Sunday, April 22, 2012

ObozoCare: A Quick Review

Written by a ConLaw prof back in '09.  He deserves plaudits for actually reading the whole damn thing (no elected Democrat has done so yet), and analyzing it vis-a-vis the actual US Constitution (about which no elected Democrat gives a rotten damn, anyway.)

...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 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.

Other than that, it's just dandy!!

HT:  Blosser


Jim said...

Hard to give much credence to a supposedly "knowledgeable" person who would write the following:

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.

Anyone can read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find Article I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power...To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Since healthcare is unquestionably "commerce...among the several states", your professor's challenge is easily met.

Furthermore, this article was written in August 2009, well before the Act was finalized, so he couldn't have actually "read the entire text" of the PPACA as passed.

Then he makes a number of wild assumptions and predictions which appear to be outside the area of his expertise and doesn't link to a single source to back them up. His only links are to the Constitution, which I have demonstrated above, easily refutes the key element of his argument.

Beer, Bicycles and the VRWC said...

Arguably, my healthcare does not cross state lines, therefore, it does not meet the "real" meaning of the Commerce Clause.

Further, there is no authority nor precedent to force a citizen to purchase a commodity just because they exist.

Dad29 said...

Deek, "Jim" is a troll who is remarkably obtuse by choice. Don't waste your time responding to him.

Jim said...

Deek, Dad doesn't like that I challenge him. I actually don't think I meet the definition of "troll".

Tell you what. Why don't you decide?

Meanwhile, does your pharmacist mix up the chemicals for your prescriptions in his basement or his garage? Was the MRI in your local clinic produced in your hometown? Are the syringes, blood pressure cuffs, bandages, urine specimen cups, and tongue depressors all made in your state? How about the computers in the doctor's office and the software they run on to keep your records and appointments? Ever travel outside the state? Anybody visiting your state ever require medical services?

Is the annual flu vaccine manufactured in your state? How about your other vaccinations? How about all those posters about nerves, arthritis, spinal health, vascular illustration? Designed and printed in your state?

Do they manufacture ambulances in your state? X-Ray machines? Are cancer cures and treatments created in your state? Dialysis machines? Sonogram machines? Is the mail order prescription service you use based in your state?

Do I need to go on? Is the manufacture, packaging, delivery of all this stuff not entail exchange of money? Is this not commerce?

Anonymous said...

So Jim, you believe the Federal Government can make you buy a car? Can make you buy a house? Can make you contribute to a political party? All of them cross state lines.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jim said...


I don't require a car for transportation. I don't require a mortgage to have shelter. Contribution to a political party is not commerce (and it is already regulated so what's your point).

Unless you are born in a log cabin without the assistance of a care provider of some sort, never see a doctor, never suffer a disease or injury, never go to a school that requires vaccinations, and die instantly, you WILL require and use health care.