antispam540
Regular Member
imported post
911Boss wrote:
911Boss wrote:
The government can't technically regulate healthcare. They're technically not regulating it. What they'll likely do is say "This is how we do things federally. If you want continued federal funds, you'll do it this way too.", and create some sort of "agency" that offers private healthcare. Then they'll slap on an extra federal tax, and let those with insurance take a 2.5% tax cut. The end effect is the same, but the way it's done is legal in the letter of the law, because most of it bypasses the law entirely.Nothing in the Constitution can be construed as empowering the government to take over health care. "Technically" or otherwise.
Whether by popular vote or representative vote, if the basic legislation is outside the realm of the powers granted by the Constitution, it is invalid no matter how wide the margin of the vote or how popular it is (or isn't in this case).
What portion of the Constitution do you think applies giving the federal government any jurisdiction or power to regulate health care? Hint, don't even try "interstate commerce" as a big part of the problem with health care is that there is NO competition across state lines due to current regulations, hence there is no "interstate commerce" when it comes to health care.
People need to wake up and realize that the power is vested in the people first, the states second, and then to the feds. Somewhere along the way things have been turned upside down and everyone has somehow become subordinate to the feds.