That law was law. Believe me it was law. That is why 'the law' was not suppose to stand.
As per the Plutocrats, FOR ALL THE RIGHT REASONS, of course.
I read through a portion of the bill and all that is on this blog. The Affordable Care Act was not written overnight either. The House Bill which outlined the final draft after Senate modifications was obviously a work of love over a long period of time.
At the heart of the Affordable Care Act are the citizens of this nation, not some Joe Lieberman protected Plutocrat insurance companies.
The Democrats are a real threat to the Plutocrats. They actually legislate and it is why the 'Four Crackpot Judges and one Conservative Judge' on the Supreme Court are so important after all.
BOYCE F. MARTIN, JR., Circuit Judge. (click title to entry - thank you) This is an appeal from the district court’s determination that the minimum coverage provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is constitutionally sound…
The standard for setting up requirements for insurance in society made precedent a long time ago with the demand for medical coverage to be placed in several forms in Auto Insurance. Heck, the Hartford now includes 'personal home care' as part of their package for AARP. This 'individual manidate' mess is just that. All the attorneys, or at least 99% of them that filed against the new law fall under 'one federal jurisdiction.' That should tell the country something.
The Plutocratic assault against the health care law became more obvious when Liberty University (a Christian Conservative institution) filed against the law on the demand that this was also a provision for companies to meet as well.
I do believe the Solicitor General is wrong when stating this would result in a mandate as to what Americans could eat. That is nonsense. Insurance and grocery shopping having nothing in common, except media hype. Such outrageous statements before a court are completely bizarre and play to 'the politics' and 'worse case scenarios.' In regard to food, there IS a federal agency ASSIGNED the responsibility to protect the American citizens from harm, it is called the FDA. But. to imply the federal government could act above that is hideous. It is the responsibility of the government to protect citizens from harm and exploitation. Making personal choices is frequently favored based in 'market pressures' in the USA, impacted by federal taxes, etc. That hardly is mandate for imposing federal 'grocery lists' to citizens.
...Today it is health insurance, and tomorrow it could be food, transportation, or housing," Staver says. "Big Brother would be able to be the CEO of every business and dictate our private choices....
...“Based on the oral argument in court today, (click here) it seems highly likely that the three-judge court will uphold the Affordable Care Act's individual responsibility provision. Like most federal district court decisions so far, it appears that the challenges to the new law will be rejected," said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, who supports the legislation....
This only proves, it is not the citizen at the heart of the attacks against the new health care law, but, also the Christian Right Wing and Wall Street CEOs. It is ridiculous. Citizens can't be protected from the 'exploits' of profit? They better be able to be protected otherwise the sovereignty of the country is in question.
The Plutocratic assault against the health care law became more obvious when Liberty University (a Christian Conservative institution) filed against the law on the demand that this was also a provision for companies to meet as well.
I do believe the Solicitor General is wrong when stating this would result in a mandate as to what Americans could eat. That is nonsense. Insurance and grocery shopping having nothing in common, except media hype. Such outrageous statements before a court are completely bizarre and play to 'the politics' and 'worse case scenarios.' In regard to food, there IS a federal agency ASSIGNED the responsibility to protect the American citizens from harm, it is called the FDA. But. to imply the federal government could act above that is hideous. It is the responsibility of the government to protect citizens from harm and exploitation. Making personal choices is frequently favored based in 'market pressures' in the USA, impacted by federal taxes, etc. That hardly is mandate for imposing federal 'grocery lists' to citizens.
...Today it is health insurance, and tomorrow it could be food, transportation, or housing," Staver says. "Big Brother would be able to be the CEO of every business and dictate our private choices....
...“Based on the oral argument in court today, (click here) it seems highly likely that the three-judge court will uphold the Affordable Care Act's individual responsibility provision. Like most federal district court decisions so far, it appears that the challenges to the new law will be rejected," said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, who supports the legislation....
This only proves, it is not the citizen at the heart of the attacks against the new health care law, but, also the Christian Right Wing and Wall Street CEOs. It is ridiculous. Citizens can't be protected from the 'exploits' of profit? They better be able to be protected otherwise the sovereignty of the country is in question.
