jump to last post 1-17 of 17 discussions (61 posts)

A Constitutional Lawyer's View Of The Health Care Bill

  1. profile image0
    Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago

    Don't take my word for it listen to an expert!

    The Truth About the Health Care Bills
    Posted August 12, 2009



    Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

    To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

    The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

    However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

    The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

    This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

    If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

    So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

    I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

    For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte … cript.html

    And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte … cript.html

    There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

    Michael Connelly

    Retired attorney,

    Constitutional Law Instructor

    Carrollton, Texas

    mrobertc@hotmail.com

    1. lender3212000 profile image85
      lender3212000posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      This does an excellent job of detailing exactly what I have been trying to warn people about! I'm amazed at home many people just accept the fact that if the goverment is doing it, it must be a good thing. Couldn't be farther from the truth! Great article.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        You might try reading factcheck.org before you automatically assume that this is an "excellent" job.

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image80
          TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I've never heard of factcheck.org. How do we know they're reputable?

          1. PrettyPanther profile image84
            PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Check it out and judge for yourself.

            1. TheGlassSpider profile image80
              TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              lol I'm so confused with this situation, I'm not sure I trust MYSELF wink

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Well, you have to trust someone, I suppose.  Why not yourself?  wink

          2. profile image0
            Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/health … itutional/

            There's the link. It's very interesting, and for the most part they can not debunk the assertions by Connolly, though they do try using liberal sources like lawyers from the Clinton justice department!

            The face is, government is FORCE, and they can do whatever they want and justify it how ever they want, but that doesn't make it right, which is why, more than any other reason we MUST STOP this health care bill!!

          3. Ralph Deeds profile image69
            Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            "I've never heard of factcheck.org. How do we know they're reputable?"

            That's pretty obvious. Neither has PoppaBlues.

            1. profile image0
              Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              What's obvious is that you don't bother to read the posts. I posted the link from Factcheck.org, which couldn't discredit the claims made by Connolly. At best, Factcheck was only able to show that these issue are unresolved.

              Besides, why should anyone accept Factcheck.org as the authority on all things true?

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image69
                Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I wouldn't accept factcheck as the "authority on all things true." But it is one of the best sources for debunking some of the crap people send me by email.

                1. profile image0
                  Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I wonder if I could verify your claim of Connoley being a "2 bit Texas lawyer"? Whatever that is.... I'll have to see...

      2. Ralph Deeds profile image69
        Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mr. Connelly's piece is full of lies and misinformation about the health reform proposals as well as ill-founded opinions about their constitutionality. He's a little, two-bit rightwing Texas lawyer.

    2. Ralph Deeds profile image69
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Funny no recognized constitutional lawyer agrees with Mr. Connelly who is a little two-bit, rightwing crackpot lawyer in Texas who either has a reading disability or he's a liar or both.

  2. Hokey profile image59
    Hokeyposted 7 years ago

    Make this a HUB      big_smile

  3. profile image0
    Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago

    Too long?

  4. Hokey profile image59
    Hokeyposted 7 years ago

    Maybe Not. I'll give you another bump.  smile

  5. profile image0
    Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago

    If I wrote it, I'd make it a hub.

  6. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    Just another right-wing windbag.  I will give him credit for one thing: the responses posted on his blog that completely shred his argument remain up.

    Conservatives rarely show such fortitude.

    1. profile image0
      Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Ron, you have no credibility on the matter, you're a communist and don't believe in the protections of the constitution.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hmmm, I believe even Communists have rights in this country thanks to the ACLU. (you've heard of them right? They protect the constitutional rights of every citizen from the abuses of conservatives)

        U S A!

        U S A!

        1. Arthur Fontes profile image91
          Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Communists in the US do have the same rights as everyone else.


          I would defend those rights in every instance.  Freedom of speech can be a great thing.  I wish all the communists would exercise their rights.  Then we would know them for what they are and we could make the proper decisions regarding electing or allowing to be appointed to office self avowed communists.

          Communists in the US must be the happiest little commis in the world.  What with all the freedom and all.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            According to the OP, anyone who doesn't march lock-step with the wackiest of the neo-cons is a communist.  That means the U.S. has the largest population of communists in the world, which further means you've heard a great amount of the communist point of view.

            1. profile image0
              Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              You see Ron, that's where you're wrong. It's NOT about party! I was opposed to many of the decisions Bush made, the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, his signing statements, and Real ID to name a few. It's about constitutional government and INDIVIDUAL freedom! I'm not interested in the "collective good". I believe the collective good is best served when we are all allowed to be individually free to live our lives as we as individuals see fit to pursue our own individual happiness. That's the basis for the formation of this country and what the constitution is supposed to protect and it's got nothing to do with party!

