Are state Republicans about to take plunge into the absurd?
I swear, Georgia Republicans have mashed their “stupid pedal” to the floorboard and it’s gotten stuck there.
First they tried to pass a constitutional amendment in the state Senate to declare that no Georgian could be mandated by government to buy health insurance, as if Georgia law could somehow supercede federal law. The amendment failed.
(The amendment was sponsored by state Sen. Judson Hill, who three years earlier had introduced legislation that would have — wait for it — forced Georgians to buy health insurance, even giving state officials the power to garnish wages of those who refused. At the time, Hill attributed the legislation to House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is now one of the sternest critics of “Obamacare”. In other words, mandated health insurance was a good idea until it became part of the Democratic health-reform bill, at which point it became unconstitutional and the most dire threat to American liberty since General Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown.)
Frustrated in the Senate, Republicans then tried to pass a similar constitutional amendment in the House.
They failed. Again.
Meanwhile, Gov. Sonny Perdue has been stamping his feet like a petulant three-year-old, insisting that Attorney General Thurbert Baker enlist Georgia in a lawsuit filed by 14 other states challenging the constitutionality of the health-reform bill. Baker refused, citing its cost and the exceedingly small chance of success.
“While I understand that the new law is the subject of ongoing debate here in Georgia and around the nation, I do not believe that Georgia has a viable legal claim against the United States,” Baker wrote Perdue. “Considering our state’s current severe budgetary crisis, with vital services like education and law enforcement being cut deeply, I cannot justify a decision to initiate expensive and time-consuming litigation that I believe has
no legal merit.”
Baker’s right. I’m no lawyer, but I’ve read my share of lawsuits. This one (available here) reads like a poorly drafted oped piece, not a legal argument. It cites no case law, no precedent. It is a multi-page whine. Most lawyers, conservative or liberal, agree that the argument behind it is absurd.
“The states cannot just say ‘not for us;’ that’s the theory that was around before the Civil War,” Harvard Law professor Charles Fried, the solicitor general under Ronald Reagan, has been quoted as saying. “It’s truly silly.”
Furthermore, adding Georgia to the list of states challenging the law would change absolutely nothing. The suit will succeed or fail — almost certainly the latter — on its merits. To hear House Majority Leader Jerry Keen wail that Baker’s decision is “pure politics,” as if the lawsuit itself was not motivated solely by politics, is to witness hypocrisy flowing pure and sweet from its source.
But all that may have been mere prelude. Still ahead may be the point that, stupid pedal to the metal, the GOP does its “Thelma and Louise” act, driving off the cliff and plunging into the abyss.
The latest rumor is, House members are circulating a resolution to impeach Baker. Seriously. And Perdue and Gingrich have called a press conference this morning, which I will be hastening to attend. The circus is in town and I’m gonna get a ticket.
However, I must say I’m encouraged by at least one thing. Here I was worried that our state leaders had an awful lot on their plate, what with trying to balance a devastated state budget and fix transportation and deal with the ongoing water crisis, etc. But apparently I was wrong. Apparently, our legislators and governor have so little to worry about here in the little state of Georgia, the piece of real estate over which they have real influence, that they feel free to divert a lot of their time, energy and intellect telling Washington what it ought to do.
Well, their time and energy anyway.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
509 comments Add your comment
md
March 25th, 2010
9:51 am
“md – 9:39 – interpreting different shades of gray is one thing – according to Chris (et al), it’s OBviously unconstitutional.”
I believe we still have an ongoing debate about Paul’s favorite subject – torture. And I vaguely remember that also being passed before the lawyers for an “opinion”.
I don’t see a cut and dried outcome if this gets to the SC – those folks didn’t appreciate the fish in the bowl treatment they received at the SOTU – although they are not supposed to judge with any emotion, they are human.
thomas
March 25th, 2010
9:52 am
USinUK
March 25th, 2010
9:46 am
You my friend are smarter than this. That is only 1 group. 1 so now the Amish are the only ones who refuse medical treatment?
You know better and understand that there will be religions forced into doing this who fundamentally don’t agree with medicine.
But you still go with this argument because you know there are those who are dumb enough to believe you.
Nice to see that you are not for religious freedom, well except for the Amish.
