Health Insurance Discussion

[JRScott]

Because you have to look at it as a whole not what each individual is receiving. I shouldn't have to pay* for all the Interstates that I don't drive on by that logic.

*(Even if they're already built they have to maintained).

actually Interstates to promote trade between the various states are constitutional and a responsibility of the Federal Government.

What you shouldn't have to pay for are road projects like the Bridge to Nowhere which would have only benefited the residence of one state and then only a very small minority of even them.

[JRScott]

I don't see that challenge holding water in court.

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfarehealth, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being: to look after a child's welfare; the physical or moral welfare of society.

Definition of Welfare in 1776:

Welfare
welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. [<ME wel faren, to fare well] Source: AHD

Welfare in today's context also means organized efforts on the part of public or private organizations to benefit the poor, or simply public assistance. This is not the meaning of the word as used in the Constitution. (you can find that at usconstitution.net or cornell's website).

Thus yes what I said is true, it is Unconstitutional the power that Congress currently seeks and the President seeks.

In the context of Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution the context was prosperity where they used it. Prosperity not of the individual but of the nation as a whole was their meaning. Now when you look at that and then compare it to todays Congress and the President you find they are very far from the meaning the Founders intended.

He's already spent more money than Bush did in Bush's first 4 years in office. Congress continues to run us deeper into debt and the President continues to rubber stamp it. In essence they run contrary at this time to the precepts of the part of Article I Section 8 you quote.

If you want to see what Government Health Care is like I suggest you visit an Indian Reservation in the Dakotas. Talk to the Indians and see what they think about it. By treaty the government is suppose to provide their health care. In reality they fund about half the money necessary to provide the health care and the care is rationed to only the most serious injuries or illness often coming so late that there is usually side effects for the life of the individual.

Go visit a Veteran's Hospital and talk to the Veteran's about what they think of their care.

Don't believe the rhetoric, President Obama and the Democrats are lying to you about a great many things. There simply is no way they can cover everyone with the amount of doctors and facilities we have and not increase costs. It is simple supply and demand. The more folks that want to visit our limited facilities and doctors the greater the demand. When demand outstrips supply prices rise.

The two major things that would help reduce costs the most the Democrats have not entertained because to many of them have made their fortunes as trial lawyers. We need tort reform to lower malpractice insurance premiums for doctors and hospitals. Without it there is no real health care reform. The minimal payout in premiums for malpractice insurance is between 55k-60k a year for your average doctor with much more required in many states and cities.

The second thing is to open up trade restrictions between the states that currently prevent insurance providers from offering deals from one state to another. For instance there are approximately 1300 insurance providers in the United States. The State of California has only licensed 6 of them to operate within the state. This is what drives up insurance costs, when 6 of them have a near monopoly they manipulate the market and drive up prices. So when the most populous state is being held hostage by such measures the Federal government has the duty to step in but like with trial lawyers the Democrats have gotten to much money from the insurance companies and are not willing to take on true reform.

The third thing that is well within the power of congress but is also not part of the bills is to introduce a windfall tax on pharmaceutical and medical equipment providers. These companies enjoy profit marjins on average three times higher than Big Oil. (Average Big Oil profit was 6.5% in 2007, average pharmaceutical company was 26%). Once again due to the power of lobbyist they are looking out for their war chests and not you.

So if they aren't willing to do the three things that are constitutional and also would have the most effect on cost, what makes you really think they want Health Care or Health Insurance reform?

[justbroke]

I shouldn't have to pay* for all the Interstates that I don't drive on by that logic.

This is why Private Roads are becoming the new trend in Florida! We have several highways that are scheduled to be built, owned, and operated by private companies. They'll charge tolls in a "per-use" model. The highways will revert back to the public after 7-10 years for the investors to recover their investments.

Personally, I always liked the concept of the toll road, if applied correctly. Now, NY/NJ has just gone mad with them!

Okay, how does this relate to healthcare... I don't know. But I see the point where paying for more than you use... is just counterintuitive to me. I've always liked the concept of consumption-based taxation. However, in the end, you wouldn't be able to use that model and provide healthcare for those who have no money.

