Considering the source, you have seen nothing yet.

Which is one of the most obvious reasons this is bad law, and MF is just flat out wrong.  Any republican idea that was offered (and these are a couple) was DOA.  Obama said it, and reid and pelosi made sure it was so.  The MSM here in the US went along with the democrats in saying the republicans were not offering anything because they did not want to hear of the offers (most that would do good).  So ignorant fools like MF just parrotted the MSM line without actually seeing what was being done.

In the end, if SCOTUS does kill this, it will be because the democrats ignored the republican ideas.  Feds can regulate INTERstate commerce, but as you noted, health care does not have Interstate commerce because of stupid rules.

That's what I thought.

Not that I am against such regulations, far from it. But I would want it done properly, legally, and with some thought behind it.

As I said before, I am all for those liberal ideas. But the liberal implementation is just not it.

dp

They are not necessarily liberal ideas, the implementation is liberal.  Which usually means prone to failure, waste, mismanagement and fraud.

But that's not the case if you then get shielded from the consequences of not having insurance by being guaranteed (emergency) healthcare even if you can't pay for it. In such a situation someone who chooses not to be insured is effectively choosing to have other people pay for their healthcare, which in principle seems to run completely opposite to the point you raised.

 

If the principle embodied in the current health care reform law (that it is constitutional & acceptable to tax someone for not having something) survives challenges, there is no rational limit to permissible imposition of government micro-regulation.

Your weight greater than 125% of the government sanctioned ideal & you've not done 45 minutes on the treadmill an average of 3 days a week?  That'll be $200 on April 15th.

Your cholesterol >260 & you're not taking your statin?  That'll be $200 on April 15th.

You did not quit smoking this year?  That'll be $200 on April 15th.

You have diabetes & your A1c is not <7.5%?  That'll be $200 on April 15th.

Ad nauseum.

Daiwa your right. The problem is the people that can't see past today, past oohhh what did I get for "FREE" are oblivious to what tomorrow might bring. They are the ones dancing in the street today, while those maniacal little cog's are turning in DC, planning the next move.

*being tempted to post*

Ooooohh.. no. I won't touch that with a 10-foot pole.

This is not a free country and it is becoming less free every year. We don't need the Government, be it local, state, or federal dictating how we live our lives and making decisions about our health and welfare for us.

We need to take personal responsibilty for our own actions. If you are an adult it should be your choice whether or not you wear a seat belt or helmet, since the only person you endanger is yourself.

Insurance is nothing more than a legal, government endorsed scam. Pay me lots of money, but I won't give you anything in return unless something bad happens. Then I'll do everything in my power to avoid paying you, such as claiming negligence/act of god/fraud or anything else I can imagine. Regardless of whether I pay your claim or not I will probably drop you even if your claim is trivial compared to the amount you've already paid in. If I do decide to allow you to have a policy I will double your rates because you are a high risk.

Several states are challenging the Constitutionality of this bill. Last I read 13 state Attorney Generals are sueing the Federal Government over this. Hopefully the states will win or everyone that voted for that BS will be replaced with people that will listen to the American people and repeal the bill.

Oh, and they'll have the medical records (electronic records are already mandated; phased in, but mandated) so it'll be easy enough for them to know.  And if you think your records will be protected, good luck - the "public interest" will trump all.

Don't worry about it. Being in a marginally less-free country isn't that bad. You don't even notice the difference on the long run.

That's the crux of the issue. It lies with three basic groups in the US. 1. Many people who believe this (or we would be in worse trouble than we are) in personal responsibility. 2. Some that believe everyone owes them. And 3. Those that believe that group #1 and to some extent themselves (because many of these folks never consider themselves part of the problem) need to take care of everyone, regardless of the reason for their circumstance. 

Some may say Nitro, you must not think group #1 is part of the problem? My answer, if one is responsible for themselves how can they be the "problem". Now all people fall on hard times, that much is true. I'm not against helping someone until they can get on their feet. There are limits however. Group #1 tend to be very generous when it comes to helping the unfortunate. They just don't want to be told it is mandatory. Group #3 is insecure in the individuals ability, they need guidance from higher authority to maintain the perception of right or wrong.

Then you're really going to love Cap and Trade. That's taking money for a problem nobody is sure we can do anything about. Someone will get rich, everyone will pay high prices for everything, win-lose. With Insurance, at least you get a feel-good sensation that the money you spend might keep you from losing more.

Yep.  The slowly boiled frog never figures it out.

And it's not just the Feds who'll use/abuse your records.