It isn't as though the Democrats are sneaking up on every state and laying down the law overnight as some Republican measures of the past have done.
There is some breathing room here. And my 'understanding' that is also good precedent in 'plenty of breathing room,'- I mean 24 to 30 months maximum. 2014 is hideous, that is five years from now. I don't think so. That is like not having effective legislation for a quarter of a generation. That isn't workable.
The Federal Government has a right to pass legislation that the States have to abide by. Granted there are 'States Rights' but that is primarily in areas where Federal Statues don't apply.
Other measures such as commerce and natural resources 'can' fall under State's Right, but, in the case of Health Care whereby the people in States without Federal Statue will have 'inequality' under the law. Inequality is Unconstitutional.
"States Rights" is about handling 'difference,' primarily geographic, within the states and not about refusing to incorporate Federal Law into state statutes. It is a completely silly concept. Human health care is human health care is human health care. A person in California has no different needs than that of a person in Texas. They just don't. Opting Out is about 'political perference.' That is not a States Right issue. That weakens the USA Constitution and provides an assault to secession. No, no. That isn't going to fly.
Not only that, but, there is also a 'hostile court' in Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalia, and somewhat Kennedy, to human rights, conservation of resources and civil rights. If this were to go to the Supreme Court it would be better if the States brought the action against the Federal Statute rather than citizens seeking support for health care reform. There are issues of 'fiscal resources' to argue such a case for the average person, there are also issues of 'precedent' when it comes for States 'Opting Out' of Federal legislation.
It is not good precedent and 'sets up' the Federal Government for inequality issues as well as anarchy issues that might even lead to greater dissent from states like Texas that like to believe they have some kind of political 'impetus' to secede.
By setting up an 'Opting Out' version of the legislation it also states the government is simply 'hoping' people are receiving good quality health care and not demanding it. Health care is a human rights issue and in a First World country there is no excuse for any citizen to suffer without such a provision by government.
I really believe 'Opting Out' is not any measure of sustainable law in the USA. When a Federal Statute is passed, it is to be respected and not disregarded. Giving States that kind of power and setting precedent to do so, is weakening our Constitution and it is simply "W"rong.
This is NOT a "telephone call list." It isn't an individual 'preference' over a law that impacts a 'personal space' such as being inside the four walls of your home. This is about an entire segment of the USA economy and its fiscal viability, too. The Federal Government has a lot of clout here and has the right to insist on health reform across the board.
There are a lot of bad legislative habits that occurred under Bush and Cheney. The legislature was used as an economic tool with EVERY measure they passed. That is not what legislation is for. There was also 'designer' legislation such as "Terry's Law Dynamics" that if challenged in a 'reasonable' court would be viewed as poor use of the Federal Legislature. It is up to the Democratic legislature to 'set these' bad habits straight and return strength to the USA Constitution.
Tom DeLay was an idiot and sold out to 'election prowess' all the time. Due to the 'outrageous' behaviors of the Republican majority under Bush/Cheney people became transfixed on their government, especially when Social Security was assaulted, even verbally, by Walker Bush as soon as he was re-elected.
The populous of the USA should be able to elect reasonable people to office that act in their benevolence with a degree of intelligence. It is an insult to the people of the USA to have to be 'hyper-vigilant' of their legislatures. I think reasonable attention to the workings of government has a place in everyone's lives, but, daily to the volume the past administration demanded vigilance to fraud and all kinds of fiscal issues as well as human and civil rights issues is ridiculous.
People should be able to petition the government, not assault it daily. "Opting Out" is a conservative pleasing measure for Senators with difficult constituencies that want control at the 'individual' level over every action by their elected REPRESENTATIVES. It is altering the reality of the intention of USA Constitution and to that end, this mess needs to end.
"Opting Out" as a precedent is really interesting IF the USA ever needs a military draft. It is really silly and puts a lot of fiscal stress on states that adopt the law from states that don't adopt it.
