We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Their plead had two parts: 1) The mandate to require purchase of medical insurance exceeds the federal government’s authority under the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause of the US Constitition; and 2) The imposition of additional Medicaid costs upon the states violates the 10th Amedment to the Constitution.
The court ruled against the second pleading, as – impractical as it may be – the states could refuse to participate in Medicaid.Actually, in reaction to the increasing costs of Medicaid, many states are already, instead, paring back on Medicaid benefits they themselves have added onto the base required by the federal government.
The judge, however, did rule that the mandate is inextricably wound up with the complex interdependencies of ObamaCare and cannot be severed. Thus, the entire ObamaCare is ruled unconstitutional.(See my earlier post about the Virginia federal district court ruling that the mandate is unconstitutional but can be severed, and the rest of ObamaCare stand.) But, pending appeals, the Florida judge will allow ObamaCare to stay in effect.
The Republican leader in the US Senate, Mitch McConnell – an able practitioner of Senate rules – says he will use the Senate Rule 14 to force a vote in the Senate on the repeal bill passed by an overwhelming majority of the House.It would be a surprise if he can muster 60-votes, but it will force the Democrat Senators to each be on record.
The US Supreme Court is unlikely to rule for another year or two. In the meantime, however, the Obama administration will continue to issue regulations, and the insurance markets will continue to comply and adjust, making it more difficult to excise ObamaCare’s effects.
Some Democrat Senators are floating ideas to neutralize the mandate issue by other means of impelling purchase of medical insurance. Why didn’t they float and support these last year, one may ask.It will take more than these ideas to right what’s wrong with ObamaCare.I floated some in my Op-Ed in the San Diego Union-Tribune ("No GOP Ideas? Try These 10") last year during the Congressional debates. Surely the Republicans in the House and Senate can even do better than I.They better. Reform is needed in some areas, and the better ideas wouldn’t throw out the baby with the washwater as the Democrats did in federalizing control of virtually all aspects of our medical care by throwing out free choice and the freer market.
Bruce ... I've been waiting for the other shoe to drop on this, because apparently the Busybody Brigade who drafted this law, neglected to include the "severance clause" that usually goes into all legislation. Simply put, it states that any amendments passed later to a law, do not invalidate the law as a whole. Barrister and the rest of the stalwart maggiesfarmers can explain this better than I can, but I've been waiting for something like this to happen. Now the heavy-hitters will swing into action. Hope we've got some real tough guys on our side
Maybe Pelosi will live to regret that she didn't read the whole bill. NAH... she never regrets anything....
But, pending appeals, the Florida judge will allow ObamaCare to stay in effect.
The Florida judge said no such thing. In effect. he said ObamaCare is unconstitutional, and as such he expects the Executive to respect that ruling and cease any activity in furtherance of an unconstitutional law.
The individual mandate is clearly against the Constitution and everything it stands for. If I have a right to own property, I have a right not to. If I have a right to choose to have a tattoo, I may decide not to have one.
There's more that is unConstitutional in the bill. The bill essentially writes insurance contracts. The federal government has no such authority or responsibility. The states might have it, but they should not use it even if they do have it.
The state government's job in insurance regulation is to ensure financial soundness of the providers and enforcement of the contract if necessary. The federal government might have such responsibility if a contract operated across state lines -- you know, the thing the federal law currently prohibits.
Maybe, oh frabjous day if, this could be where Wickburn gets overturned. That damned sack of wheat...
Removing the mandate doesn't solve the problem ObamaCare supporters have. The mandate to buy insurance was added to the monstrosity because of the other rule that insurers could not deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. Leave that section in and do away with the mandate and you have an enormous dilemma. That is, nobody would buy insurance. Instead one would wait to have a medical issue and then buy coverage. Whatever that is, it isn't insurance. Remove the mandate and it all falls apart. Which is why, of course, the judge correctly ruled that it makes the entire law invalid.
I don't say the individual mandate is right but what is certain is that the judge doesn't care about ordinary people because otherwise he would know that repealing of the provisions such as the one saying that nobody can be denied health insurance based on a pre-existing condition may cause a lot of difficulties to people diagnosed with serious medical conditions.