I think Chris Rock said it best. Insurance is just in case stuff happens. If stuff doesn't happen, shouldn't you get your money back? Love it.

(Okay, he didn't use the word stuff.)

[OhioFiler]

Because you have to look at it as a whole not what each individual is receiving. I shouldn't have to pay* for all the Interstates that I don't drive on by that logic.

*(Even if they're already built they have to maintained).

I agree. They should be toll roads and not supported by gasoline taxes.

[TooMuchCredit]

If the federal government taxes you to pay for my sex change operations how is that providing for the GENERAL welfare of the United States? Does the answer change if the procedure is my broken arm? How about my flu shot?

None of those activities provides for the general welfare. Each is for my SPECIFIC welfare.

I do agree however, that it will never be shot down on Constitutional grounds if it becomes law but not because of the "general welfare" clause.

Because you have to look at it as a whole not what each individual is receiving. I shouldn't have to pay* for all the Interstates that I don't drive on by that logic.

*(Even if they're already built they have to maintained).

[OhioFiler]

[/COLOR]

And to SweetGeorgia, it scares me because every day the government is more and more intrusive telling me what I can and can't do. This is just one more invasion of my right to LIBERTY.

I didn't expect anyone to agree with me, but I took the chance of voicing my opinions anyway. Next time I'll stay out of it.

Do not stay out of it. Your rebuttal was brilliant. We need more well thought out posts here!

[DownNotOut]

How do you take responsibility for things that WILL happen that out of your control? A responsible person has insurance to cover those things. Health, home, auto.

So, I'm irresponsible? Well, then I guess at some point all of us on this forum are irresponsible or else we wouldn't be here.

It not really matter of "what ifs" but when. Its your choice, but at some point you or a member of your family will most likely require a medical intervention to stay alive. It generally comes in the form of a 911 call and then from that point you don't have any coverage how do you plan to pay for that?

How do you know? And why do you care how I pay for it? Maybe I pay for it myself. Maybe I sell something. Point is, I WON'T ask you or anyone else to pay for it. And I don't plan on taking medical intervention to stay alive. I have no interest in hanging around when it's my time to go. Also my choice.

You do own a car? You do have car insurance to protect others? You do have fire or homeowners?

Yes, I have to have car insurance. They won't let me have a license without it. Same with homeowners, they won't let me own a house without it. Suppose I could get around that by renting. So is the argument then that they require us to have auto and homeowners, so what does it matter if they force us into health care? I'm not saying you can't have health care if you want it, but why is it okay for them to force something else on us? What's next?

But yet if you had a heart attack you plan to pay for that how?

With my own money, but, like I said earlier, I'm not interested in hanging around when it's my time to go. People may not understand that, but that's my choice. If I got cancer, I would choose to live out however much time I had and die in my own home. Again, my choice.
I guess maybe I'm asking too much to just be left alone with my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

And to SweetGeorgia, it scares me because every day the government is more and more intrusive telling me what I can and can't do. This is just one more invasion of my right to LIBERTY.

I didn't expect anyone to agree with me, but I took the chance of voicing my opinions anyway. Next time I'll stay out of it.

[OhioFiler]

You have a better shot at it defending in on the merits of the Equal Protection clause in Amendment XIV. (Actually, I think Equal Protection actually causes some problems... without a single-payer system.)

Sounds like a healthcare Co-Op!

It is on a limited scale and it isn't designed by bureaucrats who really have their own power not your well being as the primary motivating factor.

I'm a big fan of free markets. Government intervention in markets rarely adds value.

[justbroke]

I do agree however, that it will never be shot down on Constitutional grounds if it becomes law but not because of the "general welfare" clause.

You have a better shot at it defending (it) on the merits of the Equal Protection clause in Amendment XIV. (Actually, I think Equal Protection actually causes some problems... without a single-payer system.)

Take a look at the Amish community. They do not buy health insurance yet seem to survive just fine. You want to know how? They save money for doctor visits. If the have to deal with a major medical issue the community all chip in to help (via the church).

Sounds like a healthcare Co-Op!

