Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 10/22/2009 View Wed 10/21/2009 View Tue 10/20/2009 View Mon 10/19/2009 View Sun 10/18/2009 View Sat 10/17/2009 View Fri 10/16/2009
1
2009-10-22 Home Front: Politix
Hoyer Says Constitution's 'General Welfare' Clause Empowers Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Fred 2009-10-22 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11133 views ]  Top

#1 ION NEWSMAX > BIDEN DECLARES US IS IN A DEPRESSION, + GREGGS: US COULD BECOME A BANANA REPUBLIC.
Posted by JosephMendiola">JosephMendiola  2009-10-22 03:02|| na]">[na]  2009-10-22 03:02|| Front Page Top

#2 Buying health insurance sounds more like "Specific Welfare" to me. I don't see how my neighbor having health insurance improves my personal welfare. And I don't count the resulting increased taxes as detrimental to my welfare.
Posted by gorb 2009-10-22 03:10||   2009-10-22 03:10|| Front Page Top

#3 We don't mandate that they buy a particular insurance [policy] >

And what must he call the Government "mandated" Social Security and Medicare schemes?
Posted by Besoeker 2009-10-22 05:07||   2009-10-22 05:07|| Front Page Top

#4 His thought process is not his fault,as a child,tragically,Steny Hoyer was dropped on his head. Symptoms of this event manifest themselves in adulthood, with the person having short to medium bouts of irrational thinking, hyperactivity and exaggerated feelings of importance. Further, scientific evaluation of the Dropped on Head Syndrome*(DOH) indicates some common traits amongst the group. Generally as adults, these people have short attention spans, misinterpret commonly held social or legal beliefs,join the Democratic Party,and drive Volvos.
Posted by Helmuth, Speaking for Flomotch5971 2009-10-22 06:28||   2009-10-22 06:28|| Front Page Top

#5 Helmuth...while none is actually needed, to further prove you Volvo hypothosis the following link is provided.

LINK
Posted by Besoeker 2009-10-22 06:53||   2009-10-22 06:53|| Front Page Top

#6 I', actually partial to this point of view (as long as you are allowed to have ANY sized excess you like, which discounts costs amazingly).

The uninsured when they get ill tend to still get treatment at a cost born by others.

Might be fun to mandate all travellers in the country have insurance, and add an legal right to be in the country check to insurance...

Then you could kick out illegals who don't have insurance.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2009-10-22 07:23||   2009-10-22 07:23|| Front Page Top

#7 the insurance mandate could possibly be constitutional via the interstate commerce clause rather than the gen welfare clause

Posted by lord garth 2009-10-22 07:27||   2009-10-22 07:27|| Front Page Top

#8 the only thing the GIvernment should require any American to purchase is a gun. It will fulfill both the 'welfare clause' and the 2nd amendment.
Posted by airandee 2009-10-22 07:51||   2009-10-22 07:51|| Front Page Top

#9 There ain't no general welfare "clause" - that's in the preamble, not the body of the Constitution. Legally, I don't think it flies (though I'm not a lawyer). Not that that would stop Congress from passing stupid laws.
Posted by Spot">Spot  2009-10-22 08:11||   2009-10-22 08:11|| Front Page Top

#10 in article 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 Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

the ic clause is later in the same section

"[The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;"
Posted by lord garth 2009-10-22 08:53||   2009-10-22 08:53|| Front Page Top

#11 Thats article 1

sorry
Posted by lord garth 2009-10-22 08:54||   2009-10-22 08:54|| Front Page Top

#12 Lord Garth - So they can levy taxes from the general welfare clause, I don't see anything there about compulsory product purchases.
Posted by Skunky Angeack7024 2009-10-22 09:08||   2009-10-22 09:08|| Front Page Top

#13 skunky,

I think there is a chance that the GW clause could apply but I'm almost certain that the IC clause would apply

in any event, it is far better to defeat bad policy by showing it is bad policy than to rely on a constitutional test which would occur years down the road
Posted by lord garth 2009-10-22 09:39||   2009-10-22 09:39|| Front Page Top

#14 Then you could kick out illegals who don't have insurance.

Hey, BP, I think you just figured out how to pay for public health care! :-)

But creating a problem just to use it as a bargaining chip to push another problem through is not my idea of legal, or good governance.
Posted by gorb 2009-10-22 09:42||   2009-10-22 09:42|| Front Page Top

#15 This happens to be the only clause these fools want to use or back in the Constitution. What is not understood is it means nothing of the sort that they believe it does.

Nowhere in the Constitution is a welfare state authorized.

I believe it would be in the "general welfare" of our country to dipose and imprision this congress for violating their oath to "protect and defend".

General welfare IS not a free ride or ticket to play robin hood with American taxpayers. It is merely and additional clause that proposes intent to ONLY be used to protect the other powers in the Constitution you illeterate fu@&s.
Posted by newc">newc  2009-10-22 09:44||   2009-10-22 09:44|| Front Page Top

#16 We don't mandate that they buy a particular insurance [policy] but what we do mandate is that like driving a car -- if you're going to drive a car, to protect people on the roadway, and yourself, and the public for having to pay your expenses if you get hurt badly -- that you need to have insurance," said Hoyer.