You are better at showing your point than to take the intellectually dishonest route.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
9:52 am
Howdy hey there Normal! Been away for a long time….wanted to see what Jay’s sheep were thinking about the end of the Republic…
kayaker 71
March 25th, 2010
9:53 am
Bookman,
Flash back to the 2008 campaign. “No new taxes to anyone making less than 250K/yr.” Pelosi….. “We will have the most ethical House in the history of this country”. ” We will publish any new legislation on C-Span for the electorate to review at least 3 to 4 days in advance of consideration”. “We will have the most tranparent administration in history”. “We will reach across the isle and strive to have bi-partisan legislation involving members of the opposition party”.
Recent figures……. Pelosi approval rating, 11%, Reid approval rating 8%, Bozo approval rating, the lowest in his term of office and the lowest of any sitting president, at this point into their first term. Disapproval of the Health Care Bill, 65%.
How can you continually ignore these figures? The electorate is not happy, Bookman. You can go around in this temporary aura as much as you want and the fact still remains that you ignore these numbers at your peril. It only passed my 7 votes and they were bribed, cajoled, arm twisted and lied to by Bozo and his gang….. far from a mandate on so important a piece of legislation with so many far reaching implications. They muscled it through, Chicago style, and the electorate will not forget in November.
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
9:53 am
“Its a choice to live in a flood plan. there are many other areas of the country that do not lie near a flood plain. Thus eliminating your need to purchase flood insurance”
It’ss a choice to live in the USA. There are many other areas of the world that do not require health insurance. Thus eliminating your need to purchase health insurance.
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
9:53 am
Peadog….I’ll ’splain this to you once.
Young people tend to think that, because they are healthy they don’t need health insurance. They want the maximum net amount from their paychecks. When they get older and realize the financial risk they are taking, only then do they agree to pay for insurance.
Now there will be millions and millions of (healthy) people paying health insurance premiums. And the Federal government will provide subsidies for those who cannot afford the premiums……
And the health insurance companies are going to be regulated. They will be required to adhere to a revenue/payout algorithm that is more restrictive than their current operating model. The purpose of this is to help control these huge premium increases that occur every year.
Gale
March 25th, 2010
9:54 am
Yo, Gandalf!
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
9:54 am
I think Pelosi is down to 9%….
Nathaniel
March 25th, 2010
9:54 am
“First they tried to pass a constitutional amendment in the state Senate to declare that no Georgian could be mandated by government to buy health insurance, as if Georgia law could somehow supercede federal law.”
Wow, I only had to get to the second sentence to realize that you don’t understand basic US Civics. Would recommend you read the 10th Amendment where all powers not explicitly granted to the Federal government are reserved for the states. There is nowhere in the commerce clause that gives the federal government the authority to force you to buy anything… so states can nullify such laws (Virginia and Idaho allready have). In fact, every state in the union has nullified federal laws. For example, Congress may pass the Brady Bill to infringe on our gun rights… but both Tennessee and Wyoming have nullified the Brady Bill because not only does the federal government not have the authority but it is explicitly denied that authority by the 2nd Amendment.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
9:55 am
Gale Howdy! Missed you and that dang EXPAT most of all….How goes it?
USinUK
March 25th, 2010
9:55 am
thomas –
“You my friend are smarter than this. That is only 1 group. 1 so now the Amish are the only ones who refuse medical treatment?”
and 1 is still more than NONE, which was your point.
http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Religious-groups-will-be-able-to-opt-out-of-compulsory-health-care-89047832.html
here … this seems to indicate that others can use the clause, as well
Normal
March 25th, 2010
9:55 am
Daedalus
March 25th, 2010
9:40 am
Yes, there were Southerners who deplored slavery, but as you pointed out he was the Vice President of the CSA. He still believed in the separation of the states.
USinUK
March 25th, 2010
9:56 am
GtW – “Gale Howdy! Missed you and that dang EXPAT most of all….How goes it?”
hey stranger!! it’s been mighty quiet without you ’round these here parts!
thomas
March 25th, 2010
9:56 am
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
9:53 am
Yes doggone,
always the argument of the wise, educated and classy.
“If you don’t like the US, then get out”
Classy, and such a bright rey of freedom and liberty you are.
This is the ONLY BILL EVER that has forced every American (my bad USinUK not the Amish) to buy anything regardless of where one lives or what one believes.
Gale
March 25th, 2010
9:57 am
Busy, busy, busy, Gandalf. We mised you too.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
9:57 am
Well color me Amish!
Damn Skippy!
