Update on the states and the mandate  

It won't kill the bill. Just the mandate. The rest won't change. Keep your chin up and look at the bright side. no matter what...no more pre existing condition clauses, no more being able to drop people. The bill will stand. They just won't be able to FORCE everyone to buy healthcare...if you want it...buy it..if you don't....then don't.

What is a government for if it can't take care of it's citizens?

People are suppost to take care of themselves. Not depend on the government to do it for you. that is NOT what our government was set up for or to do.

We are adults...not kids...we don't need "momma" government telling what to do with our lives.

People will still be able to get healthcare...it just won't be able to FORCE people to do it. It is all about freedom of choice.

You made a very good point here that I don't want to loose track of: "It won't kill the bill just the mandate". However, where I live that mandate is important. People who don't have health care wander into hospital ER's and get treated. In a lot of areas those ER's are in teaching hospitals and those very pricey visits are passed on to the rest of us. This is a tough one for me. Although I don't want to force people into paying for something, I don't want to pay for it indirectly.

Our federal government did some much needed things in the healthcare bill. They got rid of the pre existing condition clause and they outlawed insurance companies being able to drop poeple for getting sick. Those were needed.
Now more people will have a choice when it comes to their healthcare.
The government should open up choices to people as much as possible.

But the mandate limites people choices. You can't choose NOT to buy it. I don't like that. I am ALL ABOUT CHOICEs on just about everything. Poeple being free to make their own choices and decisions.

I know you don't want to "indirectly" pay for it. Heck I don't want to either. So they could have simple stated in the bill that if you don't have insurance you HAVE to pay for it yourself if you get sick, if you don't then the medical bills can be taken out of your paycheck or tax refunds.
They could have done it WITHOUT taking away people choices.
The "pro-choice" party seems to only be "pro-choice" about one thing.

Okay, if that mandate could be omitted or amednded, would you then support or at least accept this bill?

Yep. I could live with it. If they take it out completely.
There are some things I wish they would have added. Like making it a requirement for insurance companies to pay out for services your doctor says you need. I don't think insurance companies should be able to second guess your doctor or not cover certain procedures. If the doctor says you need it...then insurance companies pay for it.
But if they take out the mandate COMPLETEL...I can deal with the bill. There are other things in the bill I am not crazy about...but they would not be "deal breakers".

Great. There are things I'm not happy with either. I wanted that public option and I had to kiss that goodbye. I could reluctantly do away with the mandate. I could live with it.

I confess I wanted very much to see what your response was to this. I've noticed for a awhile that the more intelligent oppositon to the bill on Mylot was focusing on the mandate. I sort of expected that it was because they had read the bill and knew that theiere was nothing there anywhere like what the fear mongers were hinting andthey had genuine concern about that mandate. Still, I wondered a little if it was a delay tactic. For instance if you had given me a riff about the cost of healthcare reform, I would have known it would have moved to something else and something else and something else etc. My feeling is we need healthcare reform and if not now, it will be never. I'm glad to see that you also want reform andare not just giving lip service to it. A lot of folks say they want reform I no longer believe them. It's been too damn long and I'm not willing to delay another few months, days, years etc. However, I am (reluctantly) willing to give up that mandate....I think we are very close to being on the same page here.

Yeah...but the mandate is in there...and it is a deal breaker for me. So I will be fighting it tooth and nail...not the whole bill. Just that part of it. I will tell you I will NEVER support a one payer system. In theory...good idea..but then I think of our government. I would not trust them to babysit my cat....much less run it appropriately. Look at all the other programs they have run into the ground. they can't handle the responsibilities they have...why give them more.

Now see if you ( a liberal) and me (a constitutionalist) can find common ground in less than a day...how come congress could not do it in the past year? Because they are ALL a bunch of showboating idiots.

I always supported healthcare reform. I just think our government has to carefully balance giving people greater access to it without taking away other peoples right to have choices.

We're not competing for career advancement, TV time, Newspaper Interviews etc. H Maybe, that's the answer. Maybe, we should put congress on the Internet and make them just communicate through a computer. Worth a try.

Might work. Something might actually get accomplished.

Lil, I must very respectfully disagree to a point with what you said about the government "taking care of us". Back in the days of our founders, there was no "health care" as we know it today. Sure, there were doctors but they didn't know one-tenth of one percent what they know today. People died of "natural causes" in their thirties. When someone did see a doctor they paid for it with a dozen eggs or a few pounds of vegetables, whatever. The same could be said about just about everything as far as people taking care of themselves. People didn't starve whether they had a paying job or any money or not. They raised their own food and if they didn't they traded some kind of service with a neighbor who did. Today prices are so outrageous especially when it comes to health care it's not a matter of having to pay a couple bucks to see a doctor, a major illness or accident will likely run six figures, sometimes HIGH six figures or more. Lots of people are quite capable of "taking care of themselves" in most every way but few without insurance can take care of bills like that on their own. Nobody should die or suffer needlessly based on their ability to pay. I feel it IS partly MY duty to help those who need it because I can never say without a doubt it will never be me or one of my loved ones in a similar situation. I think it's a matter of morality as much as anything else.

About the mandate and making it so those without insurance would be made to pay their own bills, my biggest concern is if it's a serious medical problem I think it's fairly safe to say that those without insurance will be hard-pressed to pay out of pocket and they'd probably be going without a paycheck or tax refund for a long, long time. Basically, you can't get blood out of a stone. We're really not the kind of a nation to wipe someone out - literally - if they get sick.

Annie

Good luck with the signature hunt. I hope you guys are successful. I would think it would not be too hard to get all those signatures if people in the area know about it. Heck...they will probly be breaking down the doors to sign it.

Actually all they are asking is the judge uphold the constitution.

Irish...in this case it doesn't matter what party your congresional represenatives are as it really doesn't have anythiing to do with them. This is action by the government of your state. If it is a law suit, it is being brought by your state's Attorny General. If it is a nullification bill, it is being processed by your state legislature. Also, if it is a legislative action, the nullification of the mandate will simply become law. It won't even see a court docket, unless the federal government challenges your state specificly in court when your state starts enforcing the nullification.
If it is nullified in your state, the most likely scenario is the residents of your state will not be required to get health coverage. I don't think any of the nullification legislation being worked through in the various states nullify anything but that mandate.
It would how ever be a good idea to look in to it and see what your state government is doing, have a look at the bill if there is one. That way you can make up your own mind on it and either call your particular state legislators and ask them to supprt it or not supprt it. they can also answer questions on it as well. Your state legislators are often much easier to sit and tak with than our federal government reps are and much more accesable. there are two from my district I speak with all the time and have personaly known for a number of years.
I keep harping on this but it really isn't a statement that is defined on party lines and applies to most issues, but the key to REAL change in this country is through the power of our states.

No matter how I look at this the bottom line is still the same. There is presently a federal mandate and you are going into a federal court and asking them to give the power of that mandate to the states which I do not think they will do.

Right now I am working on gut feeling. I need to check some things. 1) Has the Supreme Court (that's where this will likely wind up)since the time of the civil war taken authority from the federal gov and given it to the states? If so how many times and how recent? 2) How did Social Security get passed and is there a precedent there?

For now I keep coming back to the fact that they are asking the federal government to let states supercede them on something and I don't think the feds will do that.

The federal court has ruled Bills or parts of Bills that congress has written in the past "unconstitutional".
The only one that comes to mind immediately is the "fairness doctorine". But I can look around and see if I can find others.

So, according your arguement...the feds can decide to take "all" power from the states...and no one would be able to do anything about it?

Yes, but were those bills that gave the feds powers that could be assumed by the states and were the states interested in assuming those powers? I don't so much think that they want to take all power as I think they do not want to set a precedent or let power they already have be ingringed upon.

I think that is kinda the point....for the state's to take back the power that IS legally their by order of the constitution. Trust me...if the states win this one..you will see more states telling the feds to back off when it comes to infringing on their rights...and you will probly see some states take back powers that hte government illegally took from them years before.
I am a strong supporter of states rights...so I hope the states win and get back ALL of their constitutional powers. Why should the Feds be allowed to keep a power they illegally took?

lilwonders, You just said it all: If the states win this one...You will see more states telling the feds to back offwen it comes to infringing on their rights"...That is EXACTLY why the feds will not let them win this one.

And the state's and people like me are just as determined to win it. We want our rights back. It is going to be one heck of a fight. I will give you that. But we won't give up.

This post contains content of a mature nature. You must be Signed in or Registered to have the option to view this content.

Your welcome. I will try to keep everyone posted as much as I can on this one.

Irish, Governor Rendell is against the lawsuit but the AG, who is a Republican, is running for governor himself so that explains why he's determined to do this. He wants to shore up the Republican base.

Annie

I hope the republican wins. Sorry, Annie. The democrats have been turned into something of an abomination. They deserve to lose and lose big. Anyone who is for the mandate should lose.

oh they understand...they just don't care.

