Skip to comments.South Carolina Declares War On Obamacare, Will Vote To Ban State Involvement In Implementation
Posted on 12/11/2013 5:13:59 AM PST by IbJensen
An EPIC 10th Amendment showdown is quickly boiling as South Carolina government is fast-tracking legislation that blocks Obamacare at the state level.
Daily Caller has the specifics. It will essentially have five components to it, all of which in my judgment are legal, effective, and within the states power to do, Davis, a Republican from Beaufort, said in an interview.
The bills main component prohibits agencies, officers and employees of the state of South Carolina from implementing any provisions of the Affordable Care Act, leaving implementation of the national health-care law entirely in the hands of a federal government that lacks the resources or personnel to carry out the programs it mandates. This provision, according to Davis, comes from the anti-commandeering doctrine established in case law that says feds cant compel states to enforce federal laws.
What the Supreme Court said in Printz v. United States is that states are not merely political subdivisions of the federal government to carry out what the federal government does; they are sovereign entities, Davis said. Congress can pass laws, but it cannot compel the states to utilize either their treasury or personnel to implement those federal laws. Additional provisions of H3101 further neuter the Affordable Care Act by outlawing state exchanges, issuing tax deductions to individuals equal to the tax penalties levied by the federal government, and directing the state attorney general to sue over whimsical enforcement of the law. Taken together, the provisions effectively repeal the federal law for the people of South Carolina.
The bill completely guts Obamacare in South Carolina. The bill has already passed the house and is headed for fast-passage in the Republican controlled Senate. It will be interesting to see how the federal government responds. And its encouraging to see there are states who still represent the will of the people.
As others have stated, we also face the danger of getting a liberal democrat elected or re-elected by splitting the party, we must throw out these traitors in the primary elections, then we might have a chance. Our only hope for this country is the tea party getting stronger and overtaking the rhinos and progressives and the dems. JUST MAKE SURE YOU VOTE, i don't give a crap if you had a dinner engagement, i don't care if its a new movie release, i could even care less if its your 50th wedding aniversary, take your wife with you to the polls as part of it. THIS TIME THERE IS NO EXCUSE IN 2014.
Your state is on the ball!
Why leave it to chance? Sack anyone now who has a job associated with Obamacare.
Question: is this what is considered to be Nullification?
I “sack” and/or don’t employ or knowingly give money to anyone that voted for him. I fired my daughters piano teacher for his O bumper sticker. I let our favorite barbecue place that we wouldn’t return because of their O support. My wife switched allergists after learning he supported O.
What about Medicare and Medicaid? All the regime has to do is cite these two programs.
“It will be interesting to see how the federal government responds.”
OH...... so that is what Lindsay Graham meant when he said the FEDS were going to nuke South Carolina.
there are proponents of an Article V convention who are opposed to Nullification, notably Mark Levin. Is anyone familiar with the reasoning behind their opposition?
(and also ask why he didn't lead the effort ....)
Actually this is not nullification. The bill does not declare the ACA null but rather uses South Carolina’s own sovereign authority to impede its implementation.
I have no doubt that odumbo and his ilk will punish S. Carolina as they see fit. Any major huricane to hit their beaches will not see help from the Feds, So. Car. will be on their own and that will only be the tip of the ice berg. You don’t want to upset odumbo’s plans or you WILL pay, one way or the other. It’s time to remove him and his ilk and be rid of him for certain and forever.
I reiterate my occasional comment that, if this were a GW Bush law (regardless of the societal ill it purported to solve) and a state like MA or NY opposed it, the media would be marching in parades to praise the plucky courage of ‘freedom lovers’ in those sickly blue states protesting against Bush’s oppression. Lefty columnists would (re)discover their love of states’ rights.
A form of nullification as I understand it. As understood by the Founders, nullification would allow federal laws to be declared unconstitutional by state courts. South Carolina has chosen de facto nullification through an act of the legislature.
It smacks of nullification and we remember what happened the last time SC implemented nullification, don't we.
How do you think Obama would respond to such a monumental display of disrespect?
0bama aint no Andrew Jackson. It just might work.
that is what I thought. What then are the practical and legal implications between “Nullification” and “Impedance”?
The founding fathers had good reason to pen the Tenth Amendment.
The issue of power and especially the great potential for a power struggle between the federal and the state governments was extremely important to the Americas founders. They deeply distrusted government power, and their goal was to prevent the growth of the type of government that the British has exercised over the colonies.
Adoption of the Constitution of 1787 was opposed by a number of well-known patriots including Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others. They passionately argued that the Constitution would eventually lead to a strong, centralized state power which would destroy the individual liberty of the People. Many in this movement were given the poorly-named tag Anti-Federalists.
The Tenth Amendment was added to the Constitution of 1787 largely because of the intellectual influence and personal persistence of the Anti-Federalists and their allies.
Its quite clear that the Tenth Amendment was written to emphasize the limited nature of the powers delegated to the federal government. In delegating just specific powers to the federal government, the states and the people, with some small exceptions, were free to continue exercising their sovereign powers.
When states and local communities take the lead on policy, the people are that much closer to the policymakers, and policymakers are that much more accountable to the people. Few Americans have spoken with their president; many have spoken with their mayor.
Adherence to the Tenth Amendment is the first step towards ensuring liberty in the United States. Liberty through decentralization.
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness
so, Nullification is the result of the action or ruling of a State court, whereas “de facto Nullification” is the result of State legislation...
South Carolina, my state. Tom Davis, my state senator. It is great to feel a little pride in your government for a change! (...now, about the removal of Lindsey Graham...)
SC isn’t prohibiting the feds from coming in and implementing the law. The ruling just prohibits state resources to be used.
the end result may indeed be the same, but there is a HUGE difference between an issue that comes before a State court which then rules, and a law that is passed by the State legislature and signed by the Governor. The State law can only be trumped by the Constitution, and we know that Obamacare is not in the Constitution.
It seems to me that the passage of State laws goes straight to the heart of State Sovereignty, whereas rulings by State courts are less sovereign given that they can be overturned by the Supreme Court.
Congratulations to SC for leading the way again just like it did in 1861!
Now if they could only oust Grahamnesty.....
Tomato, tomota but agreed the end result is the same no matter what it is called.
First gallant South Carolina nobly made the stand...
HURRAH FOR THE BONNY BLUE FLAG THAT BEARS A SINGLE STAR!
The whole pimp and hooker ACORN setup was a bit of an eyeroller... but it worked. This time around, he brings along a young, handsome black man to put the black female apparatchiks (that typically work these sort of useless bureaucracy jobs) at ease.
I liked how, early in the video, Melissa from Change Happens kept saying as she walked James and his cameraman to the exterior office door, "You can leave now, you can leave now" over and over again... Oh... I can leave now? Thanks. I can also run a 4 minute mile, give you the best orgasm you ever had in your life (way better than your girlfriend), and then pull Hope, Change and a dozen longstem roses out of my ass for you, Melissa.
Seriously, what sort of language is that crap? "I can leave now"... you know... I recognize it as nothing more than the pure "HR-speak" that is taught in countless meaningless "Insert Your Victimized or Entitled Group/Race/Class here" Studies degree curriculums across the nation.
Is it any wonder that we have lost the republic and American Exceptionalism is targeted by this gub'mint to be destroyed? I mean look at these zombies... it's what they WANT. Christ Almighty.
The next step is for the State to reclaim is regulation of Health Insurance. The State should order the Insurance Companies to ignore the HHS mandate to not sell insurance policies that do not meet Obamacare Standards, and allow policy holders to switch to non-compliant policies which the State will approve, just as they did before the mandate was issued.
The DOJ will immediately file suit, the State will respond with a 10th amendment justification. As I remember, an early Supreme Court Decision noted the limitation of Federal powers, listing issues which were purely State responsibilities, and insurance was on that list.