Curious Observer
March 25th, 2010
9:57 am
However this bill forces everyone from coast to coast, and Hawaii, and Alaska to purchase insurance or pay a fine. There is no alternative. Even if you are not ever going to use any medicine.
That’s right, thomas. We’ve gotten sick of paying higher premiums, higher taxes, and higher medical costs to cover for people who think they’ll never need health insurance until they get sick or injured and can’t pay the bills—at which point we have to pay it.
It’s the same way we got sick of uninsured drivers who “didn’t need auto insurance” and plowed into our cars and left us or our insurance companies to pay the repair bills.
If you don’t like it, move to another country.
md
March 25th, 2010
9:57 am
Anybody else see BillO ask Weiner who collects the fine if folks don’t buy insurance?
Weiner, after dancing in circles around the question – “If you go littering and that’s a $50 fine, no one is following you around to get your litter.”
Outhouse GoKart
March 25th, 2010
9:58 am
“I think most people are wondering how mandating that everyone(sick and healthy) is going to lower premiums. I agree w/ the pre-existing conditions thing, but it’s not going to lower premiums. Insurance companies are going to have to raise premiums to pay for everyone. Obama flat out lied on that one.”
And therein lies the beauty. Even the Dems are getting screwed…in effect screwing themselves…LOL!!
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
9:58 am
EXPAT? No voice of reason?
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
9:58 am
Thomas: You posted “There has never been a time in America in which our citizens were force to either purchase a product or pay a tax since……………The English were collecting the tax.”
There is not enough space on this blog to list all the examples of where you are wrong, so I’ll give you my favorite example of taxation without representation.. Every hotel room and car rental has taxes imposed by politicians whose intent is to tax people who don’t vote in their district/city/county.
Paul
March 25th, 2010
9:59 am
thomas 9:43
not true ‘at all’?
Entirely false, then?
The current legislation has, I believe, exemptions for religious objections. Amish, Seventh day Adventists and such.
Why the request for any other examples besides immunizations? The assertion is gov’t has ‘never required purchase’ in form of insurance. Immunization is an example of the concept. One cite is sufficient to show precedent.
We had a good thread here where the requirement for mandatory purchase was discussed. Its purpose is, if people are not to be denied coverage for preexisting conditions, to make people responsible for their own costs. Otherwise, they’d get sick, get insurance, get treatment, drop insurance, get sick, get insurance, get treatment, drop coverage, and so on.
So , it seems to me the only way around it is to allow insurance companies to continue to deny coverage. Saying we should deny coverage to people won’t work, as we already have established law preventing that.
Do you have an alternative? Or are you in favor of letting insurance companies continue to deny coverage?
Peadawg
March 25th, 2010
10:00 am
“Now there will be millions and millions of (healthy) people paying health insurance premiums.”
True. But there will be millions and millions of sick people also paying. And the premiums will have to go up to cover the medical expenses for these people.
” They will be required to adhere to a revenue/payout algorithm that is more restrictive than their current operating model.”
So in other words, the government is going to put the insurance companies out of busy. If the insurance companies can’t raise premiums to cover everyone, they’ll be out of business. That’s a way to create jobs I tell ya!!!!!
All this stuff the government is doing is really good in theory…but not so much in practice.
Outhouse GoKart
March 25th, 2010
10:00 am
“And the health insurance companies are going to be regulated. They will be required to adhere to a revenue/payout algorithm that is more restrictive than their current operating model. The purpose of this is to help control these huge premium increases that occur every year.”
The Insurance companies will for all practical purposes become public utilities. Insurance premiums will go UP…not down.
Outhouse GoKart
March 25th, 2010
10:01 am
PS…and you too my friend are gonna pay.
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:01 am
USinUK,
I never made a mention of there not being 1, I asked a question. I only discredit Paul’s claim that all kids have to be immunized to go to school, which is just false.
Nice to see that there may be some hope for those religions who DO NOT believe in medicine and refuse to use it. But if our legislators were serious about those peoples needs and concerns they would have included it in the bill. 1 more page would not have been too much to ask to a bill of over 2000 pages.
Any way you want to package this, it is the very first time in USA history in which our government has forced each and everyone of us to buy a product that we may not want or use.
This looks like a simple loss of choice for the citizens today. A loss of choice is usually called a loss of freedom.
