|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Cali_Democrat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:48 AM Original message |
Poll question: Do you feel that the requirement to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PDJane (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:51 AM Response to Original message |
1. One must purchase auto insurance, no? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftstreet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:52 AM Response to Reply #1 |
2. Only because the Founding Fathers mandated we own cars n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Still Blue in PDX (633 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:53 AM Response to Reply #1 |
3. Autos are optional, though. Bodies are not. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LawnLover (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:49 AM Response to Reply #3 |
179. Give me a break |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
msongs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:02 AM Response to Reply #1 |
6. not if one chooses not to own a car or drive on public streets nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
avogadro (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:02 AM Response to Reply #1 |
8. Auto insurance is required for a totally different reason.......... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
handmade34 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 05:00 PM Response to Reply #8 |
121. not to support the false claims, but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robinlynne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 08:57 PM Response to Reply #8 |
127. obliging people to carry health insurance is "justified" by the same argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberty Belle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:05 AM Response to Reply #1 |
20. That is different. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LawnLover (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:52 AM Response to Reply #20 |
180. And people don't have to follow the mandate if they choose not to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:14 AM Response to Reply #1 |
21. A tired and debunked comparison |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RegieRocker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 05:12 PM Response to Reply #21 |
122. Only in your mind |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 06:26 PM Response to Reply #122 |
125. Well, no, in reality |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RegieRocker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:25 PM Response to Reply #125 |
130. No I said it first about you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 04:24 AM Response to Reply #130 |
159. whatever. Have some more Kool-Aid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Motown_Johnny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:05 AM Response to Reply #1 |
29. No you don't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:08 AM Response to Reply #1 |
30. You don't have to purchase auto insurance. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:21 AM Response to Reply #1 |
33. Bad example |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
City Lights (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:05 AM Response to Reply #1 |
39. No. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProdigalJunkMail (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:30 AM Response to Reply #1 |
50. total FAIL... n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RegieRocker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:03 AM Response to Reply #1 |
54. You're right they are wrong! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:30 AM Response to Reply #54 |
63. The problem is: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RegieRocker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:36 AM Response to Reply #63 |
67. Legal mumbo jumbo is only designed to confuse |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:46 AM Response to Reply #67 |
74. How then do you gain the support |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zorahopkins (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 05:26 PM Response to Reply #67 |
124. I Resent Your Comment! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:44 AM Response to Reply #54 |
72. The Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to force people to buy anything |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:18 PM Response to Reply #72 |
89. Yes it does. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:56 PM Response to Reply #89 |
103. That logic might work |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robinlynne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 08:58 PM Response to Reply #89 |
128. Look at that first sentence!!! It says we should have single payer health care!!!!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nuclear Unicorn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:53 PM Response to Reply #89 |
136. Except this isn't for the general welfare of the US as a whole |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:43 AM Response to Reply #1 |
71. That's state law, not federal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mdmc (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:46 AM Response to Reply #1 |
75. why would you need auto insurance if you have no car? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zipplewrath (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:51 AM Response to Reply #1 |
79. No |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ikonoklast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:16 PM Response to Reply #79 |
105. But the price of insurance is included in the co-op agreement. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zipplewrath (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:00 PM Response to Reply #105 |
106. You presume there is "insurance" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
krabigirl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:20 PM Response to Reply #1 |
90. Not for yourself. You have to in many states for liability reasons only, i think. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thotzRthingz (585 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:38 PM Response to Reply #1 |
101. "One must purchase auto insurance..." Well, yes & no... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SharonAnn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:19 PM Response to Reply #1 |
108. Not important what I/we think. It's important what the Supreme Court decides. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:33 PM Response to Reply #1 |
116. Medicare is government mandated healthcare insurance... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eridani (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:51 PM Response to Reply #116 |
137. Nothing wrong with paying taxes and getting public goods in return |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
area51 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 01:41 AM Response to Reply #137 |
183. +1 n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:17 AM Response to Reply #116 |
145. A tax is defferent than a mandate - that's why there are two different words. Look them up. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WillowTree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:33 PM Response to Reply #1 |
131. Auto insurance is mandated by the various states, not the federal government. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catherina (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:55 AM Response to Original message |
4. As unconstitutional as mandating a homeless person to purchase a house |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thanks_imjustlurking (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:06 PM Response to Reply #4 |
129. Bingo. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:56 AM Response to Original message |
5. My qualm is that it is requiring one provide profit to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RKP5637 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:03 AM Response to Reply #5 |
