View Poll Results: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

Voters
61. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    22 36.07%
  • No

    39 63.93%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

  1. #21
    Clown Prince of Politics
    Psychoclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hiding from the voices in my head.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,738

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    I agree it will likely end up before the Supreme Court, but I'm not crazy about bypassing the established process. Once you make an exception here, why not make another for this or that? I say let the system work as it is designed.
    Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison - Unknown.

  2. #22
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Of course not, you want to keep "the hope alive".
    Come on Vic, you're better than this. I'm not some mindless partisan hack and you know it, and acting like I am is insulting.

    It has nothing to do with wanting to 'keep the hope alive'. I was never a huge fan of this particular healthcare bill in the first place, I just doubted that we'd see anything better.

    My reasons for not wanting it to go to the supreme court are simple. When there is a lawsuit alleging that a law is unconstitutional, there is a process it has to go to before it gets to the supreme court. All laws should go through that process, and this one is no different.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  3. #23
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by molten_dragon View Post
    Come on Vic, you're better than this. I'm not some mindless partisan hack and you know it, and acting like I am is insulting.

    It has nothing to do with wanting to 'keep the hope alive'. I was never a huge fan of this particular healthcare bill in the first place, I just doubted that we'd see anything better.

    My reasons for not wanting it to go to the supreme court are simple. When there is a lawsuit alleging that a law is unconstitutional, there is a process it has to go to before it gets to the supreme court. All laws should go through that process, and this one is no different.
    Why should all laws go through this process? Do you think Bush V Gore should have been dragged through the courts for several years rather than being fast tracked to the SCOTUS?

    The damage that will be done to our economy and federal/state budgets if we continue to prepare for it as if the law will go into effect, only to have it overturned by SCOTUS, is astronomical.

    Both sides agree that the central issue in this case is whether or not congress has the power, under the commerce clause, to mandate that people purchase something. The arguments have been the same, for and against, they won’t change as it goes up the ladder and, as both sides always say after they lose a decision, “the only ruling that matters is the SCOTUS”.

    The only reason this case isn’t being taken straight to the SCOTUS (like Bush V Gore was) is Obama doesn’t want to risk a 2012 election following the SCOTUS overturning this law as unconstitutional.

    I just don’t see any reason for a delay, other than putting politics before what is best for America. There is nothing sacred about the “process” you seem to revere.
    Last edited by GPS_Flex; 02-02-11 at 02:23 AM. Reason: clarity

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  4. #24
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    I just want to add one more quote from the Florida court’s ruling. The judge quotes President Obama's own words from the 2008 presidential campaign, when the president as a candidate voiced opposition to the idea of forcing people to buy health insurance.

    "Indeed, I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that 'if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,'".
    Obama, of 2008, sounds like he would agree with the court’s ruling. I wonder what has changed since then.
    Last edited by GPS_Flex; 02-02-11 at 02:35 AM.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  5. #25
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Why should all laws go through this process? Do you think Bush V Gore should have been dragged through the courts for several years rather than being fast tracked to the SCOTUS?
    Bush v Gore should have never gone to SCOTUS, the Florida Supreme made a decision to manually recount the entire state and that should have been upheld. Bush didn't like the decision so he ran to his buddies on SCOTUS.
    Last edited by pbrauer; 02-02-11 at 02:37 AM.


  6. #26
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    't
    Bush v Gore should have never gone to SCOTUS, the Florida Supreme made a decision to manually recount the entire state and that should have been upheld. Bush didn't like the decision so he ran to his buddies on SCOTUS.
    It was a 7-2 decision in SCOTUS. You have a twisted perspective of "his buddies".

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  7. #27
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    It was a 7-2 decision in SCOTUS. You have a twisted perspective of "his buddies".
    The 7-2 decision was to stop counting of the 'Gore' counties. A 5-4 decion was also made to stop the total recount of Florida which was the Florida Supreme court decision. Like I said previously, Bush ran to his buddies on SCOTUS.


  8. #28
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    The 7-2 decision was to stop counting of the 'Gore' counties. A 5-4 decion was also made to stop the total recount of Florida which was the Florida Supreme court decision. Like I said previously, Bush ran to his buddies on SCOTUS.
    This isnít a Bush V Gore debate but Iíll take note of your desire to see our great nation brought to its knees for the sake of political gain. Every vote has since been counted (numerous times) and Bush wins every time so it worked out the way the votes were cast.

    My point was that the need to get the issue settled in the courts quickly happened because both sides wanted it resolved asap. If Bush V Gore had taken 2 or 3 years to decide, this nation would have been in a world of hurt. If health care takes 2 or 3 years to decide and then gets overturned as unconstitutional, this nation will be in a world of hurt.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  9. #29
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Why should all laws go through this process?
    Because it cuts down on the number of cases that the supreme court gets petitioned for, and gives them a basis to decide whether or not they will even hear a case. The supreme court already gets petitioned for around 5000 cases per year and only has time to hear a fraction of them. That number would jump through the roof if we started fast-tracking cases straight to the supreme court.

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Do you think Bush V Gore should have been dragged through the courts for several years rather than being fast tracked to the SCOTUS?
    This is completely irrelevant because it is a different situation altogether. It had nothing to do with a lawsuit alleging a law was unconstitutional.

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    The damage that will be done to our economy and federal/state budgets if we continue to prepare for it as if the law will go into effect, only to have it overturned by SCOTUS, is astronomical.
    You seem to be operating under the assumption that having it overturned is the only possible outcome.

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Both sides agree that the central issue in this case is whether or not congress has the power, under the commerce clause, to mandate that people purchase something. The arguments have been the same, for and against, they won’t change as it goes up the ladder and, as both sides always say after they lose a decision, “the only ruling that matters is the SCOTUS”.
    And? This is true of most cases that end up at the supreme court.

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    The only reason this case isn’t being taken straight to the SCOTUS (like Bush V Gore was) is Obama doesn’t want to risk a 2012 election following the SCOTUS overturning this law as unconstitutional.
    Clearly the states that filed suit against the healthcare reform bill felt differently. Because the cases involved were filed by a state and not a person, they would have fallen under original jurisdiction, and could have been filed directly with the supreme court. Clearly the states felt it was advantageous not to do so.

    It would also be possible to fast-track the law straight to the supreme court with a writ of certiorari before judgment. As far as I can tell none of the states involved have even filed one (though I could be wrong about this, I'm having trouble finding information on it)

    Whether you think so or not, there are clearly reasons why the states involved have not gone straight to the supreme court.

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    I just don’t see any reason for a delay, other than putting politics before what is best for America. There is nothing sacred about the “process” you seem to revere.
    Let's get something straight here. I don't revere the process and I don't think it's sacred. I think it's a good idea, but that's about as far as it goes. I just don't see anything about the healthcare bill, above and beyond any of the other cases that the supreme court hears, that is of such dire importance that it should go straight to the supreme court, especially when the states involved in the case don't seem to want it to either.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  10. #30
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Health Care Law: Do you support sending it straight to the U.S. Supreme Court?

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    This isnít a Bush V Gore debate but Iíll take note of your desire to see our great nation brought to its knees for the sake of political gain. Every vote has since been counted (numerous times) and Bush wins every time so it worked out the way the votes were cast.

    My point was that the need to get the issue settled in the courts quickly happened because both sides wanted it resolved asap. If Bush V Gore had taken 2 or 3 years to decide, this nation would have been in a world of hurt. If health care takes 2 or 3 years to decide and then gets overturned as unconstitutional, this nation will be in a world of hurt.
    The fact is that the law is already helping people, so I don't know how you can say it would hurt the nation. The controversial part - the so-called mandate - isn't actually a mandate at all. No one will be required to purchase health care insurance. If you don't have health insurance you will be paying higher taxes. Those extra bucks will be used to pay the medical services for people who don't pay their medical bills.

    This doesn't kick in for couple of years, so I don't know what the rush is.


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •