Justices Tackle The Big Question: Can Congress Force You To Buy Insurance?

Mar 27, 2012 | Posted by: Mr_Bill | Full story: www.npr.org

Families who do have insurance right now shell out on average $1,000 a year more than they would otherwise, in order to subsidize the health care costs of the uninsured

The U.S. Supreme Court gets to the heart of the health care arguments Tuesday. Almost exactly two years after Congress passed the Obama health care overhaul, the justices are hearing legal arguments testing the constitutionality of the so-called health care mandate - so-called because those words actually do not appear in the law.

Comments
1 - 20 of 23 Comments Last updated Sep 28, 2012
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

So, let us hear more from the FREELOADERS?

Why should you be free to make me pay for your healthcare?

1) Why didn't you already let your children die rather than pay a huge hospital bill.

2) Why won't you pay the bills of other freeloaders who are forcing our hospitals to close from bankruptcy?

3) Why do you think I should pay for you when your family gets sick or has a terrible accident?

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Mr_Bill wrote:
So, let us hear more from the FREELOADERS?
Why should you be free to make me pay for your healthcare?
1) Why didn't you already let your children die rather than pay a huge hospital bill.
2) Why won't you pay the bills of other freeloaders who are forcing our hospitals to close from bankruptcy?
3) Why do you think I should pay for you when your family gets sick or has a terrible accident?
Here's a personal example, Bill. My son is now off my insurance at work. He and a friend run a small mechanics and welding shop. Everyone in America loves a small business, right?

They barely earn enough to get by as a lot goes back into the business. Neither of them can afford health insurance. I checked and it would cost my son $400.00 a month for private insurance. That's insane.

Anyway, last year he developed a wound on his arm that will not heal. Turns out it's MRSA. He's gone through a battery of antibiotics, none of which are working. The next step is surgery. He can't pay for it and I can't pay for it, so we've filled out the "I can't pay for it" paperwork and you and I, Bill, get to pick up the tab.

If there were a reasonable way for him to acquire health insurance, he would gladly get it, but the problem is it costs too much, and I wonder if a lot of people are worried that being "forced" to buy it means they'll have to pay that $400.00 or whatever astronomical amount insurance companies charge. What they don't understand is that the charge will be according to what you can afford.

Health insurance shouldn't be free. Neither should it be voluntary. Everyone should have access and it should be at a reasonable price. If everyone were insured the overall cost of healthcare would come down.

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Justices Tackle The Big Question: Can Congress Force You To Buy Insurance?

Answer is NO. Look at the powers provided to the Congress in the constitution. Article 1 Section 8. Then look at amendment 10.

Everything is there clear as can be. It is pretty cut and dry.

So the simple answer is no.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Kahoki wrote:
Justices Tackle The Big Question: Can Congress Force You To Buy Insurance?
Answer is NO. Look at the powers provided to the Congress in the constitution. Article 1 Section 8. Then look at amendment 10.
Everything is there clear as can be. It is pretty cut and dry.
So the simple answer is no.
Wrong. Commerce clause. Game set match.

I'll agree people have a right to go without health insurance when hospitals can refuse to treat patients- including emergencies- who don't have health insurance.

No more freeloading at the E.R. paid for with the insurance premiums of others!

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Commerce clause. Game set match.
You are incorrect.

The commerce clause was established in order to keep the flow of commerce regular. Where lets say the state of Florida could not say we don't like the state of NY, so we refuse to trade with NY. Thus keeping the flow of goods regular.

The problem is that the meanings of words have changed over time thanks to progressives in both parties.

The word regulate has evolved from keeping things regular (like fiber does to ones body) to to control and tax.

The commerce clause is being used outside of its intention.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

PayThat CEO wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a personal example, Bill. My son is now off my insurance at work. He and a friend run a small mechanics and welding shop. Everyone in America loves a small business, right?
They barely earn enough to get by as a lot goes back into the business. Neither of them can afford health insurance. I checked and it would cost my son $400.00 a month for private insurance. That's insane.
Anyway, last year he developed a wound on his arm that will not heal. Turns out it's MRSA. He's gone through a battery of antibiotics, none of which are working. The next step is surgery. He can't pay for it and I can't pay for it, so we've filled out the "I can't pay for it" paperwork and you and I, Bill, get to pick up the tab.
If there were a reasonable way for him to acquire health insurance, he would gladly get it, but the problem is it costs too much, and I wonder if a lot of people are worried that being "forced" to buy it means they'll have to pay that $400.00 or whatever astronomical amount insurance companies charge. What they don't understand is that the charge will be according to what you can afford.
Health insurance shouldn't be free. Neither should it be voluntary. Everyone should have access and it should be at a reasonable price. If everyone were insured the overall cost of healthcare would come down.
That is serious business.
Before I get into the insurance probels, I just hope your son gets well. That MRSA is a horrible plague, and I hate to hear this sort of thing.