HOnestly.. I really dont think they understand. They have all the things they need, never had to deal with unemployment, always had health care (and since most of them are old and no kids anymore...they dont have that expense) their salary package is so elaborate and lucritive...they don't have to even think about things like we all have to. Have any of them had their homes in foreclosure? Are any of them filing bankruptcy? How can you understand something you have never had any contact with? Something you have never researched, experienced, or dealt with?It is all on paper to them and all they care about is the votes. IF they understood...we wouldn't be in this mess. THey wouldn't have given the billions in bail out money to those that caused the problem that caused the recession and lead to them needing bailed out - instead of giving it to the people that could put it back into the economy and revive it.

And no, they don't care much. Just enough to get votes next time!

Which is why we have to stop electing rich sleezy lawyers into congress and start voting in normal everyday people with common sense.

I don't see our "house" united. You have two large groups of people who want this country to go in completely different directions. Neither is interested in finding "common ground" or even "meet in the middle". Both want "their way or the highway".

Yep...we are in for some serious hurt.

You said it! Neither is interested in finding "common ground" or even "meet in the middle

You are 100% correct LIL.

I like most of the bill. But the mandate has got to go. I think the "death" panel republicans are in for some trouble in the next election. But then I think most of them should get voted out in the next elections. Our congress sucks. We need to clean house and get a new one.

As for the states that are sueing...it is not the politicans that are doing it. It is the State AG. The politicans do not get to decide. It is the AG. And the only part of hte bill they are fighting is the mandate. The rest will stand as is.
They are right. the mandate is unconstitutional.

I will make you a deal: I will get rid of the mandate for health care, if you get rid of the mandate for car insurance. I have had car insurance for the last 17 years and used it once for $500. I have spent at least $8,000 on car insurance in that time, and had my rates increase because I had an accident that I was NEVER cited for.

I can tell you that here in Ohio the AG is NOT suing over this. That would be the republican led congress that would try to FORCE the AG to do this. The AG is a democrat, and supported this bill.

If they do win this challenge, I will personally fund a lawsuit against the Patriot Act, which violates the constitution in so many ways that I can't believe that it hasn't been repealed. Can you please explain to me how it is that I can only sue the government if I find out that they taped my phone, when they won't release that information through the freedom of information act? How many amendments to the constitution does that small part violate alone?

Car insurance is a state law...not a federal one. There are states that do not have car insurance laws. It is a state right to make those laws...not the feds.Which is why the healthcare mandate is illegal. the state has the power to do the mandate..not the feds.

As for the AG in Ohio...Isn't that the state that passed the law requiring the AG to file a lawsuit if the mandate passed? Now I know why they passed that law...to force his hand. It was the state government that passed that law...not the congressmen. What is the make up of your state house of representatives? They would be the ones to push it.
As for the patriot act...there are several lawsuits flying about that one. Do a serach engine on Patriot act and lawsuit. I hate the patriot act. It IS unconstitutional. It should have been repealed way before now. It ticks me off that obama promised to repeal it...then signed a one year extention on it.

This is really funny. Great Debater - I've lost all my money on healthcare but saved a mint on car insurance.

I had this truly great insurance agent back when I was averaging 3-4 accidents per year (dont know why but they were all definitely my fault) He told me to try not to file a police report and get to him right away which I did. He then immediatley transferred me to another company before they got wind of anything on my record. I went from Aetna to Allstate to Progressive etc. in a year with no noticeable increase in premiums. But then I paid it all back on the damn health insurance with year after year after year of paying two and three and four times what I used and sometimes just paying and not using at all. I guess it all just evens out in the end.

"I was averaging 3-4 accidents per year "

Ok, so I admit I'm not the best driver in the world....but...

Don't take that too much to heart Irish...I'm just messin with ya....

My point on the insurance bit is that the insurance lobby paid millions to politicians to force mandates. If people are so upset about health care mandates, then they should stand up to other mandates.

That sounds like what the idiots in Columbus would do. The house is still made up of republicans, and they are all lemmings.

(note to self: STAY AWAY FROM IRISH!!!!)

I agree that all mandates should be outlawed. I also agree that the only reason tehy are there is because of the lobbyists.

Want my advice...fight your state law on it. It is much easier to fight a law on a state level than a federal one. Why? Because are not half a country away trying to do it. Which is why our founding fathers left so much power to the states...so poeple could have more access to their governing body.