done and done:up:

Excellent! Now when you post I can supply the appropriate accent to your writing.

Fair enough, and as usual I agree, being much more conservative than you might think. The problem is the old saying "It's not what you say, it's how you say it." When you use dismissive terms like "regime" you come across as narrow, one-sided and opinionated. I've said before that you sound like you learned your politics from Sean Hannity. Sorry if that offends, because I agree with you more than you know, but you make conservatives look bad.

I just thought I remember you saying something like that. Must have been someone else. Sorry.

Article 1, Secton 8, Clause 1 states: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

Hence the space program. Congress can collect taxes to pay for things. Congress cannot force citizens to pay private companies for things. Furthermore the same section grants Congress the power to ban your meth lab and the 4th Amendment provides where the DEA can enter your home and arrest you for it. Finally, the flight attendent can force you to comply due to the Federal Aviation Act which was legally enstated by Congress due to powers granted to them via Article 1 Section 8.

Congress forcing all citizens to pay private companies for insurance could be considered a federal tax, but such a tax seems to be a clear violation of the language in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 which states "...but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States", unless of course the bill provides that all insurance coverage costs be precisely the same (which I don't believe it does). And even then it would be a stretch to consider a payment to private companies a tax.

(To be honest, I believe a single-payer system would be far more Constitutional than Obamacare, but people just don't want that.)

Well I feel Obama Admin has earned the title of Obama Regime, so I use it.Say some Republican(of alleged Republican like McCain, etc) were to to to pass such a blatantly unconstitutional law, I would be just as upset.I was upset the Patriot Act, although I understand it had good intentions I felt it could be abused and turned on American citizens not involved with terrorism, so I was opposed to it which believe me, made plenty of my fellow conservatives angry esp after 9/11.

lol well I actually do not have a heavy accent, just a slight one.

Well I wanted that, and the people I voted for wanted that, the rest of congress didn't apparently...

:-?

No problem.

I was and am absolutely against a single payer system.We do not want a NHS style quagmire here.

As opposed to the Quadgmire I'm in? I make too much to get on Medicaid, make too little to afford it on my own. Will be 26 next year so no student on parents heath care (my dad only gets health care from the VA so I'm not even sure that counts).

:-?

Honest question: do you really think such a system would work? If so, please explain where you come up with the resources to make it work.

I've been pretty clear on my opinion on this - I'm not opposed to a FORM (key word) of universal healthcare - but one must be developed that doesn't reduce the quality of care nor tax the system beyond it's limits.

You're exactly in the ****ty situation that I think needs to be addressed, by the way. How would you feel about a healthcare system that provides for excessive needs (such as catastrophic care) but does not provide for every little cold you have?

Providing for the general welfare includes healthcare. And then Congress has the right to make any law that is 'necessary and proper' for the execution of its enumerated powers (Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 18).

QED.

PS: though I agree that this law, as enacted, is crappy. But it opens the door to better ones such as universal single payer. Hopefully. :-\

The BS lawsuit will not work. If they smacked down the requirement to have health insurance the same ruling will be used to tie up the courts from people who drive without car insurance.

If the law could be changed I would say tho that the only thing you are required to have is insurance to cover checkups and have that subsidized as over time that will reduce the overall level of care needed.