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:02 am
“If you don’t like the US, then get out”
But I never said that. I was only pointing out, as in the quote I provided, that there ARE other options.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:02 am
You don’t have to drive Curious Observer, that is such a liberal arguement!
Nationalize the Health Care Industry…2016 objective of these fine
liberals…
By the way…Barry said the Great Teddy Roosevelt was a republican when he supported universal health care, any sane person knows he was a BULL MOOSE…and it left those believes behind when got old, he actually rejoined the Repulicans…Barry doesn’t know constitional law or history!
Damn Skippy!
Sharon Zirn
March 25th, 2010
10:02 am
Bankrupting the state is much more absurd!! Read the health care bill and then think about the state’s fiscal responsibility.
Scout
March 25th, 2010
10:03 am
Paul:
It’s still a choice ……….. you can home school and stay out of the govenment schools.
Jay:
1) Our country started with slavery. A very bad idea but a practice world-wide at the time (and still is in many places today).
2) Our Constitution supported it or we would never have become a nation (excuse me ….. a “United States”.)
3) The North started the War by trying to resupply Ft. Sumpter in violation of an agreement.
4) Our country through its policies is slowly but surely returning people to economic and political slavery so we are almost full circle.
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:03 am
Paul
March 25th, 2010
9:59 am
Answer this then,
Do I have to immunize my child if I choose to Home school them?
Yes or No answer please
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:04 am
Teddy did like Ross and split the ticket, allowing another liberal to tear at the roots of the Republic…
just sayin’
Damn Skippy!
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:04 am
“Insurance premiums will go UP…not down.”
and they would go up (as they have already) regardless.
TnGelding
March 25th, 2010
10:04 am
Ever heard of state’s rights? However, Sonny should rely on our chief lawyer. A lot of people enjoy a good circus.
Normal
March 25th, 2010
10:06 am
Gandalf,
“Howdy hey there Normal! Been away for a long time”
Are you out on parole?
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:06 am
TnGelding, Barry has repealed State’s Rights, he is replacing them with State’s Lefts…
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:07 am
Doggone,
you are correct you did not use those Exact words.
you basically told me that if I didn’t want to purchase health insurance that there are many places that do not require it and maybe I should go live in one of them.
Why should I a natural born citizen have my options ever be purchase a product, or leave the country?
What happened to my freedom of choice? Its my body and my choice what to do with it, or does that argument only work for women and abortion?
Why are you so oppossed to me having and excercising my freedom of choice, and still live here?
M Percy (Banned by Cynthia Tucker)
March 25th, 2010
10:07 am
(I tried to post this over there first, since I’ve been banned…it seems on topic for Jay’s posting today)
Enter your comments hereI condemned the words used against John Lewis and Barney Frank (although it does seem odd that with all the cameras rolling, not a single one captured these epithets being hurled, so we only have the word of the Congressmen and their staffers, and I suppose we must believe them because they are all honorable men). I condemn these acts of vandalism and violence, and hope that the perpetrators are brought to justice soon.
I encourage those who might be tempted, in their outrage at the actions of Ms. Pelosi and her minions, to act out in such a manner: don’t. Use your anger to drive these people out of office in November.
Without making any judgment as to the validity of these latest of these allegations, because the Congressmen affect are certainly all honorable men, let us remember that there is a long history of false claims. Just a while ago, right here in Georgia, we had an arsonist try to claim that she had been victimized with racial graffiti and that someone tried to burn her house down because she supported Obama. We know now that was false.
I really do not doubt that some unstable person, who feels personally betrayed by the actions of Ms. Pelosi and crew, thought for a moment that tossing a brick through a window seemed like a good idea, and that these incidents did happen.
But to paint everyone who has an honest philosophical opposition to the bill is somehow a violent racist is just dishonest and lazy.
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:07 am
A legal review of mandatory immunization can be found here: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/RS21414.pdf
It notes that every state has a mandatory immunization statute requiring children to get specific immunizations in order to be enrolled in public or private schools. But many have have provided exemptions for religious or health reasons.
Shawny
March 25th, 2010
10:08 am
True, arguments at the state level are a waste of time. This should be challenged at the federal level for being unconstitutional, which it is.
Fact: Under the bill signed by the prez, if you are healthy and self employed, you may not wish to buy insurance, but you will be forced to. That is wrong.