By this logic the Fed should be mandating all citizens own a car, drive a car and pay insurance on the car.
Posted by BrerRabbit 2009-10-22 09:44||   2009-10-22 09:44|| Front Page Top

#17 He added that Congress has "broad authority" to force Americans to purchase other things as well, so long as it was trying to promote "the general welfare."

These guys are just unbelievable. Let's see, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are about broke. The financial bailout didn't work out too well. Job creation is not going well. Deregulation of the financial industry on the Clinton watch didn't go too well. The concept that everyone should be able to buy a house with no money down, and no money to pay didn't work out well. So why should anyone listen to what Steny Hoyer has to say. It's about time for the American people to leash these guys and pull hard on the leash.
Posted by JohnQC 2009-10-22 09:45||   2009-10-22 09:45|| Front Page Top

#18 My bad. Thanks for the edumacation, LG.
Posted by Spot">Spot  2009-10-22 09:59||   2009-10-22 09:59|| Front Page Top

#19 “…if you're going to drive a car, to protect people on the roadway, and yourself, and the public for having to pay your expenses if you get hurt badly --.”

Whenever the proponents for mandatory health care insurance use the auto insurance analogy they come off as either hustlers or fools. Usually the case is both, however, it’s obvious that Hoyer intentionally seeks to confuse the rubes. Auto insurance mandates are exclusively for the segment of the population that either own or operate motor vehicles – not the entire population. By using this logic, one could argue that everyone should be required to purchase flood insurance. After all, the rising cost of home-owners insurance can be directly attributed to the segment of the population that continue to build in flood plains or are victims of natural disaster. Moreover, by using the “Emergency Room Cunard” a portion of tax-payer dollars already go towards flood relief, rebuilding, and low interest loans. Presto…General Welfare!
Posted by DepotGuy 2009-10-22 10:10||   2009-10-22 10:10|| Front Page Top

#20 Hoyer's argument flies in the face of the Tenth Amendment.
Posted by Black Bart Ebberens7700 2009-10-22 11:26||   2009-10-22 11:26|| Front Page Top

#21 Uh, Sten, it says promote the general welfare, not inflict it.
Posted by SteveS 2009-10-22 12:58||   2009-10-22 12:58|| Front Page Top

#22  If Social Security and Medicare are programs in accordance with the Constitution, then mandated health insurance for the rest of the population would be also. Whether you or I like it or not. Sometimes I wish I had legal training.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2009-10-22 13:21||   2009-10-22 13:21|| Front Page Top

#23 While I personally believe this mandate would violate the 10th Amendment it does seem considerably less un-Constitutional than a whole lot of other laws the Supreme Court has let stand over the past century.
Posted by Glenmore 2009-10-22 16:54||   2009-10-22 16:54|| Front Page Top

#24 If we allow this, the government has UNLIMITED power. They can just pick someone, shoot them, and it's for "the general welfare."
Posted by Maggie Ebbuter2991 2009-10-22 18:12||   2009-10-22 18:12|| Front Page Top

#25 Sometimes I wish I had legal training. Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418

I don't know, legal training seems to destroy the part of the brain that manages common sense. I'm beginning to wish the military had provided me with sniper training.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2009-10-22 18:15|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]  2009-10-22 18:15|| Front Page Top

#26 Car insurance is the worst analogy ever for federally mandating health insurance. Car insurance is a state law.
Posted by Mike N. 2009-10-22 18:58||   2009-10-22 18:58|| Front Page Top

#27 By this logic the Fed should be mandating all citizens own a car, drive a car and pay insurance on the car.

BrerRabbit is exactly right. To own and drive a car is a privilege in this country, not a right. It's pretty simple really; if you don't want to pay auto insurance, don't own a car. The auto insurance analogy is a simplistic one and flawed on a couple of levels. Of course, the geniuses in DC can't seem to grasp such simple truths. Someone really needs to go down there with a cluebat and start swinging for the fences.
Posted by eltoroverde 2009-10-22 20:56||   2009-10-22 20:56|| Front Page Top

23:38 gorb
23:27 JosephMendiola
23:24 JosephMendiola
23:21 gromky
23:20 gromky
23:19 JosephMendiola
23:18 JosephMendiola
23:03 Redneck Jim
23:02 USN, Ret.
22:54 USN, Ret.
22:53 Redneck Jim
22:33 Thing From Snowy Mountain
22:29 Alaska Paul
22:25 Matt
22:24 Eric Jablow
22:18 GirlThursday
22:13 Alaska Paul
22:07 GirlThursday
21:19 DMFD
21:18 Barbara Skolaut
21:12 eltoroverde
21:04 lotp
20:57 Anonymoose
20:56 eltoroverde









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com