  7. MikeNV profile image74
    MikeNVposted 7 years ago

    "Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated."

    This is the driving force behind all of Team Obama's plans - control and power over the people.

    Obama is a fraud.

    And the people who continue to deny his power grab on behalf of the Wealthy Elite are those who are either to ignorant (lacking in intelligence) or are plants to subvert the truth.

    Americans are seeing through the lies.  Americans are beginning to understand that Obama is incapable of telling the truth.

    I enjoy all your posts.  Could care less about the Ignorant people who are not smart enough to protect the rights of the people.

  8. TheGlassSpider profile image80
    TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago

    This really doesn't surprise me at all. *sigh* I might really have to get out of here and move to Ireland or something. Is there a link to the health care bill itself?

    1. profile image0
      Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3962:

      There are several versions. Congress continues to revise the bill BEHIND CLOSED DOORS WITHOUT REPUBLICAN INPUT to make it more palatable to democrats that have indicated they won't vote for it in it's present form.

      1. TheGlassSpider profile image80
        TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for the link. I need to try to read up on this. I swear...they write this stuff so no one has the time to read it and understand it.

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image80
          TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          GRRR this thing is 2,000 pages long! Do THEY even understand all of it? Jeez.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image84
            PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            If by "they" you mean members of Congress, they have staff who read and interpret the various provisions of the bill and report to them.

            1. profile image0
              Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Right! Congress has NO TIME to read and understand this stuff, they just vote for it! Which explains why they almost always exclude themselves from the laws they pass!

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, just like the CEO in a large corporation doesn't have time to read every memo, publication, brochure or press release that goes out.  It's called delegation.

            2. TheGlassSpider profile image80
              TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              So, in other words, no. wink

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Yep.  smile

        2. profile image0
          Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          2700 pages! It's an abomination! Did you know that some funding for the health care bill was buried in the Stimulus bill that got passed??

          You have to under stand, power=money, and this bill is about power! The more the government can control, the more they can extract from special interests. That's why they refuse to change the tax code! If it was a simple flat tax or a sales tax, there would be nothing for congress to manipulate for special interests, they would almost be irrelevant!

          1. TheGlassSpider profile image80
            TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Well, I understand that much anyway. I just get so overwhelmed and depressed trying to read into the details of the ridiculous machinations of power. Ugh.

  9. Dena Bez profile image79
    Dena Bezposted 7 years ago

    Its odd that you frame your argument as a Constitutional lawyer but make no real arguments about Constitutional law.  It is just your opinion about the healthcare bill, well, actually Obama.

    The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power the regulate healthcare given the enormous impact that Healthcare has over the economy.  That is a Constitutional argument.  Will that work, don'tknow, haven't really looked at it.

    1. profile image0
      Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry, the commerce clause DOES NOT give congress the right to control healthcare. It states "Congress shall have the power..."

      "Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states and with the Indian tribes."

      That doesn't give them the right to interfere with transactions between me, my doctor, and my insurance company. They could however promote competition of insurance companies between the states, but this bill doesn't do that and the democrats refuse to allow the free markets to operate to solve our problem because they seek power through control.

      Power and control is what the left seems so willing to accept though if this was Bush's bill, I'm sure they would be in an uproar!

      1. livewithrichard profile image85
        livewithrichardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry but Dena is right "Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce, including local matters that substantially affect interstate commerce.  Health care and health insurance both affects and is distributed through interstate commerce, giving Congress the power to legislate an insurance mandate using its Commerce Clause powers."  Set in precedence by U.S. v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n (1944) which concerned the sale of Fire Insurance across state lines.

  10. Arthur Fontes profile image91
    Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago

    Nancy Pelosi explains what needs to happen to see exactly what is in the bill:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoE1R-xH5To

    1. TheGlassSpider profile image80
      TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      yikes

      WHO LET HER SAY THAT???!!! There was some aide around I'm sure waving his hands frantically and mouthing, "Nancy...no, no, NO! Oh God, please just shut up."

  11. Jesusjohn78 profile image60
    Jesusjohn78posted 7 years ago

    I am glad to see that at last some people understand how much of a threat this legislation is to our freedom and us.   What I don't understand is how any one can think the Government can run health care correctly when it has destroyed the health care system through its miss management and abuse of medicare

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image69
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You're a victim of propaganda from the insurance and drug industries.

  12. Greek One profile image79
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    Ron, are you a communist?

    I thought you were a Colts fan, not a Reds supporter??

  13. Greek One profile image79
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    The Constitution clearly states that Americans have the right to bare arms.

    That is an obvious reference to the fact that all Americans are entitled to free vaccinations and similar medical treatment.