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:08 am
“Why should I a natural born citizen have my options ever be purchase a product, or leave the country?”
but those are not your only options. You could, for example, convert to the Amish religion.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:09 am
Normal,
Nope, I am an escapee….
“Got two reasons why I cry away each lonely night,
First one is sweet Emily,
She’s my hearts delight,
Second one is prison,
The sheriff’s on my tale,
If he catches up with me,
I’ll spend my life in jail”
The Dead
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:09 am
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:07 am
But one still has the choice to home school right?
There is no choice in this Bill, none.
How are we free if we do not have a legal choice?
Paul
March 25th, 2010
10:10 am
md 9:57
I saw the exchange. They seemed to have a bit of trouble understanding one another.
On the bright side, O’Reilly raised many of the objections people have. Rep Wiener (and several web sites) made the mistake of taking a journalist’s question as the journalist advocating a position. He was, as I said, repeating a lot of the objections floating about.
I believe Rep Wiener countered every one of them.
The difficulty came when BOR asked who would enforce penalties for not buying insurance. Rep Wiener said it wouldn’t be criminalized. BOR asked again which agency would do the fines. Rep Wiener did not, I think understand that question until the end. The littering example he gave – a proper followup question would have been ‘which gov’t agency levies the fine or collects the fine?’
But the fine is so low as to be meaningless.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/bill-oreilly-and-anthony-weiner-spar-over-health-carethe-irs-and-the-truth/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mediaite%2FClHj+%28Mediaite%29
Outhouse GoKart
March 25th, 2010
10:10 am
“and they would go up (as they have already) regardless.”
The coming increases, however, will be much more severe.
Everyone enjoy the screwing from the Capitol hill idiots.
md
March 25th, 2010
10:10 am
” We’ve gotten sick of paying higher premiums, higher taxes, and higher medical costs to cover for people who think they’ll never need health insurance until they get sick or injured and can’t pay the bills—at which point we have to pay it.”
Interesting – so what has changed??
Curious Observer
March 25th, 2010
10:11 am
“I think most people are wondering how mandating that everyone(sick and healthy) is going to lower premiums. I agree w/ the pre-existing conditions thing, but it’s not going to lower premiums.
The concept is called anti-selection or sometimes adverse selection or sometimes just selection against the insurer, Outhouse. It’s the concept that people most likely to use insurance are also the most likely to buy it. If everybody in an insurance pool is most likely to use it, the cost of that insurance will be high. However, if there’s a truly representative mixture of healthy and unhealthy people in the pool, the cost will be lower than it would be otherwise.
Part of our health insurance problem is that young, healthy people have been avoiding health insurance coverage, unless it’s provided as part of an employment agreement. The implications of that ought to be obvious.
With that being said, I wouldn’t want to be an insurer entering one of those state cooperatives the feds are going to set up. Overwhelmingly, the people seeking out health insurance coverage will be the sicker ones with chronic conditions, and some don’t even know they have chronic conditions because they haven’t been to a doctor in many years.
Night Train
March 25th, 2010
10:11 am
The 2nd amendment has always been referred to as the “reset button” for the constitution. Heaven forbid that the lunatic fringe takes this route.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:11 am
M Percy congrats! Cynny is such a twit, she’s the reason I don’t subscribe to the AJC. I won’t sign up again until the fire her…
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:13 am
Heaven forbid Barry destroys the Republic!
Damn Skippy!
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:13 am
Doggone,
nope then that infringes upon my right to a freedom of my religon!
And the Amish are being givin an exception that other religions are not afforded. Therefore an inproper weight of government and religion. Other religions don’t believe in medicine either why can I not choose one of them. Oh yeah our government doesn’t recognize thier worth I supposse.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:13 am
I blame Ross Perot…
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:14 am
“but you will be forced to”
and I am adamantly opposed to the wat in Iraq, yet I am forced to help pay for it.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:14 am
No new taxes, this is so fun!
No help from congress for Barry after 2010 elections, he is toast.
kayaker 71
March 25th, 2010
10:15 am
No one has to buy health care insurance on the new plan. All they have to do is to pay a $750 fine (tax) if they don’t want to be covered ( repeats every year), soon to be collected by a bevy of 16K new IRS agents hired specifically to handle the new influx of tax revenue. This, BTW, is levied on everyone, regardless of income level. “No new taxes on anyone making less than 250K/yr., not one thin dime”.