[OhioFiler]

Food is not the same. We can be sustained on a different variety of foods. You don't have to have a steak to live. I can go make a sandwich and give it to someone. I can't go diagnosing or treating their health issues. That takes licensed medical professionals.

Health care is black or white. You either get the treatment you need or you don't.

And the government does assist with food - food stamps. In many places you do not pay sales taxes on non-prepared food items.

Forgoing those checkups might mean you don't get some sort of malady detected and if you had gone, and started treatment, you'd be free of the malady. Skipping that routine exam, the malady goes undetected and spreads to a point it is not treatable and you either die or have a lower quality of life.

Food is MORE important that health care. Most of us can or could live a long productive life without healthcare. Try going without food for 6 months.

Why do you get to decide if I need a steak to live? If you get to decide that I should be able to decide if you need a kidney transplant.

Much of what people go see their doctor or visit the emergency room for diagnosis wouldn't need medical attention. People go because it is free or nearly free.

Take a look at the Amish community. They do not buy health insurance yet seem to survive just fine. You want to know how? They save money for doctor visits. If the have to deal with a major medical issue the community all chip in to help (via the church).

[OhioFiler]

I don't see that challenge holding water in court.

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfarehealth, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being: to look after a child's welfare; the physical or moral welfare of society.

If the federal government taxes you to pay for my sex change operations how is that providing for the GENERAL welfare of the United States? Does the answer change if the procedure is my broken arm? How about my flu shot?

None of those activities provides for the general welfare. Each is for my SPECIFIC welfare.

I do agree however, that it will never be shot down on Constitutional grounds if it becomes law but not because of the "general welfare" clause.

[TooMuchCredit]

When did health care become a right? If health care is a right isn't food also a right? Shouldn't the federal government step in and ensure I get at least 1 steak per week? Why hasn't the government demanded that the grocery stores not make a profit and provide me with universal food service?

The truth is health care is a commodity just like every other service in our economy. We have the choice to either spend out hard earned income on health care or flat screen TV's. We can pay a doctor $100 for a routine checkup or take the wife out to dinner at a nice restaurant.

Life is about choices.

If the government would get out of the health care industry with all its unproductive regulations and just let the free market dictate pricing we'd see a real decrease in medical care costs.

Food is not the same. We can be sustained on a different variety of foods. You don't have to have a steak to live. I can go make a sandwich and give it to someone. I can't go diagnosing or treating their health issues. That takes licensed medical professionals.

Health care is black or white. You either get the treatment you need or you don't.

And the government does assist with food - food stamps. In many places you do not pay sales taxes on non-prepared food items.

Forgoing those checkups might mean you don't get some sort of malady detected and if you had gone, and started treatment, you'd be free of the malady. Skipping that routine exam, the malady goes undetected and spreads to a point it is not treatable and you either die or have a lower quality of life.

[TooMuchCredit]

Article I Section 8 does not enumerate Health Care as a power of the Federal Government thus all present bills are really unconstitutional.

The Constitutional things they could do such as Tort Reform and Ensuring more intrastate competition between insurance companies is not in any of the bills.

I don't see that challenge holding water in court.

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfarehealth, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being: to look after a child's welfare; the physical or moral welfare of society.

[OhioFiler]

Article I Section 8 does not enumerate Health Care as a power of the Federal Government thus all present bills are really unconstitutional.

The Constitutional things they could do such as Tort Reform and Ensuring more intrastate competition between insurance companies is not in any of the bills.

One only need know these two points to understand the current "health care reform" proposals are not about health care reform.

[OhioFiler]

When did health care become a right? If health care is a right isn't food also a right? Shouldn't the federal government step in and ensure I get at least 1 steak per week? Why hasn't the government demanded that the grocery stores not make a profit and provide me with universal food service?

The truth is health care is a commodity just like every other service in our economy. We have the choice to either spend out hard earned income on health care or flat screen TV's. We can pay a doctor $100 for a routine checkup or take the wife out to dinner at a nice restaurant.

Life is about choices.

If the government would get out of the health care industry with all its unproductive regulations and just let the free market dictate pricing we'd see a real decrease in medical care costs.