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

To: Graewoulf

If I read Romney right, he argues in terms of the 10th amendment.

Powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the States by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people.

This includes individual mandates which Romney insists is CONSTITUTIONAL as long as it is done AT THE STATE and NOT at the Federal level.

Therefore, based on Romney’s argument, The HUGE difference between the health care bills is that Romneycare is constitutional (allowed by the 10th amendment) and Obamacare is not (NOT allowed by the 10th amendment).

Not defending Romney at all, but since you asked, I am just giving a summary of HIS argument.

BTW, the above does not address the ECONOMICS of the issue. even at the state level, the individual mandate DID NOTHING to solve Massachusetts ballooning healthcare costs. But that is another issue altogether.


16 posted on 03/05/2012 7:52:54 AM PST by SeekAndFind (question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind

Thanks!

What was the source that you read?

My concern is that now that so many “team-players” have joined his RINO train, he feels comfortable enough to start trying to “appeal” to the Liberals. (”Severe” Conservatism has really been a burden that Romney will glad to be shed of, ASAP.)

So I need to get a direct quote before I can “Flame and Blame” the Romney choo-choo!


20 posted on 03/05/2012 8:29:08 AM PST by Graewoulf (( obama"care" violates the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND is illegal by the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

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