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:15 am
Thomas….perhaps we can kill the proverbial 2 birds with one stone. The purchase of health insurance would be mandatory unless a person of legal age signed a permanent waver. They could be treated at medical facilities, but only if they fully paid for the services. We could also use that event to enforce the requirement. If someone showed up at a medical facilty who had neither signed the waver nor paid for health insurance, they would then suffer the penalty……of course minors would still need coverage unless the responsible adult agreed to be financially responsible for their healthcare expenses. Just a thought..
NowReally
March 25th, 2010
10:15 am
The State of Georgia has so many “Auto Related” things I am required to do by law or I am fined. NONE OF WHICH ARE IN THE CONSTITUTION
I can’t drive a car in this state, without purchasing auto insurance (mandated by the state).
I am required by law to obtain a drivers license, before I can use the vehicle on the road. Penalty is usually jail and/or fines.
If I let the auto insurance lapse, my license will be suspended and I have to pay a fine. (State laws)
I am required to have a valid tag, with emissions before I can obtain a new tag and I must pay the taxes each year.
I am required to wear my seat belt or I will be fined. (state law and it effects none drivers)
It’s truly funny that the state of Georgia will impeach a man for not finding a case for implementing health insurance requirements in this state. However, they have so many other auto insurance related laws on the books.
Of course, I should not be suprise that Republicans would think it is important to protect property over human life. LOL : )
The sad thing is that if I am in a car accident, my car and any others vehicles involved will be repaired; before my body heals or someone recieves health related care due to the accident.
M Percy (Banned by Cynthia Tucker)
March 25th, 2010
10:16 am
If the bill can force everyone to purchase a product, health insurance, or face a fine, does this not set a precedent to allow the government to force everyone to buy another product or face a fine?
What if we as a people get tired of bailing people out every time there is a flood, earthquake, hurricane, brush fire, or tornado. Can we now say it is Constitutional to have Congress pass a law to force every person to buy flood+homeowner’s insurance? Or for renters, flood+renter’s insurance?
Can we pass a law to force everyone to buy a life insurance policy that will provide 10 years of income to your family if you die, or if you have no family, a policy that will cover ten years of taxes that you would have had to pay had you lived?
What if we decide that communications are a critical human right? Can we pass a law to force everyone to buy a cell-phone so that they are able to call 911 at all times?
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:17 am
“nope then that infringes upon my right to a freedom of my religon!”
If you CHOOSE to convert, then what infringement is there?
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:17 am
I don’t know how you can oppose “wat” in Iraq, Hussien was a monster….WE ARE THE SUPERPOWER. Doggone/GA, do you let bullies beat up you kids in your neighborhood? I hope not, violence can only be destroy with violence. Sorry that this is true, but it is…
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:18 am
“does this not set a precedent to allow the government to force everyone to buy another product or face a fine?”
Oh….those terrible slippery slopes.
md
March 25th, 2010
10:18 am
“The State of Georgia has so many “Auto Related” things I am required to do by law or I am fined. NONE OF WHICH ARE IN THE CONSTITUTION”
To put a quick end to your list, no one is required to drive, it is still a choice.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:19 am
Enter your comments here
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:19 am
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:14 am
Who forced you to buy a war bond?
Did someone make you pay a tax others are not paying, because they are purchasing something that benfits the war?
There is a difference. The Iraqi war is paid for by taxes already collected. There was no new war tax put in that we all pay.
Again I have read your post and find you to be smarter than this and understand that your comparission was not nearly the same but that darned intellectual dishonesty of yours wouldn’t allow a apples to apples example from you.
I guess you are glad your taxes are being used to fight the war in Afgan. as I noticed you ommitted that war from your post.
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:20 am
“Hussien was a monster….WE ARE THE SUPERPOWER”
then why have we not invaded other coutries with monsters for leaders? or does “might make right” only when it’s convenient?
Iraq was no threat to us, never attacked us, was being contained by us. Give it up, you will NEVER convince me we had the right to attack that country at that time.
md
March 25th, 2010
10:20 am
Now, if/when gov’t motors requires us to buy their cars, then you can add that to your list.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:20 am
Now Really, think there is a pefectly good seat on MARTA for you…liberal all take it so you can have someone to chat with!
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:21 am
The guarantee of freedom of religion doesn’t automatically give churches exemptions from taxes. The fact that they have such exemptions forces me to pay, via taxation, for their very existence. I wonder what would happen if all church property was taxed, all church revenues (donations, investments, etc.) were taxed, and all personal deductions for making those donations/tithes were eliminated.