  14. livewithrichard profile image85
    livewithrichardposted 7 years ago

    First, I'm in no way in favor of the legislation that is in place right now but I do feel that our health care system needs a major overhaul.  The only thing that I can see in this bill that is overtly unconstitutional is the forcing of us to pay for a product that we may or may not need at the moment. 

    This will of course be overcome by making it a tax similar to the social security tax or medicare tax.  When we get charged for not purchasing insurance, they can't even call it a fine. It has to be called a tax because under the 8th Amendment we're protected from the government imposing excessive fines on us.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image84
      PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      A voice of reason.  And no exclamation points.

      I'm impressed.  wink

    2. TheGlassSpider profile image80
      TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I agree we need health care overhaul. I just don't know if this is the way it needs to be overhauled. I can't help but sort of feel like this legislation is just being shoved through--I don't like that. Good legislation takes time and shouldn't have to be hidden or rushed. *sigh*

      How do they get away with calling things by other names when we all know it's a fine??

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Health care legislation has been proposed by both Republicans and Democrats, in one form or another, multiple times over the last 50 years.  It isn't a brand-new subject. The issues have been explored ad nauseum.  I doubt there isn't one major part of this bill that hasn't been proposed, analyzed, debated, and fought about more than once on Capitol Hill.

        So, now it's a rush job.  I just don't understand the logic of that.

    3. profile image0
      Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not so sure we need a government overhaul of health care. At least one doctor, the president's cousin, says the problems we have today with cost are because of government involvement!

      Read what he says here in another post in this forum.

      http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/38161

      1. livewithrichard profile image85
        livewithrichardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It's not just the service of health care that is at issue here. It's the entire health care industry. An overhaul can also mean less regulation in certain areas and more in others.  Nobody should be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition.  Oversight on interstate commerce is a federal responsibility. I should be able to shop around the country for the best insurance I can afford. I should be able to purchase my Rx drugs at the best rates too.  Why can't medicare, medicaid, and the VA medical services be combined into one agency and eliminate a lot of bureaucratic waste?  There should be caps placed on malpractice cases so Medical practitioners can pay less malpractice insurance and allow states to compete for their services.  Just these few things would reduce the overall cost of health care in this country.

        Still not sure we need an overhaul?

        1. profile image0
          Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Funny you bring up prescription drugs. This bill excludes purchase of drugs outside of the USA as part of the deal Obama made with big Pharma! Just further proof that this won't lower cost and isn't about helping people but about taking power and control!

          1. livewithrichard profile image85
            livewithrichardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            No, I agree this legislation is sh*t and I hope it does not pass. But I believe we need something done. Id like to see legislation that protects the people more than it protects the interests of Corporate America.

    4. Ralph Deeds profile image69
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Do you think it would be workable if everyone was permitted to wait to get health insurance coverage until they needed it? That would be analogous to allowing people to buy a life insurance policy on their death bed!

  15. Arthur Fontes profile image91
    Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago

    One thing which has been proposed concerning health care would be to allow people to buy insurance across state lines.

    What is wrong with this idea?

    Wouldn't competition naturally lower costs?

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image69
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      No it wouldn't. The result would be the same as with credit cards, i.e., a race to the bottom. It would remove the ability of states to regulate health insurance. The insurance companies in the least regulated states would  soon drive those in states with reasonable regulations out of business. We would soon be able to buy health insurance from companies located in North Dakota, Mississipi or perhaps Alaska.

  16. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 7 years ago

    Let's get one thing out there. In the first sentance the author identifies that he's examined the HOUSE VERSION - back in August '09. That's been discarded in its entirety! The US House will pass the SENATE VERSION. That's what will become law - not the House Bill! The SENATE VERSION will then be reconciled (fixed) and passed by majority vote - reconciliation - the same procedure that was used by the GOP to pass the Tax Welfare for Millionares that cost taxpayers a trillion in revenue...

    So if you are going to trot out your 'expert' in constitutional law (who had all the objectivity of  Adolph Hitler regarding Jews in Europe) perhaps you could find a windbag who's talking about the bill that will become law.

    He was wrong about the House bill in almost every issue - but it's irrelvant. So is he.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Please refrain from introducing facts into the discussion.  They are boring and lead to communism.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        "Facts are stupid things." -- Ronald Reagan (1911 - 2004)

    2. profile image0
      Poppa Bluesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yes you are correct. His comments were regarding the house bil HR3200, most of which has been combined into the senate bill. The senate bill is not significantly different than the house bill, but thanks for trying to change the subject, a typical tactic of the left.

  17. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    The people in this country who are happiest with, and most protective of their healthcare benefits are those who currently enjoy a public, not private plan.  In fact the right-wingers often scare people into opposing the proposed legislation by falsely claiming it will harm medicare.

    Hmmmmmmm

 
working