10. I agree with what you've said. I also like Medicare for all. IMO it's ridiculous to have several |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Art_from_Ark (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:07 AM Response to Reply #5 |
11. I don't think the analogy to automobile insurance is fitting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:10 AM Response to Reply #11 |
13. As I said, I do not think auto insurance rquirement is comparable |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:02 AM Response to Original message |
7. What people don't realize is that if the mandate is unconstitutional, any future public option would |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pampango (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:28 AM Response to Reply #7 |
48. There's no difference mandating premium payments to private or pubic insurers? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:12 PM Response to Reply #48 |
109. Nope. Both are allowed, or both are not allowed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:49 PM Response to Reply #7 |
102. So then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Johonny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:15 PM Response to Reply #7 |
107. If it proved unconstitutional it would have large reaching effects |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jannyk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:03 AM Response to Original message |
9. Yes, if it is to fund a for-profit org. No, if it is a payroll deduction for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:08 AM Response to Reply #9 |
12. Exactly! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
peace frog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:10 AM Response to Reply #9 |
14. Right on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mimosa (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 05:07 AM Response to Reply #9 |
27. There it is! Jannyk you mailed it! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mojeoux (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:53 AM Response to Reply #27 |
181. Exactly!!! Screw the Corrupt Insurance Industry! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greymattermom (680 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:10 AM Response to Original message |
15. If you don't have insurance |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:56 AM Response to Reply #15 |
36. Clearly false considering just such requirement is in effect right now with no mandate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saras (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:14 AM Response to Original message |
16. Health and car insurance |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
suston96 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:15 AM Response to Original message |
17. What part of the constitution does it violate? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TreasonousBastard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:27 AM Response to Reply #17 |
18. Article "I don't like it" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Johonny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:47 AM Response to Reply #18 |
76. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maru Kitteh (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:30 PM Response to Reply #18 |
98. and the "I should magically get it for free" clause. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gravel Democrat (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:27 AM Response to Reply #17 |
22. The Constitution enumerates powers.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:39 AM Response to Reply #22 |
24. The necessary and proper clause is listed right along with the enumerated powers. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:10 AM Response to Reply #24 |
31. The mandate is one option it isn't the only option. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:19 PM Response to Reply #31 |
112. You are still wrong even if we accept your incorrect position that there are alternatives. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:08 AM Response to Reply #24 |
41. The mandate is not required to ban pre-existing conditions at all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:14 PM Response to Reply #41 |
110. Actually, it is. As every healthcare economist acknowledges. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:32 PM Response to Reply #110 |
114. mhmmm....meanwhile the regs could be written and enforced. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:41 PM Response to Reply #114 |
119. So? 200 years of case law says that the necessary and proper clause is far broader than you say. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:37 AM Response to Reply #119 |
150. The question was "Do you feel...", that indicates interpretation of individual responders |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 03:52 AM Response to Reply #150 |
158. It's not really mine -- it's the Supreme Court's New Deal precedents. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluenorthwest (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:08 PM Response to Reply #24 |
83. What about the profit factor? Other nations that mandate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eridani (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:55 PM Response to Reply #83 |
138. Other nations that mandate private health insurance control those insurance companies directly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
suston96 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:43 AM Response to Reply #22 |
51. The Constitution is a skeletal framework of government.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:02 PM Response to Reply #51 |
104. Actually |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:35 PM Response to Reply #22 |
117. The Fed. Gov. already mandates purchase of health insurance... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:03 AM Response to Reply #22 |
140. Prohibition was morals regulation. The individual mandate isn't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 06:07 PM Response to Reply #22 |
171. That is exactly what Republicans say |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kudzu22 (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:09 AM Response to Reply #17 |
43. Tenth Amendment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:29 AM Response to Reply #17 |
49. I am not a lawyer, but I did just take a course in Constitutional Law. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RegieRocker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:17 AM Response to Reply #49 |
55. Thanks for reminding me that our government is involved in |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:29 AM Response to Reply #55 |
62. The government's always been doing that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RegieRocker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:05 PM Response to Reply #62 |
81. So that makes it ok right? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:42 AM Response to Reply #49 |
70. Precedent doesn't out weight legality unfortunately |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:49 AM Response to Reply #70 |
78. We're in a common law country. Precedent IS legality. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:57 AM Response to Reply #78 |
80. Not exactly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:13 PM Response to Reply #80 |
88. So what makes the individual mandate illegal? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:35 PM Response to Reply #88 |
100. The primary conflict |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kudzu22 (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 01:44 AM Response to Reply #88 |
155. An activity, yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:10 AM Response to Reply #49 |
141. Wickard is really a hard case to get around. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:24 AM Response to Reply #49 |
147. Part 1, the farmer was not being forced to pay taxes to a private company with no guarantee of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ChairmanAgnostic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 05:04 AM Response to Reply #49 |