We would probably get a balanced budget, fewer churches, etc.
Paul
March 25th, 2010
10:21 am
thomas
my sentence should have read “Saying we should deny TREATMENT to people won’t work, as we already have established law preventing that. ”
Your 10:01 [[I only discredit Paul’s claim that all kids have to be immunized to go to school, which is just false.]]
Just when did you disprove that kids can attend school without being immunized?!!?
The point wasn’t school attendance – the point was your assertion the gov’t has never required purchase, which you reiterated (”Any way you want to package this, it is the very first time in USA history in which our government has forced each and everyone of us to buy a product that we may not want or use”).
Scout
[[t’s still a choice ……….. you can home school and stay out of the govenment schools.]]
The problem I see with that is not all parents who may not want to be forced to buy an immunization have the choice of home schooling. Take a single parent with children as an example – they really don’t have the choice to stay home, do they?
thomas – your 10:03 – see above.
It’s usually considered polite to answer a question before posing one. Have you a response of what to do about people denied coverage for preexisting conditions?
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:22 am
Doggone, I am not opposed to attacking other countries with monsters for leaders…not in the least.
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:22 am
doggone,
“If you CHOOSE to convert, then what infringement is there?”
I believe a religious change in a spirtual choice, and therfore not a cognitive one.
In other words for one to truely change religion is not a choice but a need or a feeling. But not a cognative choice. Thats like saying gay people choose to be gay. Or are you making that claim too?
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:24 am
What is all this talk about happy people?
just sayin’!
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:24 am
We should all choose to be gay and happy! a gay marraige is a happy one!
md
March 25th, 2010
10:25 am
“Just when did you disprove that kids can attend school without being immunized?!!?
The point wasn’t school attendance – the point was your assertion the gov’t has never required purchase”
Paul – for the most part, many public health depts provide immunizations “free” of charge, so folks are not required to buy them.
USinUK
March 25th, 2010
10:27 am
m percy –
“Can we now say it is Constitutional to have Congress pass a law to force every person to buy flood+homeowner’s insurance? ”
it already is.
“What if we decide that communications are a critical human right?”
they already have – which is why we had the telecommunications act of 1996 to make sure no areas of the country were without access to telephony services.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:27 am
So…what about that Braves rotation this year?
FBI
March 25th, 2010
10:27 am
We are keeping Guantanamo open for terrorists and those who advocate terrorism. Expect us at your door. We won’t be reading yo any miranda rights either. Terrorists deserve no rights.
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:27 am
“a apples to apples example from you.”
I see no difference between being required to buy car insurance and being required to buy health insurance. And yes, I already know that buying a car is a choice. So is living in this country.
“I guess you are glad your taxes are being used to fight the war in Afgan. as I noticed you ommitted that war from your post.”
Not glad, no…but resigned to the necessity of it’s having been started. That it still continues I find disgusting…but when the previous admin sat on it’s hands on Afghanistan for nearly 8 years, I am also resigned to the fact that we will need some time to catch up and finish what should have been completed a long time ago.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:29 am
Doggone, I say you aren’t thinking critically…
Off to Guantanamo
March 25th, 2010
10:29 am
Seeker,
You can expect a knock on your door and an indefinite stay at Guantanamo . No lawyers, no phone calls, and NO MIRANDA warning. Terrorists and their advocates deserve none !
getalife
March 25th, 2010
10:30 am
Go get em FBI.
Karma for the cons.
Gandalf, the White
March 25th, 2010
10:30 am
Iraq, easy place to fight a lightning war
Afgan terrain, much toughter…mountains…
Paul
March 25th, 2010
10:30 am
md
And how to those public health departments operate? Through mandatory taxes paid by the citizens. So for those who pay taxes, it’s indirect – they pay taxes, the taxes go to the health dept, the person gets the immunization. For those who don’t pay taxes, it’s a subsidy provided by their fellow citizens!
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:31 am
FBI – I guess you are certain that every single person detained under the suspision that he/she is a terrorist is actually a terrorist. I mean no need for a trial, right? Just lynch ‘em.
Paul
March 25th, 2010
10:32 am
Off to Gitmo 10:29
Can the fact someone advocates violence and is picked up carrying a commie weapon (AK-47) to kill real Americans be taken as evidence of being a terrist?
