BASS BARN banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
.

Those who support and defend our written Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, and who especially support our Constitution’s Tenth Amendment and federalism, certainly know our federal government has not be granted any authority whatsoever to enter the states to tax for, spend on, regulate and control the peoples' decisions and choices regarding their health-care needs. Keep in mind, however, that our federal government does have a legitimate responsibility to care for our military war veterans.


So, what is the proper path to follow? President Trump ought to promote legislation which repeals and replaces Obamacare with nothing! The legislation ought to first declare that in view of our federal government’s defined and limited powers, and that under the 10th Amendment all power not delegated to our federal government are reserved to the states and people therein, that Congress is not authorized to enter the States to tax for, spend on and regulate the people’s decisions and choices regarding their health-care needs.


The proposal ought to continue by setting a specific date, such as January 1st, 2018, when the federal government will no longer tax for, spend on nor regulate the people’s decisions regarding the health-care needs.


In addition, the legislation must also stipulate that the federal government will reduce federal taxes, across the board, by the amount now spent on Medicaid and subsidies to the poor, leaving that money within the States so each State may have access to these funds in order to deal with their own poor and needy who now rely upon federal assistance for their health-care


This of course is very much in harmony with our Founders intentions which are summarized in Federalist No. 45:


“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.


The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”



And with regard to Congress’ legitimate power to regulate commerce among the states to insure free trade and competition among the States, The McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 ought to be repealed by the proposed legislation, which would go a long way to end price fixing, restraint of interstate trade and commerce, and a monopolizing of the insurance industry, which has without question allowed the cost of health insurance to skyrocket over the years.


Let us work to return to our founding principles, especially the Tenth Amendment and federalism, our Constitution’s plan.


JWK




"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides, that such protection was afforded [the 10th amendment], would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"
___ Justice Story
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62,424 Posts
So if they replace it with nothing, and then people with preexisting conditions die as a result, do you seriously believe that is going to fly?

Seriously, people care far more about their lives than they do what we "think" the Founders wanted when they wrote the Constitution 240 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,320 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
So if they replace it with nothing, and then people with preexisting conditions die as a result, do you seriously believe that is going to fly?

.
It simply becomes the State's problem. Do you have a problem with that?


JWK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62,424 Posts
It simply becomes the State's problem. Do you have a problem with that? JWK
If it's my family member that dies in the transition, then yes.

If ObamaCare is sooooooooooooooooo terrible (and it is), then they should be able to replace it with something better.

And if that "something" is a law that makes it be a state by state problem, with regulations that don't let people fall through the cracks and die, then so much the better.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,514 Posts
Replacing ObamaCare with nothing would be a PR and political disaster for the Trump Administration. There's no need for that. Sen. Tom Price (as well as others) has some proposals that should be considered including addressing pre-existing conditions, expanding health savings accounts, and allowing insurance across state lines. His plan also eliminates the standard set of benefits dictated by ObamaCare. Nothing isn't a viable option IMO.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,514 Posts
The "nothing" which you suggest is not a "viable option", is in fact the people within the various States, being left free to deal with "health care".
And IMO that's not "a viable option" for the Trump Administration for PR and political reasons. We'll see if the Trump Administration decide otherwise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
We need to terminate the Washington Establishment Welfare Cartel

And IMO that's not "a viable option" for the Trump Administration for PR and political reasons. We'll see if the Trump Administration decide otherwise.
I believe our federal government now spends approximately $950 Billion on “health-care” [Medicaid, CHIP, Medicare, and Obamacare subsidies]. I see nothing wrong with reducing federal taxes by that amount, leaving this money within the States, which in turn allows the States and people therein to deal with “health-care” as they individually see fit. Just imagine the enormous saving from doing this ___ no more federal bureaucracy employees who now get outrageous salaries and pensions which hard working American citizens are taxed to finance. We need to rid ourselves of this federal welfare parasitic Cartel which lives large on the American taxpayer’s hard earned wages.


