WARNING!! The following is a serious constitutional discussion; therefore if you are just a liberal progressive socialist troll, forego reading this and just make your way directly to the comments section for the usual inane and disparaging remarks.For the rest of you, this is not about assessing Obamacare or whether or not the GOP has a replacement plan. I believe we need a serious discussion about what the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has decided in the two cases it has heard and rendered decisions upon relating to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), aka Obamacare.
The first thing we must understand is that the ruling regarding the individual mandate has established a precedent granting an incredible amount of taxing power to the legislative branch. The first case was supposed to be an evaluation of the individual mandate against the commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution. The question was whether or not the federal government could actually mandate to the American people that they MUST purchase a private sector commodity.
The Commerce Clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” The initial decision returned from the SCOTUS was that the individual mandate was not consistent with the Commerce Clause — and that should have been the end of discussion. However, Chief Justice Roberts decided to redefine the individual mandate as a tax — which is exactly what the Obama administration had told the American people it was not — it was supposed to be a fine, a penalty. So in redefining the individual mandate as a tax, Chief Justice Roberts then decided that it fell within the taxing powers of the legislative branch and therefore it was constitutional.
The consequences to that decision are that SCOTUS has now ruled the federal government has the power to use taxation as a means of forcing individual behavior modification and purchase of private sector commodities that it demands. What could be next? Well, consider an individual mandate as part of climate change to purchase certain types of automobiles – don’t doubt me, that is viable.But what is most disconcerting is that Obamacare and the SCOTUS decision unfairly provides an advantage to a private sector industry — health insurance — in that they have been provided a mandated customer base. Even worse is the “risk corridor” caveat included in Obamacare which provides a taxpayer bailout to the health insurance industry. Is it any wonder that yesterday you saw a run on stocks for AETNA, United Healthcare, and Anthem? Funny, where is the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd? Are they not against big corporations — at least that’s what the liberal progressives say — unless you’re in their protected class of business. So it seems we have, courtesy of President Obama, another “too big to fail” industry which has sold its soul — talk about special interest.
Yes, we now have kids on their parents plan to 26 and coverage for pre-existing conditions, along with subsidies (tax credits) to a certain population who cannot afford the massive costs of health insurance in the Obama exchanges.
You see, the costs of health care insurance, which are rising, must be assumed by someone — that means y’all who are going to get the sticker shock. And understand that since we have basically established state-by-state health insurance monopolies, you are trapped and not allowed to use the free enterprise concept of competition in order to find the best possible and best priced health insurance policy for you and your family. Funny, I thought the liberal progressive left was against monopolies and stood for anti-trust laws — I guess that’s only against the industries they don’t like.You must understand the employer mandate, which has been delayed by the Obama administration – unconstitutionally — will soon kick in and you can expect
Click here to continue reading >>