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:32 am
“I believe a religious change in a spirtual choice, and therfore not a cognitive one”
and if you truly believe that you should not be forced to buy health insurance, would not a change of church be a spiritual one? As you would be joining a church whose spiritual beliefs coincide with yours?
and spiritual or cogintive, it’s still a choice.
USinUK
March 25th, 2010
10:32 am
Normal – 10:06 – I thought the same thing!!!
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:32 am
that would be “suspicion”, of course. Doh!
kayaker 71
March 25th, 2010
10:33 am
All of the tax implications and laws requiring insurance for your car, home, etc. are state mandates, not federal ones. The states are free to mandate this, according to their laws but never in the history of this country has the federal government assumed that power on it’s citizens. Apples and bananas.
Scout
March 25th, 2010
10:33 am
Night Train:
We are NOWHERE near that point and I don’t think we will be in my lifetime but thankfully our “lunatic fringe” founding fathers had the guts or we wouldn’t be here as we are now.
Doggone/GA
March 25th, 2010
10:34 am
“Doggone, I say you aren’t thinking critically…”
and I disagree
USinUK
March 25th, 2010
10:35 am
N-ga – “FBI – I guess you are certain that every single person detained under the suspision that he/she is a terrorist is actually a terrorist. I mean no need for a trial, right? Just lynch ‘em.”
I believe you’re missing the point … since the RIGHT believes that, this is a case of being hoisted on your own petard …
N-GA
March 25th, 2010
10:35 am
kayaker…..is there a medicare or social security deduction on your paycheck stub?
Scout
March 25th, 2010
10:36 am
P.S. to Night Train:
Just as a hypothetical ……….. what would it take for “you” (in othere words what right could the government take away) to push that “reset button” ? Can you name something?
Disgusted
March 25th, 2010
10:36 am
Pay up, kayaker, or else join the Seeker in your little rebellion. Let’s see how you stack up against the 82nd Airborne and the 2nd Marine Division.
thomas
March 25th, 2010
10:36 am
Paul
March 25th, 2010
10:21 am
“Just when did you disprove that kids can attend school without being immunized?!!?”
Are you saying children who are homeschooled are not attending school, or are you saying children who are homeschooled have to be immunized as well?
Unless you are saying that those homeschooled do not attend school, I have disproven your point that the gov’t has forced all of the citizens to purchase something. Cause……… you have the choice to homeschool, you do not have to send your child to a public or private school.
Now do you see where the gov. has never forced us into this type of action?
About pre-existing conditions.
I feel we should go with the model of allowing anyone to gain insurance regardless of any pre-existing condition. However insurance companies should not be forced to pay out upon claims in direct link with the pre-existing condition for a period of up to 1 year after the start of premium collections. After the 1 year there is no longer any pre-existing conditions, allowing for all claims to be covered as any other member covered under the insurance plan.
Thus eliminating people from going off when well and back on insurance when sick. Also it would remove the risk of people not gaining any insurance due to a pre-existing condition.
Would need some tweeking, but I am not a full time politician and do not have the time to research it that much further. I think its a good idea though.
Gator Joe
March 25th, 2010
10:36 am
Jay,
The Republicans’ feeble attempts to stop healthcare reform, which is now law, reminds me of Roadrunner-Wiley Coyote cartoons. Republicans are enjoying about as much success as Wiley.
Message to Governor Perdue and other Republicans: “Elections Matter,” as you often reminded us during the Bush years (W). If you want to change or undue legally enacted Democratic legislation, then do so “the old fashioned way,” work hard to win elections.
Hakui Guy
March 25th, 2010
10:37 am
Gandalf, the White
To all the patriots that run from the law,
but they don’t run to fast.
Salud.
And here’s to you Roady-
Road Scholar …statist
reaches for retirement wealth
no where to be had.
Paul
March 25th, 2010
10:38 am
kayaker 71
Congratulations! Well done! I was wondering when that distinction would be raised.
But… according to the Centers for Disease Control, there are federal requirements for immunization, even to the extent that parents must be immunized before immunizations are administered to children.
http://www.hhs.gov/nvpo/law.htm
Outhouse GoKart
March 25th, 2010
10:38 am
Your arguments are invalid and stupid. There will be a huge premium increase and other than those who opt for the fine WILL PAY!
Pay your BILLS…