Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Howard Dean Claims Unpopular ObamaCare Mandate Could be Ruled Unconstitutional
NewsBusters ^ | August 9, 2010 | P.J. Gladnick

Posted on 08/09/2010 7:16:20 AM PDT by PJ-Comix

A well known political figure appears on MSNBC's Daily Rundown and announces, in the wake of Missouri voters overwhelmingly supporting Proposition C to remove the insurance mandate from ObamaCare, that it is so unpopular that it will probably be removed from that legislation or that the courts will rule it unconstitutional. So was the person who delivered this opinion a conservative Republican? Nope. It was Howard Dean, former Democrat presidential candidate and chairman of the DNC who made that statement to a surprised Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie.

The Daily Rundown conversation begins with Chuck Todd discussing the Proposition C landslide in Missouri:

CHUCK TODD: In Missouri this week there was referendum on the ballot. Non-binding but it was, frankly, the legislature didn't want to deal with the issue of healthcare and this mandate and about whether the state should challenge the mandate on the new healthcare plan. It got 71%. Yes, more Republicans turned out than Democrats. But 71% in Missouri, that has to make Democrats nervous, particularly in that Senate race. Robin Carnahan has got an uphill battle.


(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: chucktodd; howarddean; obamacare; romney; romney4dnc; romney4obama; romney4obamacare; romneycare; savannahguthrie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last
Imagine how those idiot Democrats who voted for ObamaCare with its highly unpopular mandate must feel? Now they have to figure out a way to backtrack on the mandate.
1 posted on 08/09/2010 7:16:23 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

I predicted that the insurance mandate would be thrown out, and that the dems would then use the loss of revenue as an excuse to move closer to gopvernment run health care a la canada.


2 posted on 08/09/2010 7:18:09 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Doesn't really matter.

The only purpose of Obamacare and the mandate is to destroy the current health care system.

Mission accomplished!

3 posted on 08/09/2010 7:18:16 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Democracy aims at equality in liberty. Socialism desires equality in constraint and in servitude.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

considering Dean is for a complete gov run system and not the half ass’d obama-care. His comments dont surprise me.


4 posted on 08/09/2010 7:21:40 AM PDT by Casaubon (Internet Research Ninja Masta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

I thought the Donkeys were calling it a tax now which puts it in the same boat as Social Security and Medicare. On the other hand you aren’t required to pay SS and Medicare if you aren’t working but those who don’t work won’t have to buy healthcare either, it will just be given to them (much like it is now with Medicaid, the “public plan”).


5 posted on 08/09/2010 7:24:05 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

The GOP should introduce legislation to exempt three groups of people from the mandate:

1- Those making less than $250,000

2- Those who do not see their premiums reduced by $2500 per year as Obama promised

3- Those who were unable to keep their present insurance coverage as Obama promised


6 posted on 08/09/2010 7:26:47 AM PDT by earlJam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
OK, it's time for the other states to follow suit...

missouri


7 posted on 08/09/2010 7:28:37 AM PDT by FrankR (It doesn't matter what they call us, only what we answer to....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

The way that the bill was written it cannot be changed and in addition if any part is ruled unconstitutional the WHOLE bill becomes unconstitutional.San Fran Nan made it that way.


8 posted on 08/09/2010 7:32:00 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannolis. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

They don’t need a mandate anyway. Just make screw things up so the only rational choice is buying a government plan. Just need a few high profile cases where the uninsured get sick and the IRS garnishees their paycheck and assets and people will fall in line.


9 posted on 08/09/2010 7:33:28 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

Here’s how it goes down. They back off on the mandate and play it up as them being flexible, and listening to the people. RINO republicans will crow about their big victory but it’s all irrelevant since the statists get everything they want anyway.


10 posted on 08/09/2010 7:36:17 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: camle

I hope the mandate is found unconstitutional, rather than having them repeal the mandate by statute. The reason is, the Dems were in such a hurry to pass the bill, they neglected to include a severability clause. That means that if any part of the bill is found unconstitutional, the whole bill is overturned.


11 posted on 08/09/2010 7:37:24 AM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

The ONLY thing the GOP should do is repeal the entire thing lock stock and barrel. Anything less is a total failure for constitutional government.


12 posted on 08/09/2010 7:37:24 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Tell that to Christ United Methodist Church. They push it constantly in their weekly newspaper, how we must have social justice by providing health care for all.

My local congregation features the health care plan prominently on its bulletin board when you walk in the front door on the way to the sanctuary. Full bulletin board display on the provisions of healthcare and what provisions will kick in year by year.

Some churches feature Jesus on their bulletin boards. The Methodist church features Obamacare.

13 posted on 08/09/2010 7:38:08 AM PDT by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
I'm sure any second rate lawyer could come up with 10 arguments why that doesn't apply in this case.

That means that if any part of the bill is found unconstitutional, the whole bill is overturned.

14 posted on 08/09/2010 7:38:50 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

let’s hope so...


15 posted on 08/09/2010 7:43:26 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
The GOP should introduce legislation to exempt three groups of people from the mandate: 1- Those making less than $250,000....

Wealthy people can afford to get by without insurance, paying out of pocket. An exemption won't do the rest of us any good -- we *need* insurance. And Obamacare is going to destroy the private health insurance industry for those of us who need it.

The focus on the individual mandate is misplaced. You can eliminate the mandate, but if the rest of Obamacare stands, we who need health insurance will be left with few options other than crappy, expensive health plans.

However, the focus on the mandate by the state attorneys general who are suing, is the best way to get Obamacare ruled unconstitutional. The law has no severance clause, so if one bit is found unconstitutional, the whole thing collapses.

But if we lose in the courts, removing the mandate legislatively, while getting the wealthy off the hook, would still leave the rest of us screwed.

16 posted on 08/09/2010 7:52:19 AM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; FromLori; Gilbo_3; NFHale; ...

Around the time of the final Obama-care push Dean like most democrats jumped on board just to have a democrat win against Republicans. But Howard Dean was already on record for opposing that bill, which was basically the Senate Bill (with more taxes and pork) with mandates without a public option. He had previously told progressives to kill the Senate bill. Progressives hated the idea of a mandate to private insurance companies, but they sold out their principles for a D win against Republicans. Now they must live with it.


17 posted on 08/09/2010 7:52:34 AM PDT by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is the federal spending=tax delayed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

I hope the mandate is found unconstitutional, rather than having them repeal the mandate by statute. The reason is, the Dems were in such a hurry to pass the bill, they neglected to include a severability clause. That means that if any part of the bill is found unconstitutional, the whole bill is overturned.
__________________________________

Are you sure there is no severability clause? I find that hard to believe (as an attorney who has drafted model legislation)....Admittedly, I don’t know...


18 posted on 08/09/2010 7:57:03 AM PDT by Tulane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tulane
Are you sure there is no severability clause? I find that hard to believe (as an attorney who has drafted model legislation)....Admittedly, I don’t know...

Yes, last week I saw interviews with Virginia's Ken Cuccinelli and Florida's Bill McCollum -- and both of them mentioned that there is no severance clause.

19 posted on 08/09/2010 8:01:37 AM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

Watch for the dems to pull something like “deeming” it to be severable.

They’ll try to get around the whole bill being declared void.


20 posted on 08/09/2010 8:03:44 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson