Healthcare does not violate the tenth Amendment PERIOD

So many Republicans are complaining that healthcare violates states' rights but does it? Here's look at the tenth amendment.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Click to expand...

So any issue not listed in the constitution is a states' issue. So what are the federal issues? Let's just take a look into part 1 of section 8 of Article 1.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States

Click to expand...

So in other words, welfare is an enumerated federal power. But, the word "welfare" meant something different back when the constitution was being laid; it referred to well being. Despite this, it can be largely argued that certain programs such as free education and the interstate are necessary for the well being of the American people. particularly the ones who can't afford to pay for it. Healthcare is the same way. For those who argue against free healthcare, what would you say about a low income man who has cancer but cannot afford the treatment? If healthcare shouldn't be public, why should education?

Masterhawk said:

So many Republicans are complaining that healthcare violates states' rights but does it? Here's look at the tenth amendment.



So any issue not listed in the constitution is a states' issue. So what are the federal issues? Let's just take a look into part 1 of section 8 of Article 1.



So in other words, welfare is an enumerated federal power. But, the word "welfare" meant something different back when the constitution was being laid; it referred to well being. Despite this, it can be largely argued that certain programs such as free education and the interstate are necessary for the well being of the American people. particularly the ones who can't afford to pay for it. Healthcare is the same way. For those who argue against free healthcare, what would you say about a low income man who has cancer but cannot afford the treatment? If healthcare shouldn't be public, why should education?

Click to expand...

The "general welfare" clause is used by most liberals to justify every government action ever.

Masterhawk said:

Despite this, it can be largely argued that certain programs such as free education and the interstate are necessary for the well being of the American people. particularly the ones who can't afford to pay for it. Healthcare is the same way.

Click to expand...

No.
"General well being" of the nation as a whole. Not individuals.
This can be exemplified in preventing the spread of a contagion (immunizations) because it then affects the entire nation negatively if the majority are out sick. An individual's wellness does not have such an affect on the nation as a whole.

I made a post about this earlier today. So, here's my take:

Libertarians - Strict Constructionists -

We aren't going back to the pre-New Deal days. If you say SSC is unconstitutional, I understand why you can make an argument. But, the precedent that has been set in this country is woe to overturn. Sorry. If you want to make the argument that public health is a state issue. Then constitutionally, so is law enforcement. So, by your logic, the FBI is unconstitutional and needs to be disbanded. That's not going to happen. We live in a modern world with new challenges. The younger generation is only more and more open to spending on social programs. So, either you get on board with a 6.2% income tax to provide national health care to all citizens. Or, retreat into the woods with your shotguns to bury your gold.

Excon said:

No.
"General well being" of the nation as a whole. Not individuals.
This can be exemplified in preventing the spread of a contagion (immunizations) because it then affects the entire nation negatively if the majority are out sick. An individual's wellness does not have such an affect on the nation as a whole.

Click to expand...

Why are you arguing with him after he ssid period to you.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

trouble13 said:

Why are you arguing with him after he ssid period to you.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

iLOL

Because someone on the internet is wrong.

Winston said:

I made a post about this earlier today. So, here's my take:

Libertarians - Strict Constructionists -

We aren't going back to the pre-New Deal days. If you say SSC is unconstitutional, I understand why you can make an argument. But, the precedent that has been set in this country is woe to overturn. Sorry. If you want to make the argument that public health is a state issue. Then constitutionally, so is law enforcement. So, by your logic, the FBI is unconstitutional and needs to be disbanded. That's not going to happen. We live in a modern world with new challenges. The younger generation is only more and more open to spending on social programs. So, either you get on board with a 6.2% income tax to provide national health care to all citizens. Or, retreat into the woods with your shotguns to bury your gold.

Click to expand...

The good thing is that young people don't vote and they get more conservative as they get older. It's easy to support a tax when it doesn't really effect you but once you have a house and a car and a kid and the govt wants to lop off an extra 6.2% when you are barely getting by then you change your mind.

