I don’t understand the outcry against mandatory health insurance, most states have that in place for car insurance.
I think this is admirable, but absolutely has no fangs. Remember the ATF says federal laws trump TN gun and sovereignty rights. Suddenly after many years of growing government interference, folks are speaking up? Well, with nothing to back it up, it’s simply feel good blather.
I hope Texas can pass one but they probably won’t. They only hold session every other year.
You mean laboratories of democracy AREN’T the stomping grounds for socialists? Sheesh, who’da thunkit?
Thanks for posting. Interesting.
Do they list the states some where in the article?
Timothy Stolzfus Jost is just wrong. He said:
“States can no more nullify a federal law like this than they could nullify the civil rights laws by adopting constitutional amendments,” said Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, a health law expert at Washington & Lee University School of Law.
Civil Rights legislation was found valid based upon the equal protection clause in the 14th Amendment.
“No state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
What a legal minded midget.
The question is what power will the federal government use to achieve it’s goal...commerce clause or taxation power?
According to United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association (1944), the federal government can regulate INSURANCE COMPANIES under the commerce clause. Not the insured.
To deal with this ruling congress passed McCarran-Ferguson Act (1945) was passed and places states in charge of:
* regulation of insurance
* establish mandatory licensing requirements
* preserves certain state laws of insurance.
To regulate the insured, the federal government must use taxation to mandate citizens be insured. However, in the case of United States v. Butler (1936) it stipulates that Congress has power to tax and spend FOR the general welfare, but Congress has no power to regulate in order to PROVIDE for the general welfare.
That creates a sticky issue for Obama, because the centerpiece of the Obama-Baucus plan is a decree that everyone purchase heavily regulated insurance policies or else pay a penalty (think tax to regulate).
U.S. v. Butler is why Obama refused to call it a tax. That soundbite alone could derail Obama-Baucus plan.
Fun to watch the sausage being made...just don’t want to live it.
Can’t a STATE make Tort Reform Laws? Just asking.
One wonders if they could do something else that would have an effect and still pass Constitutional muster. Say a 50% gross receipts tax on any Federal monies paid to health care providers.
Just a shout out to the group. Before I reached the end of this article “blood was shooting out of my eyes”! A nod to Glenn Beck for that perfect descriptor. These “journalists” just can not seem to help themselves. Other’s thoughts?
Blue Dogs are only slightly less liberal for the most part since Pelosi took over as speaker and started cracking her whip in 2008. Even the more conservative Blue Dogs went left after she took over.
You are so right in your assessment of Dems.
This could be the beginning of a resurgence in state power. The federal government needs to be dismantled. It started as a protector of liberty and has become an oppressive dictatorial force that is crushing freedom and advancing socialism. The states can destroy the federal government and replace it with a subservient system. Like the Swiss.