Part of the problem with the terrible cost is that about 30% of our insurance money is wasted on "overhead" at the insurance company. That means profit, paperpushing, and making us and our doctors jump through hoops.

The universal, or one payer plan would have cut deeply into that. However, the GOP, in their poliitical wisdom, opposed that part of this plan to the wall. So, we don't have it.

Another major part is the high cost of modern medical test and treatment technology. MRI's, monitors, and all the rest pump up our costs, often with unneccessary tests.

Many years ago, my dad was in the hospital for a very bad ulcer. Dctors he didn't even know would poke their head into his room and ask how he was doing.
Then, they would show up on his bill as consults.
My mother went crazy on the bill!

You are right, and I hope your son is soon back to cutting, joining, and milling.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
You are incorrect.
The commerce clause was established in order to keep the flow of commerce regular. Where lets say the state of Florida could not say we don't like the state of NY, so we refuse to trade with NY. Thus keeping the flow of goods regular.
The problem is that the meanings of words have changed over time thanks to progressives in both parties.
The word regulate has evolved from keeping things regular (like fiber does to ones body) to to control and tax.
The commerce clause is being used outside of its intention.
It doesn't matter what you think the original intent of the commerce clause was. The only thing that matters is the current interpretation.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
You are incorrect.
The commerce clause was established in order to keep the flow of commerce regular. Where lets say the state of Florida could not say we don't like the state of NY, so we refuse to trade with NY. Thus keeping the flow of goods regular.
The problem is that the meanings of words have changed over time thanks to progressives in both parties.
The word regulate has evolved from keeping things regular (like fiber does to ones body) to to control and tax.
The commerce clause is being used outside of its intention.
And you failed to address the central question. Why should people without insurance get to freeload off the rest of us? I know many people who use the E.R. for their basic primary care because they don't have insurance. They know the hospitals have to treat them even if they come in for the common cold. One mother brings her kids to the E.R. for their immunizations and school physicals so they can play sports.

Until hospitals can turn away the uninsured without fear of being sued, then everyone should be required to have insurance or be able to pay cash up front PRIOR to any treatment.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
You are incorrect.
The commerce clause was established in order to keep the flow of commerce regular. Where lets say the state of Florida could not say we don't like the state of NY, so we refuse to trade with NY. Thus keeping the flow of goods regular.
The problem is that the meanings of words have changed over time thanks to progressives in both parties.
The word regulate has evolved from keeping things regular (like fiber does to ones body) to to control and tax.
The commerce clause is being used outside of its intention.
Poor interpretation, and an incorrect opinion.

The Commerce clause in this case refers to a service that is universal. I's seen someone here on Topix mainain that only 50% of American workers even get sick.

WRONG. We all get sick, or have accidents. Even if we don't, our wives have children. They get sick. Our husbands have industrial accidents. Our daughters get repetitive strain injury, our sons get MRSA.

If you live in Georgia, or New Mexico; I know when your child is dying, and the local hospital is a snake pit, you'll get on that bus to New Jersey or to California for a good hospital.

When the FREELOADERS start letting their children die in the woods, I'll believe your empty arguments.
Let me know.

Until then, interstate commerce.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

P.S. I am in NY.
My old health insurer was once in Hartford.
My present health insurer is in California.

Is that interstate commerce?
Tell me not.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And you failed to address the central question. Why should people without insurance get to freeload off the rest of us? I know many people who use the E.R. for their basic primary care because they don't have insurance. They know the hospitals have to treat them even if they come in for the common cold. One mother brings her kids to the E.R. for their immunizations and school physicals so they can play sports.
Until hospitals can turn away the uninsured without fear of being sued, then everyone should be required to have insurance or be able to pay cash up front PRIOR to any treatment.
He has a point, that sometimes the law is an ass. We must follow the US Constitution.

It is his interpretation that is off-base. He has somehow acquired the idea that Health Insurance is not interstate, necessary, or universally needed. That may be true of a few hermits, but they will contunue to live in their caves; and not be insured.

