Water Over Gold
New member
...we buy "green" products? The argument the justice dept is using to defend this bill is eerily similar to the way they defend their ability to wage the U.S. Federal War on Drugs (another overreach by the federal govt. into the private lives of U.S. citizens based on a dubious interpretation of the commerce clause)
It would seem this interpretation basically gives the federal govt. unlimited power as long as they think it's for the common good. (So I guess we can go ahead and delete the 10th amendment since it is basically null and void at this point.......) [Car insurance mandates are done at the STATE level......not all state's have them]
So what if the Fed's decides not buying green products is adversely affecting the health of other people and mandates you buy environmentally friendly products or face a tax penalty?? This would be a perfectly consistent with the Justice Dept's argument wouldn't it??
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100514/ap_on_re_us/us_health_care_challenge;_ylt=AshXkgjJYRGvq79fvc89dR9cr7t_;_ylu=X3oDMTNkdDNzZTJvBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNTE0L3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX2NoYWxsZW5nZQRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzEEcG9zAzEEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yaWVzBHNsawNzbWFsbGJ1c2luZXM-#mwpphu-container
Individuals who refuse to get health insurance will be hit with a tax penalty, although exceptions are allowed for financial hardship and religious reasons. Businesses will also be required to contribute to the cost of their workers' health insurance, but companies with fewer than 50 employees are exempt.
The Obama administration argues that the coverage requirements rest on a solid constitutional foundation: the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
But critics say that does not give government the right to direct individuals to purchase a specific good or service.
The new law allows government "to regulate you just because you exist," said Danner. "If you can regulate this, where do you stop? Do you tell people, 'We are going to mandate that everybody exercise?' We think this is an overreach by the government. It goes too far, and threatens individual freedom."
The administration counters that a decision to opt out of health insurance is not merely a matter of personal choice. It has consequences for others, since uninsured people will get sick, or have accidents, and someone must pay for their care if they can't afford it.
"Individual decisions to forgo insurance coverage, in the aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce by shifting costs to health care providers and the public," Justice Department said this week in legal papers filed in a similar lawsuit in Michigan.
It would seem this interpretation basically gives the federal govt. unlimited power as long as they think it's for the common good. (So I guess we can go ahead and delete the 10th amendment since it is basically null and void at this point.......) [Car insurance mandates are done at the STATE level......not all state's have them]
So what if the Fed's decides not buying green products is adversely affecting the health of other people and mandates you buy environmentally friendly products or face a tax penalty?? This would be a perfectly consistent with the Justice Dept's argument wouldn't it??
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100514/ap_on_re_us/us_health_care_challenge;_ylt=AshXkgjJYRGvq79fvc89dR9cr7t_;_ylu=X3oDMTNkdDNzZTJvBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNTE0L3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX2NoYWxsZW5nZQRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzEEcG9zAzEEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yaWVzBHNsawNzbWFsbGJ1c2luZXM-#mwpphu-container
Individuals who refuse to get health insurance will be hit with a tax penalty, although exceptions are allowed for financial hardship and religious reasons. Businesses will also be required to contribute to the cost of their workers' health insurance, but companies with fewer than 50 employees are exempt.
The Obama administration argues that the coverage requirements rest on a solid constitutional foundation: the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
But critics say that does not give government the right to direct individuals to purchase a specific good or service.
The new law allows government "to regulate you just because you exist," said Danner. "If you can regulate this, where do you stop? Do you tell people, 'We are going to mandate that everybody exercise?' We think this is an overreach by the government. It goes too far, and threatens individual freedom."
The administration counters that a decision to opt out of health insurance is not merely a matter of personal choice. It has consequences for others, since uninsured people will get sick, or have accidents, and someone must pay for their care if they can't afford it.
"Individual decisions to forgo insurance coverage, in the aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce by shifting costs to health care providers and the public," Justice Department said this week in legal papers filed in a similar lawsuit in Michigan.