JWK

Our Washington Establishment welfare cartel, which has enslaved the American People, needs to be terminated, and powers not granted to the federal government must be returned the states and people therein.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76,198 Posts
Replacing ObamaCare with nothing would be a PR and political disaster for the Trump Administration. There's no need for that. Sen. Tom Price (as well as others) has some proposals that should be considered including addressing pre-existing conditions, expanding health savings accounts, and allowing insurance across state lines. His plan also eliminates the standard set of benefits dictated by ObamaCare. Nothing isn't a viable option IMO.
Have to agree with that. Once it was given out it cannot be taken away. Now it must be fixed with something that minimizes the pain to those who support ($$$) it. IMO the HC providers (Hospitals, Pharma, etc.) need to be challenged as well.
IMO we may not be able to give everyone the same level of HC. Welcome to Elysium…
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62,424 Posts
I believe our federal government now spends approximately $950 Billion on “health-care” [Medicaid, CHIP, Medicare, and Obamacare subsidies]. I see nothing wrong with reducing federal taxes by that amount, leaving this money within the States, which in turn allows the States and people therein to deal with “health-care” as they individually see fit. Just imagine the enormous saving from doing this ___ no more federal bureaucracy employees who now get outrageous salaries and pensions which hard working American citizens are taxed to finance. We need to rid ourselves of this federal welfare parasitic Cartel which lives large on the American taxpayer’s hard earned wages......
The above could be a great idea, but it's not what Trump ran on or got elected on. He needs to do what he said, and the next POTUS could run on your idea.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,850 Posts
It's my belief that Trump has no intention of replacing Obama care with another form of government run healthcare. It appears that a federally mandated set of rules like acceptance of preexisting conditions and elimination of individual state mandates which create monopolies for certain providers can pave the way for private insurers to compete
I also expect to see tort reform included within the federal guidelines. A free market solution is the best way to insure the lowest cost for health insurance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I believe our federal government now spends approximately $950 Billion on “health-care” [Medicaid, CHIP, Medicare, and Obamacare subsidies]. I see nothing wrong with reducing federal taxes by that amount, leaving this money within the States, which in turn allows the States and people therein to deal with “health-care” as they individually see fit. Just imagine the enormous saving from doing this ___ no more federal bureaucracy employees who now get outrageous salaries and pensions which hard working American citizens are taxed to finance. We need to rid ourselves of this federal welfare parasitic Cartel which lives large on the American taxpayer’s hard earned wages.

The above could be a great idea, but it's not what Trump ran on or got elected on. He needs to do what he said, and the next POTUS could run on your idea.

I do recall Trump embracing federalism and the Tenth Amendment.



JWK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
A repeal of the McCarran-Ferguson Act is essental for heath insurance reform

It's my belief that Trump has no intention of replacing Obama care with another form of government run healthcare. It appears that a federally mandated set of rules like acceptance of preexisting conditions and elimination of individual state mandates which create monopolies for certain providers can pave the way for private insurers to compete
I also expect to see tort reform included within the federal guidelines. A free market solution is the best way to insure the lowest cost for health insurance.
A repeal of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 needs to be part of any Obamacare reform!

I know the following is a bit long, but it is essential to be familiar with to understand our current situation and federal control over our decisions and choices regarding our health-care needs.

I have long stated that part of health insurance reform starts with a repeal of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945. Let me give you the background.

As a result of a Senate investigation in 1888-1889 which found a number of Trusts [sugar, beef, oil] were interfering with free trade among the States, the Sherman Anti Trust Act was passed to “protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies.” But the Act remained, as noted by Supreme Court Justice Harlan, “a piece of useless legislation.”



But in the mid 1940’s a criminal indictment was handed down charging 27 individuals with violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Some of the specific allegations were conspiracy, price fixing, restraint of interstate trade and commerce, and monopolizing trade and commerce. Please keep these charges in mind because they are very pertinent to our current situation and seem to reflect what folks in government have been engaged in. The defendants in the case claimed they were not required to conform to the standards of business conduct established by the Sherman Act because “the business of fire insurance is not commerce.” But the Supreme Court decided the insurance business was in fact commerce and subject to the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and Congress’s regulations. See SOUTH-EASTERN UNDERWRITERS ASSOCIATION, Decided June 5, 1944


Less than a year after the Supreme Court decision was handed down, Congress passed the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 providing that the “business of insurance, and every person engaged therein, shall be subject to the laws of the several States which relate to the regulation or taxation of such business.” In other words Congress decides to overrule the Court’s decision and relinquish its constitutionally assigned duty to regulate commerce “among the States”, but only with regard to the insurance industry! And by neglecting this power the various State Legislatures are allowed to engage in practices which would otherwise be indictable offenses under the Sherman and Clayton Acts, and so, the various State Legislatures decide to engage in such practices e.g., adopting discriminatory laws which work to stifle competition from out-of-state companies (restraint of interstate trade and commerce).


The power of a State Legislature to impose discriminatory law upon out of state business entities doing business within their state is immediately tested in PRUDENTIAL INS. CO. vs. BENJAMIN (1946). The South Carolina law is upheld by the Supreme Court. The law imposed an annual tax of 3 percent of the premiums of out of state business entities conducted in South Carolina which is not imposed on instate business entities. In fact, the Court in handing down its decision ignored the very intentions for which Congress was granted power to regulate commerce among the states, which was to prohibit the various states from imposing discriminatory law upon out of state entities and undermine free trade among the States.