Crovax said:

The good thing is that young people don't vote and they get more conservative as they get older. It's easy to support a tax when it doesn't really effect you but once you have a house and a car and a kid and the govt wants to lop off an extra 6.2% when you are barely getting by then you change your mind.

Click to expand...

It actually saves you money when you factor in your health care costs. You keep more of your paycheck. Also if everyones covered under a single payer system. You don't have situaitons that drive up costs when people go to the ER and never pay the hospital. The hospital always gets paid under single-payer. It's a win-win.

Winston said:

It actually saves you money when you factor in your health care costs. You keep more of your paycheck. Also if everyones covered under a single payer system. You don't have situaitons that drive up costs when people go to the ER and never pay the hospital. The hospital always gets paid under single-payer. It's a win-win.

Click to expand...

Except the doctors get paid **** and wait times for non emergencies sky rocket... win-win

Winston said:

It actually saves you money when you factor in your health care costs. You keep more of your paycheck. Also if everyones covered under a single payer system. You don't have situaitons that drive up costs when people go to the ER and never pay the hospital. The hospital always gets paid under single-payer. It's a win-win.

Click to expand...

You can provide all the insurance you want, but it doesn't mean they will actually go to the doctor. (horse to water)

So, paying for a front loaded payment mechanism is NOT providing healthCARE. And if you have to cough up 6.2% in taxes for something people may or may not use, with the government deciding what I can or cannot do or receive, then I will revert (stay) as the individual I am and address it myself.

If I have taken the personal responsibility to look after myself thus far, I don't have the overwhelming urge to pay for someone who has not done the same, with exclusion for those who could not do so.

And there is no need for finding a cure, when addressing the symptoms only, keeps the masses happy.........

GottaGo said:

You can provide all the insurance you want, but it doesn't mean they will actually go to the doctor. (horse to water)

So, paying for a front loaded payment mechanism is NOT providing healthCARE. And if you have to cough up 6.2% in taxes for something people may or may not use, with the government deciding what I can or cannot do or receive, then I will revert (stay) as the individual I am and address it myself.

If I have taken the personal responsibility to look after myself thus far, I don't have the overwhelming urge to pay for someone who has not done the same, with exclusion for those who could not do so.

And there is no need for finding a cure, when addressing the symptoms only, keeps the masses happy.........

Click to expand...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GottaGo said:

You can provide all the insurance you want, but it doesn't mean they will actually go to the doctor. (horse to water)

So, paying for a front loaded payment mechanism is NOT providing healthCARE. And if you have to cough up 6.2% in taxes for something people may or may not use, with the government deciding what I can or cannot do or receive, then I will revert (stay) as the individual I am and address it myself.

If I have taken the personal responsibility to look after myself thus far, I don't have the overwhelming urge to pay for someone who has not done the same, with exclusion for those who could not do so.

And there is no need for finding a cure, when addressing the symptoms only, keeps the masses happy.........

Click to expand...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Winston said:

It actually saves you money when you factor in your health care costs. You keep more of your paycheck. Also if everyones covered under a single payer system. You don't have situaitons that drive up costs when people go to the ER and never pay the hospital. The hospital always gets paid under single-payer. It's a win-win.

Click to expand...

Do you realize Obamacare gave every State the option to completely opt out of the ACA ? Yep, under one condition, they set up their own Single payer system.

Only one State tried it, want to venture a guess on which State ? It was Vermont, Bernie Sanders State.

In 2011 the Governor of Vermont signed " Green Mountain Care, Vermont's Single payer plan into law. This was AFTER the State payed MITs Jonathon Grubber and Harvard's William Hsiao 400 thousand dollars a piece to run the numbers for them to see if Single payer on a State level was even viable.

Well, according to Grubber and Hsiao it wasn't just viable, it would have saved the State over a Billion dollars ( 1.6 billion ) over 10 years, so, what happened to " Green Mountain Care " ?

Well for one Vermont's total annual revenues at the time were around 1.7 billion dollars. Green Mountain Care would have required an additional $2.6 billion in tax revenue so where does the new revenue come from ? Tax increases, MASSIVE tax increases. A total a 160 percent tax increase.

Green Mountain Care was never implemented because it would have crushed Vermont's economy. It would driven out private sector capital investment and jobs and killed off any new investment. Eventually even Vermont's Progressive Governor had to admit, that Single payer wasn't sustainable let alone a cost saving alternative to the ACA. Its ultimate in the hitch in the Lefts plan to implement policies based on nothing else but empty platitudes

The wealthy, corporations and investors and their money are mobile, they simply will not play along with Leftist policies that redistribute wealth based on someone subjective definition of fairness and equality. When they leave jobs leave and people are plunged into poverty and dependence.

I would have more of a optimistic outlook for this Country if it wasn't for the younger generations obsession with failed socialist and authoritarian concepts and their obsession with Politicians like Bernie Sanders who thinks its the Govt responsibility to not only be the arbiter of whats " fair " but to force through a failed Socialist agenda their definition of fairness. Too bad they've lost sight of what's truly progressive and revolutionary, our Constitution and the concepts of limited Govt within.

Sanders thinks Healthcare should be a right, that should give you some idea of just how dangerous he is and how much damage he would do if he ever, god forbid made it into a position of power and influence

Fenton said:

Do you realize Obamacare gave every State the option to completely opt out of the ACA ? Yep, under one condition, they set up their own Single payer system.

Only one State tried it, want to venture a guess on which State ? It was Vermont, Bernie Sanders State.

In 2011 the Governor of Vermont signed " Green Mountain Care, Vermont's Single payer plan into law. This was AFTER the State payed MITs Jonathon Grubber and Harvard's William Hsiao 400 thousand dollars a piece to run the numbers for them to see if Single payer on a State level was even viable.

Well, according to Grubber and Hsiao it wasn't just viable, it would have saved the State over a Billion dollars ( 1.6 billion ) over 10 years, so, what happened to " Green Mountain Care " ?

Well for one Vermont's total annual revenues at the time were around 1.7 billion dollars. Green Mountain Care would have required an additional $2.6 billion in tax revenue so where does the new revenue come from ? Tax increases, MASSIVE tax increases. A total a 160 percent tax increase.

Green Mountain Care was never implemented because it would have crushed Vermont's economy. It would driven out private sector capital investment and jobs and killed off any new investment. Eventually even Vermont's Progressive Governor had to admit, that Single payer wasn't sustainable let alone a cost saving alternative to the ACA. Its ultimate in the hitch in the Lefts plan to implement policies based on nothing else but empty platitudes

The wealthy, corporations and investors and their money are mobile, they simply will not play along with Leftist policies that redistribute wealth based on someone subjective definition of fairness and equality. When they leave jobs leave and people are plunged into poverty and dependence.

I would have more of a optimistic outlook for this Country if it wasn't for the younger generations obsession with failed socialist and authoritarian concepts and their obsession with Politicians like Bernie Sanders who thinks its the Govt responsibility to not only be the arbiter of whats " fair " but to force through a failed Socialist agenda their definition of fairness. Too bad they've lost sight of what's truly progressive and revolutionary, our Constitution and the concepts of limited Govt within.

Sanders thinks Healthcare should be a right, that should give you some idea of just how dangerous he is and how much damage he would do if he ever, god forbid made it into a position of power and influence

Click to expand...

You better hope he doesn’t run 2020 because he woulda CRUSHED Donald Trump in the election.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Sanders

Your argument is flawed. Green Mountain Care wasn’t a true single-payer plan. Large businesses operating across state lines would have been exempt from paying into the health care fund. And patients who had previous federal coverage posed administrative complications. Effectively taking the wind out of Green Mountain Care’s wings by undermining its strong point: simplicity.

It’s a small bump in the road. American Exceptionalism is fading. People are open to ideas that make more sense. Embarrassing presidents and policy decisions are wrecking the American image. You can’t tell an American he’s better than a European any longer.

The Health Care Lobby’s tricks to keep the money flowing upstairs are about up. It is inexcusable that they are standing in the way of single-payer in this country. When the truth gets out there how countries with single-payer systems have lower costs as a % of GDP and pay less for prescription drugs, people will see how they’ve been lied to in order to keep profits high. AKA keep the money party going. Adelson Drug Clinic alone gave 27.5 million dollars in donations to Republicans from ’15-'16 because Republicans will legislate on the behalf of the drug companies. Yet, there's people out there who can't afford those drugs.

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=H


Unless the competition gets stiffer from across state lines, unless that works to drive down health care costs. It is inexcusable Americans keep trudging down this road of spotty coverage, high costs, and uninsured citizens. It is inexcusable that we pay by far the highest costs for health care of the civilized world. The highest. When the only thing standing in the way of a cost efficient system that would save lives is the profits of Big Pharma. The simple truth is single payer works and has worked in this country for those age 65+. Once people do some independent research, once people who’ve been used by bad think tanks and Fox News mouthpieces are exposed, then people will see that single-payer guarantees everyone gets covered, is economically viable and makes a whole lot of sense.

Winston said:

You better hope he doesn’t run 2020 because he woulda CRUSHED Donald Trump in the election.

Click to expand...

:lamo Uhm NO, no he wouldn't have. Sanders rhetoric resonated with the younger generation, kids who haven't enough wisdom and or life experience to understand just how destructive and regressive Socialism is. Had Sanders won the primary, he would have had to address a National audience. He would have had tell sell his tax increases on the already struggling Middle class and his sell his Single payer plan, a plan that wasn't even viable on a State level. Trump won 30 out of 50 States, and he did that by appealing to the Middle class. He promised to make American great again, while Sanders was giving speeches and telling audiences that this Nation was built on the backs of slaves.

Sanders would have gotten crushed. His 13 point plan was base left wing nonsense as he appealed to the less informed, the gullible. Sanders came out against the Banks, blamed them for the 2008 Sub-prime crisis and not once did he mention the two most corrupt and influential financial entities involved in the sub-prime crisis, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. When asked how he would break up the Banks he had no answer
Bernie Sanders Can'''t Explain How He'''d Break up the Banks | Fortune.com

There's no substance to his arguments, to his promises and to his agenda. Its just a bunch of stale left wing talking points

Winston said:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Sanders

Click to expand...

:roll:
Trump Has No Path to Victory
https://politicalwire.com/2016/10/18/trump-no-path-victory/

Winston said:

Your argument is flawed. Green Mountain Care wasn’t a true single-payer plan.

Click to expand...

It failed because Vermont couldn't afford to implement it without massive tax increases. Tax increases that would have driven out private sector investment and corporate dollars and jobs. No such thing as " free healthcare "

Bernie Sanders?s Single-Payer Health Care Plan Failed in Vermont - The Daily Beast
" But the very real peril came in the cost for the program, an estimated $4.3 billion a year, almost the size of the state’s entire $4.9 billion budget. To make up for the $2 billion shortfall, taxes would have to go up, a lot. Businesses would see an 11.5 percent payroll tax increase, on top of whatever they chose to provide for employee health care, while individual income taxes could jump by up to 9 percent. The report recommended against moving forward “due to the economic shock and transition issues,” and Shumlin agreed "

Winston said:

It’s a small bump in the road. American Exceptionalism is fading. People are open to ideas that make more sense. Embarrassing presidents and policy decisions are wrecking the American image. You can’t tell an American he’s better than a European any longer.

Click to expand...

Lol ! Apparently it isn't. Americans are not what make this Nation exceptional. What makes this Nation exceptional is our founding documents and the revolutionary concepts written within. The concept of inherent natural rights and a Constitution that put strict limits on Government authority and power and the idea that men could govern themselves and that Govt has only the powers that the sovereign people have delegated to it. I assume your'e a young man, so I'll cut you some slack but I have no patience for someone like Bernie Sanders. As far as I'm concerned he's a imbecile with no redeeming qualities.

Winston said:

Unless the competition gets stiffer from across state lines, unless that works to drive down health care costs. It is inexcusable Americans keep trudging down this road of spotty coverage, high costs, and uninsured citizens.

Click to expand...

The VA showed the average American just how corrupt and poorly run and corrupt Govt healthcare is and gave them some insight into a future under single payer in the Country. If this is how our Govt treated our veterans, how would they treat my son, my wife, my mother, etc. NO ONE was held accountable for the thousands of veterans left to languish and die on hidden waiting list and because Single payer is such a Politically charged issue, no matter how bad it became, no matter how many people suffered due to incompetence or lack of care, it would always be hailed as a great success.

Thats the best reason to make sure it never comes to fruition.

Fenton said:

:lamo Uhm NO, no he wouldn't have. Sanders rhetoric resonated with the younger generation, kids who haven't enough wisdom and or life experience to understand just how destructive and regressive Socialism is. Had Sanders won the primary, he would have had to address a National audience. He would have had tell sell his tax increases on the already struggling Middle class and his sell his Single payer plan, a plan that wasn't even viable on a State level. Trump won 30 out of 50 States, and he did that by appealing to the Middle class. He promised to make American great again, while Sanders was giving speeches and telling audiences that this Nation was built on the backs of slaves.

Click to expand...

I don't see it. Factoring in Trump's unfavorables to HRC's unfavorables, with the populist mood of the country, I can see why Trump beat HRC. But, no way he beats Bernie. You don't get the wikileaks bump from a scandal plagued candidate. Bernie has no scandals.. and he's the opposite of what everyone hates about politicians, honest and consistent. Bernie takes Trump's main argument of, "She's bought and I'm not." away from him. And Bernie would have hammered on Trump in a debate. Trump U, bankruptcies, statements of misogyny, bigotry. It woulda been on. Bernie woulda made Trump look like a blathering blowhard in a debate! When the idea got floated on national TV of a Bernie Sanders v. Trump debate. Trump said yes. Both parties agreed. And Trump wussed out. Man I woulda loved to see a Bernie vs. Trump general. It woulda been the ultimate showdown of the socialist vs. the capitalist. Choose America. Instead we got carbon copied establishment democrat who had to use every political hatchet trick in the book to limp into the nomination. HRC's support was all fake and uninspiring. Sure she had voters, but her groundgame and campaign offices were snoozeville. Bernie had a real coalition of people who were motivated to get him elected. During peak months of the primaries Bernie Sanders outraised the Clinton Machine without a SuperPAC. That stands on its own. Right there. I guess we'll never know.. until 2020.

Masterhawk said:

So many Republicans are complaining that healthcare violates states' rights but does it? Here's look at the tenth amendment.



So any issue not listed in the constitution is a states' issue. So what are the federal issues? Let's just take a look into part 1 of section 8 of Article 1.



So in other words, welfare is an enumerated federal power. But, the word "welfare" meant something different back when the constitution was being laid; it referred to well being. Despite this, it can be largely argued that certain programs such as free education and the interstate are necessary for the well being of the American people. particularly the ones who can't afford to pay for it. Healthcare is the same way. For those who argue against free healthcare, what would you say about a low income man who has cancer but cannot afford the treatment? If healthcare shouldn't be public, why should education?

Click to expand...

complete fail of constitutional understanding. the general welfare clause does not give congress any additional powers.

Winston said:

I don't see it. Factoring in Trump's unfavorables to HRC's unfavorables, with the populist mood of the country, I can see why Trump beat HRC. But, no way he beats Bernie. You don't get the wikileaks bump from a scandal plagued candidate. Bernie has no scandals.. and he's the opposite of what everyone hates about politicians, honest and consistent. Bernie takes Trump's main argument of, "She's bought and I'm not." away from him. And Bernie would have hammered on Trump in a debate. Trump U, bankruptcies, statements of misogyny, bigotry. It woulda been on. Bernie woulda made Trump look like a blathering blowhard in a debate! When the idea got floated on national TV of a Bernie Sanders v. Trump debate. Trump said yes. Both parties agreed. And Trump wussed out. Man I woulda loved to see a Bernie vs. Trump general. It woulda been the ultimate showdown of the socialist vs. the capitalist. Choose America. Instead we got carbon copied establishment democrat who had to use every political hatchet trick in the book to limp into the nomination. HRC's support was all fake and uninspiring. Sure she had voters, but her groundgame and campaign offices were snoozeville. Bernie had a real coalition of people who were motivated to get him elected. During peak months of the primaries Bernie Sanders outraised the Clinton Machine without a SuperPAC. That stands on its own. Right there. I guess we'll never know.. until 2020.

Click to expand...

Hey, Im all for Bernie Sanders being the next Democratic nominee and Im all for the Democratic party sticking to this failed and divisive strategy of identity politics.

It guarantees a Trump second term and it just shows they STILL haven't learned anything from the election

The Democratic party ( this includes Bernie ) likes to break people down into their component parts by convincing them that their sexuality, race, gender identity, legal status, wealth , etc is first their most substantial characteristic and second that its being attacked in some way by the Political oppostion

Its pandering with every intention of creating division and hatred and its all done for one purpose, to secure votes. They, this includes Bernie, could care less about you or your problems or your identifying characteristics.

But Bernie Sanders has to be one of the worst. His message is targeted for a younger voter not because they possess the wisdom and experience to objectively vet his agenda. He targets youth because he knows they lack the maturity, wisdom and experience needed to see through his facade of stale revolutionary propaganda and promises of " free stuff ".

He strategy was to appeal to some of the most toxic human characteristics and emotions including envy and he knew exactly what he was doing

Bernie's plan for fixing ObamaCare was to give the same people that thoroughly screwed up healthcare in this Country MORE power to implement Single Payer

His plan for the economy was to raise taxes including taxes on a already struggling Middle class in a economy that was already on life support and increase spending exponentially.

Add in carbon taxes and his plan to " bring AGW deniers to justice " , co-ops, his plan to break up the banks, " free college tuition " and you have a recipe for disaster.

Masterhawk said:

So many Republicans are complaining that healthcare violates states' rights but does it?

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Health care is a service. Use correct nouns.

Crovax said:

The good thing is that young people don't vote and they get more conservative as they get older. It's easy to support a tax when it doesn't really effect you but once you have a house and a car and a kid and the govt wants to lop off an extra 6.2% when you are barely getting by then you change your mind.

Click to expand...

Well, that extra tax sounds bad, until realize you don't have to hand similar money over to an insurance company in the form of premiums and deductibles.

It's fair to debate the merits of private vs public healthcare, but that tax is recouped by not paying insurance.

Winston said:

I made a post about this earlier today. So, here's my take:

Libertarians - Strict Constructionists -

We aren't going back to the pre-New Deal days. If you say SSC is unconstitutional, I understand why you can make an argument. But, the precedent that has been set in this country is woe to overturn. Sorry. If you want to make the argument that public health is a state issue. Then constitutionally, so is law enforcement. So, by your logic, the FBI is unconstitutional and needs to be disbanded. That's not going to happen. We live in a modern world with new challenges. The younger generation is only more and more open to spending on social programs. So, either you get on board with a 6.2% income tax to provide national health care to all citizens. Or, retreat into the woods with your shotguns to bury your gold.

Click to expand...

I just wish more people realized this end game as you so clearly state it.

wars have been fought over much less

Chomsky said:

Well, that extra tax sounds bad, until realize you don't have to hand similar money over to an insurance company in the form of premiums and deductibles.

It's fair to debate the merits of private vs public healthcare, but that tax is recouped by not paying insurance.

Click to expand...

Its only recouped if your employer gives you a raise

Crovax said:

Its only recouped if your employer gives you a raise

Click to expand...

Or you're paying out of your pocket.