Why can't we have an opt-out clause

[kitty]

Ahhhh...I see. What if we established health care for foreign citizens??

*head exploding*

 

[Angelhair]

You haven't got it yet??? This health reform was for the 32M without health insurance. Now let me see - if we have approximately 30M illegals floating around in this country - hmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[Murf76]

Thanks....so i think I get it now

We elect people at the local, state and federal level to represent us. Those elected officials get to decide what is best for the society as a whole. If we are not happy with what they did, we get to elect someone else.

Is that what the Constitution is all about??

No. The people at the local, state, and federal levels who we elect to represent us, can't just do whatever the fuck they want. They must legislate from within the parameters of the U.S. Constitution, from within the parameters of their state constitution, and from within their local charters.

 

[kitty]

Politifact.com looked at the number Obama was using over the summer - "Nearly 46 million Americans don't have health insurance coverage today." This is based on 2007 census data. Politifact says that 9.7 million are non-citizens, which brings the number down to about 36 million. Because the census doesn't ask whether you're an illegal immigrant or not, Politifact asked the Pew Hispanic Center for estimated numbers of uninsured illegal immigrants - that number is 6.8 million, bringing the number of uninsured, legal, flag-wavin' American citizens to 29.2 million.

To recap:

46 million uninsured, from census data

- 9.7 million uninsured non-Americans

- 6.8 million uninsured illegal immigrants

= 29.5 million uninsured, legal Americans

We also have to consider that since the economy has gotten considerably worse since 2007, and many have lost their jobs and the insurance that goes along with it, the 29.5 m number is likely higher now.

 

[Murf76]

Unfortunately, that's the way government works. Lawmakers trade favors all the time to get their bills passed.

And the "CF" isn't for health care, it's for health insurance. If the insurance companies policed themselves a little better, there'd be no need for additional regulation.

If you want to talk about a REAL CF, let's talk the Iraq war. How much has that little gem cost us, in money and in lives?

Glad to know that raw bribery isn't a problem for the Democrats. We'll be running ads on that all summer long, thanks!

Oh... and you know what you call it when the government controls everything and private owners aren't allowed to engage the market without government's approval and permission? We call that Fascism... which makes people who engage in that particular behavior FASCISTS.



(The Iraq war deflection would be a whole lot more convincing, btw... if Democrats hadn't eagerly voted for it at the outset. Just so ya know. )

 

[kitty]

Well, by all means let the insurance companies, car manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, etc. run rampant without any regulation. Jeez....we have regulation BECAUSE of the past behaviors of for-profit companies.

And by the way, I work for a local government and I see horse-trading going on all the time, on both sides of the aisle. It's the way government is run and it SUCKS.

 

[Samson]

Well, by all means let the insurance companies, car manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, etc. run rampant without any regulation. Jeez....we have regulation BECAUSE of the past behaviors of for-profit companies.

And by the way, I work for a local government and I see horse-trading going on all the time, on both sides of the aisle. It's the way government is run and it SUCKS.

I'm all for Government Regulation.

Let's Regulate It in November.

 

[Murf76]

Politifact.com looked at the number Obama was using over the summer - "Nearly 46 million Americans don't have health insurance coverage today." This is based on 2007 census data. Politifact says that 9.7 million are non-citizens, which brings the number down to about 36 million. Because the census doesn't ask whether you're an illegal immigrant or not, Politifact asked the Pew Hispanic Center for estimated numbers of uninsured illegal immigrants - that number is 6.8 million, bringing the number of uninsured, legal, flag-wavin' American citizens to 29.2 million.

To recap:

46 million uninsured, from census data

- 9.7 million uninsured non-Americans

- 6.8 million uninsured illegal immigrants

= 29.5 million uninsured, legal Americans

We also have to consider that since the economy has gotten considerably worse since 2007, and many have lost their jobs and the insurance that goes along with it, the 29.5 m number is likely higher now.

Nobody has an exact head count of illegal aliens. It's not like the report in and let us know they're here.
It might be ten million; it might be twenty. But... it really doesn't matter. There is NO ENUMERATED POWER for Congress to manage the healthcare needs of American citizens.

Sure, the Weasels in Washington can stretch it like taffy-pullers at the county fair, and they can maybe even get away with it. But we're not stupid and WE CAN READ. The Constitution is written in plain English and it means what it says. They're lying to us... and we know it.

 

[rightwinger]

Ahhhh...I see. What if we established health care for foreign citizens??

*head exploding*

We already did in Iraq and Afghanistan....aren't you proud?

But if Americans want healthcare they are being.....LAZY

 

[rightwinger]

There is NO ENUMERATED POWER for Congress to manage the healthcare needs of American citizens.

Sure there is

- Congress is empowered to regulate comerce and Insurance companies are comerce

- Congress is empowered to act to benefit the General Welfare of its citizens

 

[Murf76]

Well, by all means let the insurance companies, car manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, etc. run rampant without any regulation. Jeez....we have regulation BECAUSE of the past behaviors of for-profit companies.

And by the way, I work for a local government and I see horse-trading going on all the time, on both sides of the aisle. It's the way government is run and it SUCKS.

Republicanism is not against all regulation. We do recognize the need from some regulatory control. But it should be minimal, only enough to get the job done. You don't need a Sherman Tank if a flyswatter will do. Every legislation will invariably present both intended and UN-intended consequences. Less is more.

