us where you came up with that assertion in the first place. I KNOW you don't think anyone's going to just take YOUR word for it.