Thread: Obama's "Compromise" is Just a Shell Game

Originally Posted by Emagatem

Since the President is in charge of the administration of the law, he decides on the specifics of how laws are enforced: in this case, the Affordable Care Act decrees that basic preventative care coverage must cost the same for both genders, and Obama is clarifying what constitutes "basic preventative care" for women.

Where in the US Constitution does the Federal government have the power to force the citizens to buy a specific product/service under the threat of fines and jail?

You are clearly granting the President power he does not have and should never have

Originally Posted by red states rule

Where in the US Constitution does the Federal government have the power to force the citizens to buy a specific product/service under the threat of fines and jail

Fines, the Commerce Clause. Jail, nowhere.

Originally Posted by Emagatem

Fines, the Commerce Clause. Jail, nowhere.

The Commerce Clause does NOT give the government the power to force people to buy anything

And yes if you refuse to pay the fines imposed under Obmacare you can go to jail

No wonder people still want Obamacare repealed

Originally Posted by red states rule

Commerce Clause does NOT give the government the power to force people to buy anything

The government has been subsidizing and penalizing people's financial decisions for well over 100 years. A penalty for not buying health insurance is another way of expressing a subsidy for buying it. Why the sudden outrage?

Originally Posted by red states rule

if you refuse to pay the fines imposed under Obmacare you can go to jail

Well, yeah. That's how fines work. The same thing happens if you don't pay your taxes.

Originally Posted by Emagatem

The government has been subsidizing and penalizing people's financial decisions for well over 100 years. A penalty for not buying health insurance is another way of expressing a subsidy for buying it. Why the sudden outrage?Well, yeah. That's how fines work. The same thing happens if you don't pay your taxes.

So what is to stop the Obama folks from ordering all of us to buy dental ins? Or a gym membership since they are "paying" for our healthcare? Or telling us what foods we can or cannot eat?

This is all mute since the USSC will strike down this insane porwer grab right at the height of the election

Yes, it is liberal compassion if you do not comply and obey the Obama commands - you will go to jail

Originally Posted by red states rule

what is to stop the Obama folks from ordering all of us to buy dental ins? Or a gym membership since they are "paying" for our healthcare? Or telling us what foods we can or cannot eat

Constitutionally, nothing. Politically, elected officials would never make such enormously unpopular moves.

Originally Posted by red states rule

C will strike down

Doubtful. If they strike down the individual mandate, they'd also have to strike down the very idea of government subsidies, which would be an enormous policy shift.

Originally Posted by Emagatem

Constitutionally, nothing. Politically, elected officials would never make such enormously unpopular moves.Doubtful. If they strike down the individual mandate, they'd also have to strike down the very idea of government subsidies, which would be an enormous policy shift.

The new WH Cheif seems to think Obamacare gives them many new rights not found in the US Constitution

White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew joined “Fox News Sunday” to preview the president’s FY 2013 budget, but first he defended the administration’s position on the contraceptive controversy that has dominated headlines this week.

“The president has the authority under the Affordable Care Act to have these kinds of rules take effect,” Lew said in response to the question of how the president can force a private company to provide a product free of charge.

In addition, Lew argued, that providing contraception will not cost insurance companies anything,

“If you were looking at the actuarial projection, the cost of the plan, it costs more to provide a plan without than it does with.”

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a sternly-worded statement Friday in response to the president’s revision to the new rule, which in part calls the decision, “unacceptable” and says it “must be corrected.”

“We didn't expect to get universal support of the bishops or all Catholics. I think that what we have here is a policy that reflects bringing together two very important principles in a way that's true to the American tradition. And that's what the president is trying to do. There are others who want to have a clash over it. We want to bring these two principles together,” Lew said.

Pointing to statements of support from Catholic Health Association and Catholic charities, Lew said that the policy put forward Friday, “is something that should put this issue to rest.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-ne...#ixzz1mFsYAM4B

So if they think they can get away with this why stop with just healthcare ins? After all, it is for our own good right?

Originally Posted by red states rule

WH Cheif seems to think Obamacare gives them many new rights not found in the US Constitution

Um... if that article mentioned the individual mandate, then I missed it.

Originally Posted by red states rule

why stop with just healthcare ins

Again, government subsidies for our purchasing decisions are nothing new and are unlikely to stop anytime soon.

The church didn't buy it. Our Priest read a letter from Bishop LeLorenzo and it was scathing. Bye-bye 74 million votes!

Originally Posted by Emagatem

The government has been subsidizing and penalizing people's financial decisions for well over 100 years. A penalty for not buying health insurance is another way of expressing a subsidy for buying it. Why the sudden outrage?Well, yeah. That's how fines work. The same thing happens if you don't pay your taxes.

I disagree with a law that transfers wealth from the poor who are making just enough money to not qualify for free health insurance to big health insurance corporations. that is fascism at its finest.

And it's blatantly unconstitutional. Show me where in the Constitution the federal government has the power to compel an individual to purchase a service.