If he could understand the US Constitution commerce clause better, he wouuld be unable to find another leg to stand on.
Paul Revere

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

PayThat CEO wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a personal example, Bill. My son is now off my insurance at work. He and a friend run a small mechanics and welding shop. Everyone in America loves a small business, right?
They barely earn enough to get by as a lot goes back into the business. Neither of them can afford health insurance. I checked and it would cost my son $400.00 a month for private insurance. That's insane.
Anyway, last year he developed a wound on his arm that will not heal. Turns out it's MRSA. He's gone through a battery of antibiotics, none of which are working. The next step is surgery. He can't pay for it and I can't pay for it, so we've filled out the "I can't pay for it" paperwork and you and I, Bill, get to pick up the tab.
If there were a reasonable way for him to acquire health insurance, he would gladly get it, but the problem is it costs too much, and I wonder if a lot of people are worried that being "forced" to buy it means they'll have to pay that $400.00 or whatever astronomical amount insurance companies charge. What they don't understand is that the charge will be according to what you can afford.
Health insurance shouldn't be free. Neither should it be voluntary. Everyone should have access and it should be at a reasonable price. If everyone were insured the overall cost of healthcare would come down.
First off $400/month is a great rate for health insurance. Second, still not my problem that you or your son cannot afford health insurance, and want me to pick up the tab on his self induced injury. Third, why the hell should i pay more for a loser do nothing who gets it for free when i have to pay more than 10 people comibined?
duh

Abilene, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

we the people dont want nore need something rammed down our throats! is this the land of the free or what? why should we the peeps be forced to accpet this commy program when our own congress doesnt even want it? wake up people this is our country the goc works for us!
CHECK SIX

North Port, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

JUSTICE KENNEDY...The STAKE in the HEART of OBAMACARE

its 4 yea 4 nay and KENNEDY got the harpoon to kill this WHALE!

Allis Kaput for Obama care!!

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Paul Revere wrote:
<quoted text>
First off $400/month is a great rate for health insurance. Second, still not my problem that you or your son cannot afford health insurance, and want me to pick up the tab on his self induced injury. Third, why the hell should i pay more for a loser do nothing who gets it for free when i have to pay more than 10 people comibined?
Self-induced? Where'd you read that, birdbrain?

And if you had any reading comprehension skills whatsoever you'd recognize that under Obama's plan EVERYONE would pay their own way. That's the gist of this conversation which lost while you were busy deciding someone you don't know is a loser do-nothing with a self-inflicted injury. A loser is someone who runs off at the mouth while not knowing a damn thing about what they're talking about.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And you failed to address the central question. Why should people without insurance get to freeload off the rest of us? I know many people who use the E.R. for their basic primary care because they don't have insurance. They know the hospitals have to treat them even if they come in for the common cold. One mother brings her kids to the E.R. for their immunizations and school physicals so they can play sports.
Until hospitals can turn away the uninsured without fear of being sued, then everyone should be required to have insurance or be able to pay cash up front PRIOR to any treatment.
You figure there are millions of Americans with any insurance whatsoever. They're all having a duck fit because Obama wants to make them be responsible for themselves.

This is a hoot because now we see just how Republicans act when accountability comes calling.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

duh wrote:
we the people dont want nore need something rammed down our throats! is this the land of the free or what? why should we the peeps be forced to accpet this commy program when our own congress doesnt even want it? wake up people this is our country the goc works for us!
1. I'm forced to purchase a war I don't agree with
2. I'm forced to purchase guns and weapons for Israel
3. I'm forced to purchase medical care and food for illegal immigrants
4. I'm forced to purchase "friendship" from foreign countries
5. I'm forced to purchase education for children I don't have
6. I'm forced to purchase help for banks that helped cause a financial collapse
7. I'm forced to pay for idiots taking this healthcare issue to the Supreme court.

There's a lot of things forced down my throat. I have no choice in the matter. I can think of a lot things I would rather NOT pay for than heathcare. You're right. This is MY country and I believe everyone has a right to pay their own way when it comes to healthcare.
Paul Revere

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Mar 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

PayThat CEO wrote:
<quoted text>
Self-induced? Where'd you read that, birdbrain?
And if you had any reading comprehension skills whatsoever you'd recognize that under Obama's plan EVERYONE would pay their own way. That's the gist of this conversation which lost while you were busy deciding someone you don't know is a loser do-nothing with a self-inflicted injury. A loser is someone who runs off at the mouth while not knowing a damn thing about what they're talking about.
A loser is someone like you and your son who cannot pay their own way! Your buddy Obama and libs do not want everyone to pay for their own, just like in the BS social lazy welfare programs. The twits will not have to pay due to their so called being disadvantaged ect... So all will happen again is that people like me will have to pay for the losers of this society. Time for us to let them sink or swim!

“your life is great”

Since: Aug 09

you poop in clean water

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Mar 27, 2012
 
wow.
just......, wow.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Mar 28, 2012
 
duh wrote:
we the people dont want nore need something rammed down our throats! is this the land of the free or what? why should we the peeps be forced to accpet this commy program when our own congress doesnt even want it? wake up people this is our country the goc works for us!
The bleeting of a sheep, a freeloader or health industry shill...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••