Wisconsin Attorney General Announces he will not enforce Obamacare
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
February 4, 2011 5:51pm CST
Since Obamacare has been ruled unconstitutional in federal court, J.B Van Hollen declares the Federal Medical Reform law "dead in Wisconsin" until such time as the recent federal judge ruling that the law is unconstitutional is overturned.
"Effectively, Wisconsin was relieved of any obligations or duties that were created under terms of the federal health care law."
This is what all law abiding and Constitution respecting officials should be doing!
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_617b540a-2f31-11e0-8571-001cc4c002e0.html
2 people like this
5 responses
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
5 Feb 11
This is the first judge I have heard do this. Hopefully more follow. I have heard some states are deciding on their own not start following it until the supreme court hears it and decides.
You are right...they should not enforce a law when it's constitutionality is in question.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
7 Feb 11
Sorry Lakota, I don't know what I was thinking when I read your comment. I took it almost 100 backwards. lol
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
7 Feb 11
Nothing about this piece of trash gets health care for everyone. 10s of millions are already left out, and now Obama is signing waivers left and right to leave out even more.
It's a corrupt piece of trash pushed through by criminal actions. Then they changed the bill after they got the CBO report, but the lying royalty wannabes keep quoting the numbers as if they were never changed.
Prs. Obama signed the illegal trash, knowing it wasn't legitimate.
What part of all that do you consider "ok"?
@dragon54u (31633)
• United States
5 Feb 11
I wonder if the government will sue Wisconsin and other states that will inevitably refuse to implement this crazy, costly scheme? That would be a good court battle, for sure, and make more Americans aware of how our constitution can protect us if we'll only insist that the Feds abide by it.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
5 Feb 11
a lot of state are just ignoring the ID act. The feds are not sueing them for it.
1 person likes this
@dragon54u (31633)
• United States
5 Feb 11
So would that be a passive admission that the law is unconstitutional?
If they would do that, they would make the case for the opposition. If they don't and they challenge it it will be a history-making decision that will seal Obama as America's most naive, clueless (if perhaps well intentioned--or Marxist) president.
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
6 Feb 11
I still can't bring myself to fully understand why government would push something like this in the first place.
If they had just started out with minor touch-ups and repairs, people could actually be benefiting for real healthcare CHANGE.
From the get go, this seemed far more symbolic about Obama and other liberal-minded politicians attempting to push large measures on the American public simply to show they could - price, fallout, unintended consequences be damned; it seemed 100% a show of power and control.
Folks can ramble on about "Oh, it's not a 'government takeover' and it's not even single-payer like we wanted," but the law to FORCE individuals to purchase care was in there, and as we all know: it crawls before it walks.
I hope it's shot down universally and they have to go back and actually FIX healthcare instead of shaking their kawks and showing how much power they can push with a pen.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
7 Feb 11
If you keep in mind that medical care has nothing to do with their motives, it's easy to understand.