163. Did you drive to class? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kudzu22 (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 01:39 AM Response to Reply #17 |
154. In theory, the Tenth Amendment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cronus Protagonist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 01:34 AM Response to Original message |
19. Free universal healthcare must be provided for by governmental sources |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 02:40 AM Response to Reply #19 |
157. Just to clarify |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hamlette (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:30 AM Response to Original message |
23. I'd like a poll that asks that question of those who are lawyers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MilesColtrane (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 02:49 AM Response to Original message |
25. The HCR law is constitutional because purchasing private insurance isn't a legal requirement. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:12 AM Response to Reply #25 |
32. There is no tax break for purchasing insurance. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MilesColtrane (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:39 AM Response to Reply #32 |
69. . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MilesColtrane (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:45 AM Response to Reply #32 |
73. OK, it's a tax penalty. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:11 PM Response to Reply #73 |
86. Yes. If the purpose is punitive. There is significant taxing authority jurisprudence via case law. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:22 PM Response to Reply #86 |
113. Actually, your tax power analysis is completely wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kudzu22 (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 01:45 AM Response to Reply #32 |
156. Good example |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 10:47 AM Response to Reply #32 |
168. That is not an analogous example. Abortion is a substantive due process right -- there is an |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
beevul (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:44 AM Response to Original message |
26. Yes, without a doubt. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
markpkessinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 08:53 AM Response to Original message |
28. The question rests on a false premise |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jtown1123 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:06 AM Response to Reply #28 |
40. How do they expect people living on the edge to come up with this fine? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
phleshdef (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:20 AM Response to Reply #40 |
46. If you are living on the edge, then you likely qualify for exemption and/or subsidies. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jtown1123 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:46 AM Response to Reply #46 |
52. What is the exemption? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluenorthwest (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:10 PM Response to Reply #46 |
85. How do these exemptions and or subsides apply to families who |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
phleshdef (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:22 PM Response to Reply #85 |
92. You know when you attempt to derail every single thread into a "gay marriage" issue... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BobbyBoring (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:12 PM Response to Reply #40 |
87. I guess |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:23 PM Response to Reply #40 |
93. The health care law does provide subsidies to people with low incomes to help them pay for insurance |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slipslidingaway (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:45 PM Response to Reply #93 |
133. Subsidies for insurance which is not necessarily care. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jtown1123 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 09:21 AM Response to Reply #93 |
165. Unemployed people don't get Medicaid. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MattBaggins (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:40 AM Response to Original message |
34. Would it be wrong for a hospital to willfully turn away |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:52 AM Response to Reply #34 |
35. Damn, you take your defense of insurance cartel profits very seriously. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
supernova (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:56 AM Response to Reply #34 |
37. They don't do that now? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elehhhhna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:05 AM Response to Reply #34 |
38. please give some stats on Americans who can afford but "refuse" to buy health insurance... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kctim (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:17 AM Response to Reply #34 |
44. You don't buy votes with that kind of thinking |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
raccoon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:08 AM Response to Original message |
42. No, but it's stupid. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
phleshdef (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:18 AM Response to Original message |
45. There is no requirement to purchase health insurance. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
seabeyond (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:20 AM Response to Original message |
47. you can "think" it is unconstitutional. but fact per constitution, it is NOT unconstitutional |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:25 AM Response to Reply #47 |
58. An expert in both jurisprudence and the Constitution, are you? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:30 AM Response to Reply #58 |
64. See my post 49. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
seabeyond (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:20 PM Response to Reply #58 |
91. informed. yes. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rucky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:48 AM Response to Original message |
53. Probably |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KansasVoter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:20 AM Response to Original message |
56. Wow, disappointed in this place |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jpak (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:28 AM Response to Reply #56 |
60. Yup! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:25 PM Response to Reply #56 |
94. Deleted message |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:23 AM Response to Original message |
57. Absolutely and demonstrably not. You are required to buy disability and retirement insurance now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:26 AM Response to Reply #57 |
59. That is precisely and succinctly THE sticking-point which renders the proviso UNCONSTITUTIONAL. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:32 AM Response to Reply #59 |
65. What part of the constitution? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:32 AM Response to Reply #65 |
148. The constitution grants the right for congress to levy taxes, not to force people to buy goods |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:36 AM Response to Reply #59 |
68. So all that's needed is a public option? Do you really think that would have mollified the judge? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
phleshdef (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:08 PM Response to Reply #59 |
82. Bullshit. My tax money buys all kinds of stuff from PRIVATE companies and I had no say in the matter |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:35 AM Response to Reply #82 |
149. Only if by paying the surtax you are guranteed healthcare. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:28 AM Response to Original message |
61. Deleted message |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:34 AM Response to Reply #61 |
66. Deleted message |
du_da (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:25 PM Response to Reply #66 |
95. Just because the opposition uses an argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
underpants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:48 AM Response to Original message |
77. No - 9th amendment, 10th amendment, Necessary and Proper clause, Commerce clause |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:09 PM Response to Original message |
84. No more unconstitutional then SE Tax or FICA |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 06:36 PM Response to Reply #84 |
174. Profits. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 06:48 PM Response to Reply #174 |
175. Medicare Advantage |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maru Kitteh (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:28 PM Response to Original message |
96. NO, I do not. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JHB (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:29 PM Response to Original message |
97. The founders passed a mandate for sailors' medical care... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 12:31 PM Response to Reply #97 |
99. It was like Medicare, not a private insurance company policy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cynatnite (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:15 PM Response to Original message |
111. I'm torn on this actually... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:33 PM Response to Original message |
115. No. It's been done for decades... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:36 PM Response to Original message |
118. How people "feel" about it is irrelevant |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cali_Democrat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 04:54 PM Response to Reply #118 |
120. Of course. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 05:26 PM Response to Original message |
123. Interesting results. 71% feel it is unconstitutional. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jtown1123 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 10:15 AM Response to Reply #123 |
167. I think it's more that 71% think it's bs. Who care if its constitutional. It's morally wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 02:12 PM Response to Reply #167 |
170. Fully agreed. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robinlynne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 08:54 PM Response to Original message |
126. I think the constitution has nothing to do with it. The constitution does not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eilen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:40 PM Response to Original message |
132. I'd like to qualify my "yes" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ShadowLiberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 09:58 PM Response to Original message |
134. You're going against multiple founding fathers if you think it's unconstitutional |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slipslidingaway (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 10:30 PM Response to Reply #134 |
135. The President Adams Payroll Tax: Nothing Like an Individual Mandate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-01-11 11:57 PM Response to Original message |
139. It's quite plainly not. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coti (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:14 AM Response to Reply #139 |
144. Quite plainly, eh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:19 AM Response to Reply #144 |
146. Wickard v. Filburn is pretty directly on point. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coti (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:45 AM Response to Reply #146 |
151. That's not even CLOSE. Not even close to all fours. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:58 AM Response to Reply #151 |
152. That's not how you interpret Supreme Court precedents. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coti (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 01:25 AM Response to Reply #152 |
153. "The fact that a literal purchase mandate wasn't at issue there is quite irrelevant." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 09:18 AM Response to Reply #153 |
164. You haven't responded to a single thing in my post. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hansberrym (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 06:29 PM Response to Reply #164 |
172. Could Congress penalize Filburn for not selling to the AAA board |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 11:41 PM Response to Reply #172 |
176. I'm not sure there's a Commerce Clause problem with compelled growing of wheat. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LawnLover (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:11 AM Response to Original message |
142. We have a lot of mandates. Get over it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skittles (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 04:26 AM Response to Reply #142 |
161. um |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LawnLover (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:41 AM Response to Reply #161 |
177. Oh, please |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gravel Democrat (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 10:08 AM Response to Reply #142 |
166. nope |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LawnLover (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:43 AM Response to Reply #166 |
178. Oh, come on. The penalty is practically a joke |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 12:13 AM Response to Original message |
143. That should read "from a private for-profit corporation". Yes, it's like letting Corp's levy taxes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skittles (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 04:25 AM Response to Original message |
160. without a Public Option - YES |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lorien (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 04:59 AM Response to Original message |
162. Would it be unconstitutional if Bush had proposed it? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 02:10 PM Response to Reply #162 |
169. No. It wouldn't be unconstitutional if Satan proposed it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 06:36 PM Response to Reply #169 |
173. So far, jurisprudence begs to differ. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LawnLover (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 01:03 AM Response to Original message |
182. All Those Crying Foul, Read This: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gravel Democrat (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 01:55 AM Response to Reply #182 |
184. RE: "you're getting subsidies that make insurance virtually costless anyway" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 02:38 AM Response to Reply #182 |
187. "subsidies that make insurance virtually costless" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
old mark (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 02:27 AM Response to Original message |
185. No....nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 02:35 AM Response to Reply #185 |
186. Do you feel it's fair? Just curious. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
old mark (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:07 PM Response to Reply #186 |
189. Yes. We are all REQUIRED to "contribute" to social security and to pay taxes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 02:41 AM Response to Original message |
188. The ayes have it, unconstitutional it is!!! My question is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
demgurl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 03:06 PM Response to Original message |
190. Not as much unconstitutional as much as stupid! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon Sep 23rd 2024, 09:51 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC