At issue is whether the individual mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act (aka "Obamacare" by its critics) is an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional power. Some claim it falls well within the acceptable umbrella of regulating commerce while others claim it's a violation of states' rights, federalism, and the 10th Amendment. What are your thoughts?
Health care law ruling ignores settled law
Melanie Nelson
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do believe that requiring every solitary citizen of the United States to have health care would not be a terrible idea in terms of the general welfare of the people and the welfare of the citizens money that would be saved, I do not agree with congress being able to have the power to implement such a requirement.With the possession of liberty should come the possession of making ones own decisions pertaining to all assets of the life one wants to live and the way they would like to live it. Since when is it congress' place to mandate humans to care for themselves? However, for the good of the whole, encouraging people to take good care of themselves can't be a terrible thing.
Tonya Brown
ReplyDeleteI agree with melanie when she says that it would be nice that all americans be able to have health care, but when did it become okay for the government to step in and force you to get health care? Furthermore the government is forcing companies to pay for their employees health care which in return makes them lose money. What this plan really hurts is the small businesses. Small businesses do not receive the discounts that larger businesses do. Although this is a good start to a better plan, I believe it needs some more details to work out.
Cameron Ridley.....If justified through the 'Commerce Clause' that citizens must purchase health care, what is to say that the national government can't force you into buying other items? i.e. a new car, computer, etc.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the state government can force you into buying items..... That is if you want to legally drive. It appears that this issue should be left to the states'.
Katie Ward
ReplyDeleteCongress does have the power to regulate health insurance via the companies due to the 'commerce claue' but they dont have the power to force Americans into getting health insurance. It is unconstitutional to force anyone on the people of america because that is taking away our librety and going against our rights.
I personally believe congress is interperting their enumerate powers to the fullest because, they are now applying health care to the commerce clause. It is said "choosing to avoid a commercial transaction is not an economic activity." Thus proving health care does not apply to interstate commerce since not all citizens may not want to purchase such insurance. The federal government does not have the right to interperet the constitution to any way they seem fit. I believe that is what they are doing here by also using the neccesary and proper clause to their advantage. Purchasing such insurance should not be decided upon the federal government, rather to the states. Just as Cameron said if states are able to make their citizens purchase car insurance they should also be left to decide wether or not their citizens have to buy health care insurance or any other type of insurance.
ReplyDelete--Shirley Leanos Per.3
Victoria Garcia.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it’s all nice when everyone can have health care but it’s unethical that one should be forced to have it. Yeah, Obamacare is lovely and it sure is a ‘change’ but I highly doubt people will jump for joy over it. How do we pay those clinic doctors if people can’t pay to see them but still get in? It must be raining money if we can support these things. People make money for a reason. If they choose to have health care, then okay, that’s cool, it’s your money, spend it however you want, but what about those lower class who don’t have jobs to buy it? Yeah, sure, we’re in a ‘recession’ and upper class should share the wealth but those less fortunate had the same opportunities as everyone else to get an education, get a job, etc. If you get fired and can’t find a job, KEEP LOOKING. Jobs are out there so you would think that even though working at a fast food restaurant sucks, it’s still a job and pays money. It’s all about money. I understand people want to do good things, but they can’t do everything. Some things are meant to be left to the people. Health care is one of those things.
If the federal government would like to pass a law such as the Affordable Care Act to be effective throughout the country, why not include it as a condition of aid under categorical grants for states? As Mr. Cavanaugh said, the federal government has the ability to get away with things now that it would not dream of back when the Constitution first took effect. If Congress was successful with raising the legal drinking age to 21 through this method, there is a strong possibility that required health insurance could be passed in the same way. Of course, revisions will have to be made if Congress wants to gain more public support, such as lowering insurance costs for those who cannot currently afford it.
ReplyDeleteHolly Pham Period 3
My opinion on this argument is that the government is using this affordable care act to just find another way to seek out those citizens in this country who are trying to "cheat the system". Those who will not answer to the law and receive health care might just be those who are the big frauds stealing from the government. Sure it is not "democratic" by forcing us to do things like buying health insurance but i think it is a blessing in disguise because maybe the government is doing this to crack down on the economic side. When we all abide by this, we will be helping the country by all having a plan when emergencies happen, and that we they will also leak out nonloyal citizens and get them on the same page of a "new deal". I am in favor for this Obamacare act.
ReplyDeletesateki finau Per.2
I believe that because the health insurance is distributed past state borders and therefore gives federal government the power to REGULATE the policies including prices, availablility, acceptance/denial but once you go into actually having to buy health insurance or you'll be fined is beyond the scope of congress because the forcing of buying the policies is not in any of congresses powers including necessary and proper, commerce. I believe that this is more of a trade off because congress is putting some heavy restrictions on health insurance companies that could put them out of business without having everyone required to have a policy but regardless federal government shouldn't have a say in this and I believe neither should the states because having life insurance isn't like wearing a seatbelt which can endanger lives or not permitting guns in school again endangering lives but not having health insurance doesn't mean endangering your life just you'll have a huge bill to pay after your treatment without health insurance so if people are dumb enough not to want health insurance that's there problem not the governments and having a penalty for not buying health insurance is like rubbing an open wound.
ReplyDeleteSireena Sy
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Congress should not be allowed to require all citizens to obtain healthcare. I fail to see how it could be considered interstate commerce in the eyes of the federal government and therefore Congress has no right to pass laws on the matter. Only states should be allowed to pass healthcare laws and even then I don't think that making healthcare an universal requirement is constitutional. Is it not our own personal choice to be medically protected? Who has the right to make us buy something when we do not wish to? Forcing citizens to purchase healthcare is equivalent to telling us how to spend the money that we work so hard for. That should be one of our rights.
I think that forcing each citizen to buy health insurance is outside of the umbrella for Congress' powers. It clearly is not an enumerated power, so Congress is just abusing the "necessary and proper" clause. Im not even sure what it is necessary for. But on the other hand, as Melanie said, it is a good idea to have everyone buy health insurance and keep themselves safe. I just think Congress is abusing their power and doing something they shouldnt.
ReplyDeleteTyler Sapp Period 3
Sabrina Perez
ReplyDeleteI do not believe the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because it violates the 10th Amendment. The State Government has the power to make health care mandatory already, which means that the National Government has allowed that power to the sates. If the National Government try to enforce the Affordable Care Act,this will violate the state's rights.
Jenny Kim
ReplyDeletePer. 3
In my opinion, congress should not be able to force U.S citizens to purchase health care insurance. Congress' powers should not stretch as far as to "regulate interstate commerce in health insurance". It is true that people of United States will be safe under the insurance but it is a choice to whether they desire to buy insurance or not. People who are short of money, for example, how would they buy insurance? It's ridiculous for them since they should buy necessities first before paying for insurance.
Andrew Massey
ReplyDeleteCongress has no right or the power to undergo such a tremendous change in the lives of the citizens and the government. To regulate all the buying of the health care, and then the government having to provide the health care to those who buy government health care, and then the citizens living off welfare having to either loose money in their checks or the government having to spend more money it doesnt have on people on welfare. For the ammount of effort it will take to get this all situated would be an enourmous task in itself. Along with the effort there are also the rights of congress. this health care is not going to be traded from state to state so therefore congress cannot control it. the 10th ammendment gives the states the power to do whatever congress does not have the power to do, therefore the states should have the power to regulate healthcare and since it is in the hands of the state it would be at the hands of the citizens who vote for it. the necessary and proper clause is just congress' exuse to exersize a right it does not have. this bill wil in no way benefit this country when it is in such an economical crisis.
Amber Arguello :D
ReplyDeleteCan the government mandate that every citizen needs health insurance? I dont believe they have the power or right to do so. I feel it is violating individual's rights and liberties. Congress is trying to tell us how we should spend our disposable income. It also interfere's with the state's rights which have been in control of health care since the begginning. The national government trying to pass this Act is violating the 10 ammendment and the full purpose of federalism. The power is to be split between the states and the federal gov., and I feel the fed has no right to start playing 'Whose yo Daddy' seeming to be the one who usually ending on top doesnt have the right to take away power strictly given to the states.
I would have to agree with Victoria. I think people should have a choice and not be forced to buy health care. Congress has no right to force it, the matter should be left to the states. Everyone should have a choice in anything they do, and noone should tell us otherwise. Some people are struggling just to get by, or have bills to pay and then to add required healthcare on top of it? I don't think it would be right the way the economy is now.
ReplyDeleteRebekah Hernandez Period 2
I think that the fact of having health insurance, should be an option, as to whether the citizen wants it or not. Congress shouldnt intervene and make it mandatory for a person to buy. This shows that they will be abusing there powers by forcing many citizens to do something maybe they dont want to do. But i agree, as Tyler Sapp mentioned, that it is a good idea to have health insurance, but it shoudnt be mandatory if not wanted. -Cristian Salas
ReplyDeleteAlexandra Jose
ReplyDeletePer. 2
Of course Congress should not be forcing Americans to purchase healthcare. Even if, as Congress believes, they think it is "necessary and proper" it should ultimately be up to the states to decide because that is the states' rights.
However, I think a movement towards national healthcare can at least be jump started if Congress uses its power to not just make healthcare mandatory but affordable and realistically possible for everyone to obtain. For instance, those who are not covered for insurance by their employers should automatically then be covered by the government no matter whether they qualify or not (although this then brings up the debate of who pays for it). But forcing someone to buy something they do not have the money for is unjust.
The portion of this that is considered unconstitutional would be the matter of it being mandatory. For some people it will be a matter of whether they can eat or have life insurance. An example of other insurance would be car insurance. People can choose not to have it and not drive. There is no real choice in whether or not to live. Making a fine for it would add a major finical difficuilty to some families. If the poor were exempt from the fine then is it fair for everyone else to foot the bill for something that might not truly be needed because there are already free clinics available.
ReplyDelete-James NeVille
Cory Moore
ReplyDeleteI feel that yes having everyone have health care is a good idea but I feel that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to force the people to obtain it and tax them if they don't have it. I feel that the healthcare issue isn't an interstate issue but an intrastate affair that according to the tenth amendment how it discussess reserved powers that the power to enforce healthcare would lie with the states for healthcare is no where enumerated in the constitution
Audi Sinaga period 3 :3
ReplyDeleteI agree with Cameron Ridley. If we are obligated to buy health insurance, they can do so with other things. If people with welfare cannot afford the health insurance, would we be taxed more money so it would be possible to support them? Questions rise to how far The Constitution's "necessary and proper" clause will go in the future.
The idea of universal health care can be a great idea but making health care mandatory can make things a little more frustrating. Congress should not have the power to make a citizen of the United States have health insurance. A citizen of the United States should have the right to determine whether or not they want health insurance and they shouldn't be punished for it by paying extra taxes. It seems like the government will try establishing something that makes people give more money to them.
ReplyDelete-Jaron Moringlane
Melissa Magana Period 2
ReplyDeleteEveryone having health care would be a good idea but i also think that the fact that it is mandatory makes it unconstitutional because the federal government would be enforcing people to obtain it and if not they would be taxed. Although it's a good idea, I dont think it is necessary, even though Congress believes it's "necessary and proper", this matter should be left to the states. I believe we should decide in what we want to spend our income in, and it should be an open decision for every citizen.
zach smith per. 2 says...
ReplyDeletehey mr. cavanaugh how was ur evening?
so check it out i dont think that congress should force citizens to buy health care i beileve that is unconstitutional...people dont have the money to pay for that and some of us can barely get by...some people can really take care of themselves and be smart about what they do and dont need to spend money if they dont need too...i think healthcare would be nice for everyone if it wasnt expensive or at least people could pick diferent like health care options...but ultimatly i think that congress is stretching there power and just pushing the limit with this
Felix Maya
ReplyDeleteper.3
health care is a great thing but making it mandatory is pushing it. congress should not have to force people to have health insurance if they do not want it. Also the fact that it said their will be a punishment if you do not purchase health insurance, this puts pressure on the citizens and makes them have second thoughts about making this mandatory.
I think that Congress should not have the power to force everyone to have health insurance because not everyone wants to buy insurance and not every is able to afford the cost of health insurance; therefore, by forcing Americans to get insurance, Congress is violating the liberty of them. An individual can decided whether he or she needs insurance or not, so it is not an necessary and proper act by the government.
ReplyDelete(Period 3)
ReplyDeleteThe end result of the Affordable Care Act would be, of course, that everyone has health insurance; that in itself is great for the nation as a whole and would be beneficial for the people as individuals. However, for Congress to step in and, not only force universal coverage, but to do so under the guise of 'necessary and proper?' It seems as if Congress is indeed violating the states' rights. Shouldn't whether or not an individual possess health insurance be a matter for the state governments alone?
I feel that Congress should not have the power to make it mandatory. It may seem reasonable, but it would be violating the rights of people. The people would no longer have a choice and would be forced to pay for healthcare. How could this be considered constitutional when Congress is stretching its power over the rights of people? Their so called "necessary and proper" belief becomes solely an excuse to have power over the states when this kind of matter should be handled by the states and the people within.
ReplyDelete-Simon Hwang P.3
Ashlee Gilford
ReplyDeleteperiod. 3
I agree with all the people who said that health care shouldnt be required for every citizen. Even though that would be great and the national government would have programs to make it affordable i dont believ that its necessary. For the reasons why Congress is trying to pass this law is not justified by the interstate commerence clause or by the necessary and propper clause.