But what is most amazing, when one realizes it, the defendants in the SOUTH-EASTERN UNDERWRITERSASSOCIATION case were charged with conspiracy in price fixing, restraint of interstate trade and commerce, and monopolizing trade and commerce. Well, with Congress’s behind-the-scene deal making in 1945, the McCarran-Ferguson Act was passed and paved the way for the various Sate Legislatures to “legally” engage in price fixing, restraint of interstate trade and commerce, and monopolizing the insurance industry within their borders, which are indictable offenses under SOUTH-EASTERN UNDERWRITERSASSOCIATION


And now comes Obamacare which in fact is designed to engage in price fixing, restraint of interstate trade and commerce, and monopolizing the insurance industry on a federal level! Are these not indictable offenses under SOUTH-EASTERN-UNDERWRITERS-ASSOCIATION?



You be the judge!

JWK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,717 Posts
So if they replace it with nothing, and then people with preexisting conditions die as a result, do you seriously believe that is going to fly?

Seriously, people care far more about their lives than they do what we "think" the Founders wanted when they wrote the Constitution 240 years ago.
Let's be very clear.

Those with preexisting conditions are not looking for health "insurance." They're looking for charity to deal with a misfortune that has already occurred.

You can't buy car insurance AFTER the accident.

You can't buy homeowners' insurance AFTER the fire.

You can't buy life insurance AFTER you croak.

Those with preexisting conditions do need help. But that help is NOT "insurance" in any sense of the word.:huh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,316 Posts
Have to agree with that. Once it was given out it cannot be taken away. Now it must be fixed with something that minimizes the pain to those who support ($$$) it. IMO the HC providers (Hospitals, Pharma, etc.) need to be challenged as well.
IMO we may not be able to give everyone the same level of HC. Welcome to Elysium…
I think the genie has been let out of the bottle. The opportunity for an outright repeal and abandonment passed when the first uninsured people received coverage. At this point it's more about managing and controlling the newest entitlement. The hospitals, pharma, providers & insurers have little incentive to change anything.

If healthcare does get kicked back to the states, and receives federal dollars, there will be some minimum mandates. Then if states wish to increase coverage it will be on them to pay for it. What I don't like about that, is in many states we will quickly see the people vote themselves additional benefits when politicians offer them and claim the rich will pay for it. Next thing you know, we're back where we started.

We already have Elysium. The filth in washington excluded itself from obamacare and has excellent taxpayer-funded healthcare.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62,424 Posts
I do recall Trump embracing federalism and the Tenth Amendment.JWK
Not when it comes to health care he didn't. He very clearly ran on a platform of "repeal and replace."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,717 Posts
I think the genie has been let out of the bottle. The opportunity for an outright repeal and abandonment passed when the first uninsured people received coverage. At this point it's more about managing and controlling the newest entitlement. The hospitals, pharma, providers & insurers have little incentive to change anything.

If healthcare does get kicked back to the states, and receives federal dollars, there will be some minimum mandates. Then if states wish to increase coverage it will be on them to pay for it. What I don't like about that, is in many states we will quickly see the people vote themselves additional benefits when politicians offer them and claim the rich will pay for it. Next thing you know, we're back where we started.

We already have Elysium. The filth in washington excluded itself from obamacare and has excellent taxpayer-funded healthcare.
I agree.

Obama's legacy is not going to be ObamaCare.

It IS going to be the idea that the federal government is responsible for EVERYBODY'S health care....cradle to grave.:nuts:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,044 Posts
john.... I could not help but notice in your earlier post that you included Medicare & Medicaid with the CHIP & Obamacare programs. What would be your suggestion as it relates to those programs ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Let's get rid of our federal welfare parasitic Cartel and observe the Tenth Amendment

john.... I could not help but notice in your earlier post that you included Medicare & Medicaid with the CHIP & Obamacare programs. What would be your suggestion as it relates to those programs ?

I believe our federal government now spends approximately $950 Billion on “health-care” [Medicaid, CHIP, Medicare, and Obamacare subsidies]. I see nothing wrong with, and to be in compliance with our Constitution's defined and limited powers and the Tenth Amendment, to reduce federal taxes by that amount, leaving this money within the States, which in turn allows the States and people therein to deal with “health-care” as they individually see fit and as how our Constitution commands. Just imagine the enormous saving from doing this ___ no more federal bureaucracy employees who now get outrageous salaries and pensions which hard working American citizens are taxed to finance. We need to rid ourselves of this federal welfare parasitic Cartel which lives large on the American taxpayer’s hard earned wages.


JWK





The American People need to rid themselves of the Washington Establishment welfare cartel which has enslaved them, and return powers to the States and people therein which are not granted to the federal government.



 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top