And to your point about "horse-trading", here's some unsolicited advice... if you're not sickened by the lack of integrity in what amounts to raw bribery with taxpayer dollars... maybe it's time to do a little soul-searching. Just because something is commonplace doesn't mean it's acceptable.

 

[GilbertArizona]

Why can't we legislate an state level opt-out for S.S., medicade, and this healthcare program? People in states that do want these programs can elect to have them but people in states that don't want to participate in them can opt-out.

From my latest Social Security statement of last summer, through 2008 I've paid an estimated $107,247 in Social Securities taxes and another $25,838 in taxes for Medicare. Additionally, my employers have matched that amount of dough and placed it into the system. Thus I'm not all that comfortable with any opt-out proposal that's on the basis of state. I would favor an opt-out choice by individual.

 

[kitty]

Absolutely, Samson. Regulate with your vote.

Rightwinger - yep, I made those points about the Constitution on another thread. Nobody wanted to hear it. Oh well. Regarding health care, should we move the lazy Americans move to Iraq to get health care?

 

[kitty]

Murph - I didn't say it was acceptable. I said it SUCKS. And the previous level of health insurance regulation wasn't enough to protect subscribers from abuses. Hence the need for reform.

 

[ihopehefails]

Why can't I opt out for paying for schools? My kids are grown
Why can't I opt out of Police and Fire protection? I never use them
Why can't I opt out of paying for troops in Iraq? I never supported that war

We live in a society. As part of a society, money is collected and used for the greater good. People elect Mayors, governors, congressmen and presidents to determine what the greater good is.

That is what happened last week

There is no such thing as the greater good. It might sound like a really good religious concept but in reality the total good is equal to sum of all individual goods and that can't be greater than the sum of its parts. It is simple math.

 

[ihopehefails]

There is NO ENUMERATED POWER for Congress to manage the healthcare needs of American citizens.

Sure there is

- Congress is empowered to regulate comerce and Insurance companies are comerce

- Congress is empowered to act to benefit the General Welfare of its citizens

No their isn't

- Congress has the power to regulate commerce among the states witch is trade between them or the movement across state lines.

- No clause under congressional powers are listed that says that. The general welfare clause states that all taxes collected are for the benefit of the United States which is referring specifically to the federal government. It did not say general welfare of the people.

 

[Murf76]

There is NO ENUMERATED POWER for Congress to manage the healthcare needs of American citizens.

Sure there is

- Congress is empowered to regulate comerce and Insurance companies are comerce

- Congress is empowered to act to benefit the General Welfare of its citizens

Bullshit. The regulation of commerce among the Several States was designed to allow free trade among them and disallow one state from putting tariffs on another. We didn't ALL just fall off the turnip truck. Congress has been ABUSING this clause for many years now to the point where Nancy Pelosi believes that her power to regulate healthcare is "essentially unlimited" :
Commerce Clause Gives Federal Government the Power to Do Everything|Tenth Amendment Center Blog

Further, we've already been back and forth about the General Welfare Clause. It hasn't been used in YEARS and the only way Barack Obama is going to get it to stand is if he coerces the Supreme Court like FDR did in his court-packing scheme to get Social Security through. Personally, I don't think that in the age of instant information, he'll have nearly as much luck.
In fact, he'll be lucky if he doesn't end up with SS and Medicare/Medicaid being overturned.

 

[ihopehefails]

Why can't we legislate an state level opt-out for S.S., medicade, and this healthcare program? People in states that do want these programs can elect to have them but people in states that don't want to participate in them can opt-out.

From my latest Social Security statement of last summer, through 2008 I've paid an estimated $107,247 in Social Securities taxes and another $25,838 in taxes for Medicare. Additionally, my employers have matched that amount of dough and placed it into the system. Thus I'm not all that comfortable with any opt-out proposal that's on the basis of state. I would favor an opt-out choice by individual.

The tenth amendment actually gives you an opt-out since all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the state and the PEOPLE.

 

[rightwinger]

Why can't we legislate an state level opt-out for S.S., medicade, and this healthcare program? People in states that do want these programs can elect to have them but people in states that don't want to participate in them can opt-out.

From my latest Social Security statement of last summer, through 2008 I've paid an estimated $107,247 in Social Securities taxes and another $25,838 in taxes for Medicare. Additionally, my employers have matched that amount of dough and placed it into the system. Thus I'm not all that comfortable with any opt-out proposal that's on the basis of state. I would favor an opt-out choice by individual.

Who is going to pay for your Social Security when you start to draw on it? That $214,000 will be gone in seven to ten years. If people "opt out" ther will be nothing for you

 

[rightwinger]

Why can't we legislate an state level opt-out for S.S., medicade, and this healthcare program? People in states that do want these programs can elect to have them but people in states that don't want to participate in them can opt-out.

From my latest Social Security statement of last summer, through 2008 I've paid an estimated $107,247 in Social Securities taxes and another $25,838 in taxes for Medicare. Additionally, my employers have matched that amount of dough and placed it into the system. Thus I'm not all that comfortable with any opt-out proposal that's on the basis of state. I would favor an opt-out choice by individual.

The tenth amendment actually gives you an opt-out since all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the state and the PEOPLE.

No it doesn't....it hasn't for over 70 years but in ihopehefails dream world, I guess it does