FARRAH HSU
ReplyDeleteP. 3
Health care would be a benefit to the people, but it is not necessarily “necessary and proper.” It is a good point to mention that not all people will be able to afford health insurance as well. And how will this affect the country in the long run, economically wise? Many people see this law as a personal attack on their freedom and rights. Congress does not have the right to force the population to buy health insurance. If this were allowed to occur, it would open the door to the possibility of so many more controversial laws, (such as this), being passed in the future. Perhaps next time it will be a more ridiculous situation.
The notion of forcing one to have health care is ridiculous. It should be recommended, not required. It makes note that if one does not get health care then they would be taxed is almost like a "damn if you, damn if you don't" situation. As with a few of other comments here I agree that it should be left to the states and the people. I think of this quote "The government that governs least governs best, because the people discipline themselves". If people want health care or not they should be free to decide.
ReplyDelete-Elise Lara Period 3
Although the intention of the Affordable Care Act is noble, the implementation Congress is using is flawed and unconstitutional. Enforcing it through a mandate will only cause difficulties for it is the state that holds the power to enforce healthcare to its people. Also, many citizens would feel their liberty is violated if they had a larger portion of their salaries cut to cover those who cannot pay for health insurance, or even be fined for not being able to afford it, without having the freedom to choose to obtain the insurance in the first place. I agree with Holly Pham’s suggestion of Congress looking to a less forceful way and passing it through categorical grants. If it follows through, it would benefit both the federal government and the states because the states are given the rightful power to decide and Congress has the power to influence their decision.
ReplyDeleteDianne Tulud, Period 2
Andrew Shin. wussuppppp! :D
ReplyDeletehow you doinnnn. aight so here is my SOPHISTICATED RESPONSE:
The ends justifies the means. That is what I feel like is occurring here. The government is currently in a huge deficit, and there is no reasonable benefit for the government except for maybe money from the insurance companies. Therefore, the ends justifies the means.
Mohnia Husson Period 2
ReplyDeleteI agree with Victoria.
While universal health care sounds like a great idea for our country, it is not the most realistic. It would be great if every American could have the assurance of medical care when needed, but not every American can afford it. It is one of our liberties to choose where to spend our hard earned money, and if we choose to not invest in health insurance, its okay as our nation was founded on individual liberty. Some cannot even afford their mortgage so making it mandatory to hold insurance causes more financial problems for already debited citizens. Congress has no right to force health care onto all Americans, no matter how noble the act might be, its simply not a possibility in its 'universal' state, but states do. If mandatory health care does need to happen, it should be at the hands of the states, not Congress.
I do not think that the federal government has the right to firce everyone to purchase healthcare. The reason is that the government wants to make money and while it would help America to have universal healthcare, the federal government does not have the right to make us buy it. That falls under states rights.
ReplyDeleteConnor Dye
Dion Chiu
ReplyDeleteHealth care would be a very nice addition to the lives of every family however if Obabama is forcing people to get it is very unethical in my opinion, Congress is totally using the wrong concept. Through violating rights of the people with cutting salaries of citizens and making those who don't have it pay a fine, Congress is asking for it to fail in this way. Health care should be left to the state governments to handle not the national..
When it is all said and done every person should have healthcare insurance. This saves lives and can keep families from drowning in debt should tragedy strike.However, Congress is severely pushing it's limits by fining those who dont have it. Even if it is needed to fine those without insurance, that fine should fall under state not national jurisdiction. I respect the legislation and believe that it is a worth while and noble cause but as i said congress is walking a very fine line at best.
ReplyDeletePattie Santos
ReplyDeleteP. 3
Congress has no right to force people to buy health insurance. In theory, it sounds optimistic, with everyone's health being taken care of and what-not. However, it would take a lot away from insurance companies; they would have to significantly lower the cost of insurance for those who cannot afford it. This wouldn't be efficient for them. Individuals have the right of what to do with their money, and forcing them to buy insurance rids them of that right.
Since this is a case about federalism, not about individual rights, I believe the federal government does not have a right to force everyone to purchase health care. The Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because the states should be the ones that have the right to enforce this, not the national government. If the national government wants this to be passed and believes that it is the best for its citizens, then why not offer categorical grants to the states and "reward" them for agreeing to follow through with this instead of proposing it as a mandate. I do not believe congress can properly use the commerce clause because requiring a person to buy health insurance is not a regulation of commerce.
ReplyDeleteAlyssa Nunez
Tiana Harris
ReplyDeleteAlthough Health Care would be a wonderful thing for everyone to have it is not fair for Congress to force everyone to buy it and punish those who don't with a penalty tax. Not every person can afford health care or another tax. Congress is taking advantage of the "necessary and proper clause" and by doing so it is violating the peoples rights. The unrealistic request for universal health care is not only unnecessary, but it is also unconstitutional and does not fall under the Congress's jurisdiction.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the individual mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act is a constitutional exercise of Congressional power, if not under the Commerce Clause then under its power to levy taxes.
ReplyDeleteUnder the argument that this individual mandate falls under the umbrella of the commerce clause is the fact that Congress CAN regulate the interstate commerce of health insurance, thus Congress can require insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, as written in the article and agreed by Hudson. Plus, this would allow the insurance system to work properly (fairly distribute the costs) because people cannot game the system by only buying insurance once they become sick. So wouldn’t requiring part of the financial obligation on people who will benefit from it (those with pre-existing conditions and those benefiting from a secure pool of money in which some will not have to use the benefits=all insured) be “necessary and proper”? I think so. I think that this expansion of the necessary and proper clause is valid.
If the states cannot accept this exercise of the elastic clause, then Congress has another “line of defense,” so to speak. Ultimately, the individual mandate is a tax. It gives people the choice to either pay for health insurance, or pay a tax of roughly the equivalent to purchasing it. In effect, this “mandate” is no more than a tax deduction for those who choose to buy it. This falls under the argument that the federal government has the power to tax. It really is a play on semantics.
Christina Huang, Per 3
kayla steuben
ReplyDeleteRegardless of one's personal opinions about healthcare, the bigger picture is whether congress has the power to enforce this act. Constitutionally, however, it doesn't seem they do. People of the United States have the right to liberty and the government's purpose is supposed to be to protect these liberties. Therefore, it would seem that Congress should not have the ability to force the people to have healthcare, but rather they should provide it as an option.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is fairly obvious that permitting this mandate would benefit the people in the long run, ensuring healthcare and an improved standard of living for all, the issue arises not out of ethics and what SHOULD be done, but what Congress is permitted to do.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, no where under Article I, is Congress given enumerated rights to require healthcare of all citizens. It can, however, do what it has always down when trying to manipulate the states: threaten/restrict the income of Grants-in-Aid. Since the 1960's, states have become dependent on this "free" money from the Fed, and will definitely be willing to compromise to maintain these funds. Congress merely needs to establish that a certain percent of a state's population have healthcare (a right granted to the states under the 10th Amendment) in order for eligibility of any Federal Aid. This does not violate the Constitution, grants a sense of power, albeit forced, to the states, and generates revenue from the the new healthcare payments. - Charles Aramayo Per. 3
Shannon Smith, per. 3
ReplyDeleteI believe Congress should have the power to make health care mandatory for every American. Nobody complains about being able to call the fire department when there’s a fire, or the police department if there’s a crime being committed. So, why can’t every American have the freedom to go to the doctor when he or she is sick or injured, regardless of their level of income? It seems to me that taking care of all Americans is indeed “necessary and proper”.
Mayra Acevedo
ReplyDeleteAs Americans, we must understand that our nation was structured upon those who believed that the government had no right to push ideals, lifestyles, or even products onto citizens. As wonderful as all this sounds, the government cannot make citizens buy health insurance; and, I highly doubt that this will reach as many people as desired, for there are the homeless and undocumented who will most likely continue without. Also, this system will slow down our medical services and put a strain on the medical sector for there will be many more patients, but not all will pay full price and health care quality will decrease. Everything else seems dandy, yet I like coffee black, my ice tea sugared and government respectful of my pocket.
Brittney Christine Simon
ReplyDeletePeriod 2 :)
Well I think it is safe to say that most of us can agree that it would be great if every american were to receive health care, however in the end it is the individuals' right to choose whether or not he or she should indeed have it. The Government should not try and force everyone to be involved in something just because THEY feel that it will help benefit everyone in the long run. For many people, health insurance is a luxury that they are unable to afford. In my opinion the Government has no right in forcing someone to do something if they truly do not want to. Why make a constitution that gives us the right to freedom for what we want if in the end they are just going to try and persuade us all to do as they please?
Brian Cowan period 3
ReplyDeleteforcing americans to buy health care is unconstitutional .American citizens have never been forced to purchase anything in the history of the United States. people have argued that the government forces us to buy car insurance. we buy car insurance because we like to drive. if you live and breath in america, you will have to pay for health insurance, there is no other option. the government is arguing that it can use the interstate commerce act to defend its position. the interstate commerce act really came into play to regulate railway fees in different states, which is reasonable, but what the didnt do was force everyone to get on those trains and pay the fee, people still had the option to use other means of transportation.
Kenneth Yontwises
ReplyDeleteAlthough I believe a health care mandate, or at least affordable health care will be invaluable to the country. I do not believe that congress should be enforcing this act. Sure, it is more convenient and possibly more effective if it were to be passed through congress. However, they do not have such power to do so, because it hardly falls under the necessary and proper clause, and for it to fall under the commerce clause is a bit of a stretch for something that requires ALL citizens to carry. Then again, government seems to all about loopholes and loose interpretation.
Mina... I believe its wrong for congress to force people to buy health insurance because not everyone has enough money to afford if people dont want to get better then its their choice the congress is abusing their power by forcing people to do something they might not want to do!
ReplyDeleteTommy Truong
ReplyDeleteBased on my opinion, the Affordable Care Act stays positive in my point of view even though it does have some violation toward the Constitution. True that Congress cannot take away one's decision on certain topics, but it seem fair enough that everyone should have health care no matter what level of income they are in. The act is definitely beneficial in the long run and opposer should learn how to see things farther away.
(HANDS DOWN THE BEST POST JK) HOLLAH AT MR. C!!!
Kamal Andrawis
ReplyDeleteI believe health insurance should not be required to have by United States' citizens because that would not help our country. Although this is what should be done by the Congress, it would never work because it is impossible to make every person that lives in the United States pay for health care. You must take in account the illegal immigrants living here, who would not be paying for this health care. The "necessary and proper" clause does state that Congress has the power to make it mandatory or else citizens would pay a penalty tax, but morally this is not the right thing to do because not every one can afford it.
Universal health care would certainly be nice… if only it were free, but it is impractical. Requiring every citizen to pay for health insurance or pay a penalty tax is violating the people's rights because some people simply do not want health insurance no matter how affordable it is--they earn their money, they should be allowed to decide how to spend it. I agree that this should be left for states to decide or people to vote. Like a few people mentioned before, I don’t think this falls under the congress umbrella.
ReplyDeleteNancy Wu, Period 3
in response to a lot of responses, healthcare isnt necessarily a good idea. we have an enormous debt and health care would put us even farther into the debt. to create a public healthcare system now would not be fiscally responsible. people also dont want to pay for it. lower income people wouldnt pay the tax for it and still get the free healthcare. that could potentially collapse public healthcare if enough people skip out on paying there taxes. as of right now its a bad idea
ReplyDeletebrian cowan p3
~ Jewel Curameng was here. Per. 3
ReplyDeleteThe only reason I would have to disagree with the decision for national health care is because of the fact that it isn't INTERSTATE commerce. Because of this fact, the federal government has no right by the constitution to put this policy into practice. That being said, it is up to the states to decide on how they would like to handle their health care.
But I do agree with the general idea for national health care. Sure it might be costly for certain poor people, but in the long run, I'd rather have the help of insurance than having to pay for say, heart surgery at full price. The idea for health care is in the best interests for the people. Plus, if people buy health care, wouldn't it boost the economy up? Yes we're in a recession but spending money would generally help the economy in itself. The only problem is that the federal government itself doesn't have the money to be able to cover insurance companies for the amount of money they would need to cover all the population.
So although I do support the idea of national health care, I believe it is a proposal made at the wrong time, because it would be difficult to support it were it passed.
Kelly Moreno
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I fully agree with Shannon. I do think that Congress should have the right to be able to mandate health insurance. Though I do think that having taxing penalties makes Congress walk a fine line, but I believe people should be able to have affordable health insurance no matter the level of income they receive. If this is repealed, it will leave millions of Americans without insurance and also for those who need it the most. Congress also needs to focus on the corruptive nature of insurance companies. What is the point of health insurance if you can be denied for being sick? I've lost one too many family members due to "pre existing" medical conditions. It is not fair for those who are fighting for their lives to be denied a chance of life. Because after all, every one has the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
I do believe that Congress should be able to have everyone have health insurance, but the fact is, the problem with is is the affordability of it for everyone and how it will affect the economy. This health care bill does seem to be under "necessary and proper" to keep the citizens of the country healthy, but I think in the long run, people will be happy to know that they won't have to worry if they will be covered or not.
Zach Smith you said it all, you go girl!
ReplyDeleteI believe that the National government is pushing their power to the limit with this forced health care plan. Although the idea of a universal health care for everyone at an "affordable" price sounds fine and dandy, I just think it sounds stupid to put, pretty much, all our health in the hands of politicians who control this health care and give them the power to say what kind of care we recieve. Obamacare is giving the National Government wayyyy too much control of the Health Care industry, I think forcing a Single Payer Health Care plan onto the people of this country is a violation of their liberty. Long story short: Health care should be a power resserved by the states not the national. Alrighty thats it.
Yours truly, Spencer Luke Watson
i dont know if people are aware of this but people do complain about police officers and fire fighters. when they complain about how there taxes are high theyre complaining about there public services. health insurance isnt going to be 'affordable" medical treatments like chemotherapy are expensive and bipassing arteries is dangerous and pricey. even if its public healthcare it wont be cheap
ReplyDeleteI believe it is unconstitutional because making people have health care does not qualify under enumerated powers, the neccesary and proper clause, and especially the commerce clause. It is not commerce because health care is about the individual and it is in the states, not interstate. The state has the power to make health care mandatory, not the national goverment. -Rafael Vaca
ReplyDeleteP.S. Today is the 50h anniversary of JFK's presidential inagural adress!
Abel Soano
ReplyDeletePer. 2
In opinion, Congress should not have the power make people buy health care. i beileve that it is unconstitutional to mandate an individual to purchase insurance. But since this is a case about federalism, not about individual rights it should ultimately be up to the states to decide
aight hold up... lemme holla at choo real quick ;)
ReplyDeleteTo me this more than just a question of federalism and states rights. It is also a question of what our government can and can not make us do. For example even though the government can prohibit the use of medicinal marijuana for its citizens, does that also mean it can reversely force upon us the choice of using marijuana? It is human nature to be more accepting of someone telling us what we can not do more so than what we must do. We feel it takes away our free will and in turn our liberty which to many is unacceptable. Now in agreement with many comments before mine, I do believe national healthcare would be a great benefit to our society as a whole and would be nice to have. So in other words it would be very "proper" but is it necessary? I believe not because national healthcare is not something our society or economy can not function without and does not intrude on any of our basic rights as citizens. Furthermore every plan has its drawbacks. National healthcatre could benefit many families, but on the same hand the added number of medical patients would put a strain on medical facilities decreasing the quality of medical care. Also for such families that can not afford healthcare at their current level of income, a penalty tax would only further increase their financial burdens and make the ability to purchase healthcare even more difficult than it was in the first place! And finally I also believe forcing citizens to buy healthcare is unconstitutional and blatently invades upon our basic rights and liberties. If you choose not to buy a car you are not included in commerce so therefore why should you be included in commerce if you choose not to buy healthcare? If the government can force us all to buy healthcare which is clearly not "necessary" than it can force us to buy anything by bending the definition of what's "necessary and proper". The requirement of healthcare is not something I believe should be under the jurisdiction of the national government OR state governments and is a personal choice that should be left to the discretion of the citizens.
and thats how yuboijsam gets it done. yahmossssss!
by the way cavanaugh jsam= justin samules
youll get used to it :)
Agnijita Kumar, period 3
ReplyDeleteAs Kelly and Shannon said, I believe that having the Affordable Health Care Act is indeed a brilliant idea. Not only is it a necessity for every American, but it also provides as a stimulation to our economy at the moment. In passing the Affordable Health Care Act, we assure ourselves of proper treatment in the event of an emergency. Without healthcare, we may be turned down by the providers, and I believe that nobody deserves that fate. Along with this, the Act would be what its name states it is: affordable. It would not be out of reach for people of different economic situations. Thus, with minor adjustments from Congress, I am positive that adjustments could be made to ensure the ability for everyone to purchase it. The purchasing of healthcare would in turn stimulate the economy, due to the money flow involved. Therefore, I believe that Congress does reserve the right to mandate healthcare for everyone. By linking it to both the "necessary and proper" clause, and the commerce clause, which will help to jump start our economy, no matter how little or how much. Congress seems to have made an intelligent decision with the creating of this act.
anthony anzaldo period 3
ReplyDeletei believe that congress is abusing their powers and also abusing the "necessary and proper cause." Just as Tyler Sapp said,
"I think that forcing each citizen to buy health insurance is outside of the umbrella for Congress' powers." It is better for congress to offer health care as an option to all, even those who can not afford it. Since health care will have to be purchased by all, I believe that the price(s) of health care should decrease to help those who do not have a steady paying job.
Akash-I think that it's wrong and unconstitutional for the national government to force and mandate healthcare on U.S. citizens. Also, the national government is being overbearing this should be left to the states. Also, I believe that the necessary and proper clause is being manipulated and the definition of necessary is being stretched. And necessary implies that it’s a do or die situation for the country and this isn't one of those situation. This also violates the commerce clause which makes it even more flawed.
ReplyDeleteJoyce Park- I think that U.S. citizen having to have health care through Congress's order is over the top like how many of the people before have said. Having anything mandatory in America is already to the extreme, and by allowing the Congress to decide what someone has to have is unconstitutional. It is not necessary 'nor proper due to the less importance of health care for the people in America; everyone in America having access to healthcare is ideal and beneficial; however, I feel that it is not the national government of U.S.'s position to determine what's mandatory in a person's life.
ReplyDeleteIn relation to the situation, I fully agree with Joyce. Recently, my friend’s mom has been having serious health problems with her heart, which has been rushing her in and out of the hospital. These hospitals, however, will not treat her condition, and continue to send her home, with risk of her health getting to the extreme worse. Why is this? Only because she does not have insurance. This situation perfectly shows how important having health insurance is, and how much it can affect one person. I believe that it is practical to have health insurance for times like such, but I also believe that it is something that can not be forced upon a person. The Affordable Care Act, in my opinion is understandable, yet at the same time unconstitutional. Allowing the Congress to require Americans to have health insurance is taking away the right of the states and the people. It should be an individual’s decision, if not, the states, to choose to have health insurance or not. After all, health insurance should effect the individuals life more than the Congress itself right? So shouldn’t the decision or desire to hold health insurance be held in an individual’s hand?
ReplyDelete---Nicole Pham (Period 3)
Many of the above posts like the idea of universal health care given certain situations, and I can agree, however, like these posts, I can also agree on the unconstitutionality of The Affordable Care Act. According to the CNN article, Congress is stretching the "necessary and proper" clause in order to carry this act out. It is a good idea but I agree with Cuccinelli's comment in one of the videos on the CNN page where he says that violating the constitution is not the correct way to go about health care as there are more alternatives, such as making it more affordable. Having insurance is an individual's choice, mainly because of money, not everyone can afford it. Forcing the hand of the people, taking away liberties, is unconstitutional, plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteIn the constitution, it is made clear that everyone is entitled to LIFE. If someone, who becomes ill and is not able to get the care they need, and ends up dieing, then this right has been denied to them. By forcing everyone to be covered allows government to continue to protect our rights.
ReplyDeleteSHELLY LU
ReplyDeletePERIOD 2
Although it would be great to have controlled health insurance costs and equal coverage of everyone, the requirement of having health insurance is not under the umbrella of interstate commerce; therefore, the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. As necessary to one’s healthiness and life as health insurance is, it is not “necessary and proper” as stated in the Constitution because paying for health insurance is more of a choice of an individual than a part of commerce and trade. Like the article said, “the commerce power is limited to laws that themselves constitute the regulation of commerce”. If the Congress can pass laws to require people to buy health insurance, can’t it pass laws to force us to pay for other things that are all part of the supposed interstate commerce?
Gisselle Valiente
ReplyDeleteI think that congress shouldnt have the power to force citizens to have health insurance. Many factors come into play in doing such an act. As much as it is a good idea for all citizens to have health insurance, not many can afford it. It should be their decision whether or not they do or do not have it.
Nami Mottaghi
ReplyDeletePeriod 3
The Affordable Health Care Act is great and free health care for all is also beneficial. Although, Congress is not right in forcing EVERY citizen to have health care. Some believe they do not need it or rarely get sick and refuse to spend money on something they do not need. To force people into buying healthcare violates a person's liberties. If this gets passed, what else will get passed in the future?
-Michael Oktay
ReplyDeleteI agree with Simon. It seems reasonable that Congress should put into effect national healthcare but it would definately violate the people's rights. I do not see how it is necessary or proper to take away a fundamental liberty of the people. If this Affordable care Act goes through, it would seem the the pendulum of power has cleary shifted toward the national government.
Jarrett smith p.3
ReplyDeleteI think that the idea to make everyone avalible to heathcare is in the state of mind but that should be for the people to decide, not congress. If the united states is for the people of the people by the people then why does congress get the say in how the people should live their lives. And say this does go into effect and national healthcare is mandatory then what happens to those who can't afford it? Do they have to suffer consequences for something the congress forced upon them? I think congress should do some more thinking about this.
P.s. Sorry for the late post