Scalia sets pecedent for insurance mandate

how you think you are not comparing them is beyond me...you're using one to justify the other....this is a loser argument nigel, the constitution specifically addresses militias, the power to create them...

I'm merely refuting a specific argument made in this thread, not offering a general argument in favor of the Affordable Care Act. You should be able to distinguish between those two things.

And while the Constitution refers to militias and their creation, there is nothing the Constitution that refers to Congress having the power to compel people to purchase equipment on their own dime for militia purposes. In fact, the Constitution specifically refers to the federal government providing for organizing and arming militias, not for individuals to provide for the militias on their own dime.


quite different from the h/c law...and tell me nigel...what was teh penalty if someone couldn't afford to buy their own arms/ammo? did congress ever discuss the issue of those too poor to purchase nigel? they are under the power of the POTUS who is in charge of the US military...they weren't regular military, but still under the authority of the POTUS and congress re training etc....


Why do penalties matter from a constitutional perspective? In any event, my understanding is that the penalty for failure to comply was a year's worth of wages. What difference does it make?

In the end, your point seems to be that it is OK for Congress to require people to purchase things in certain circumstances and I agree.
 
h/c is very different from the militias. there is no executive or legislative power to force someone to purchase h/c insurance, unlike the early use of war powers which are for the national defense.

You really should stop listening to Glenn Beck and Limbaugh. Or, you should at least do your own research before blindly accepting their propaganda.

President John Adams and the 5th Congress in 1798 created a law authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance.

Furthermore, the law authorized the President to use any surplus the government had from collecting this tax to purchase property on which to build maritime hospitals. "Strict constitutional constructionism" my ass. Limbaugh has been lying to you.


In July, 1798, Congress passed, and President John Adams signed into law “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen,” authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance.

This legislation also created America’s first payroll tax, as a ship’s owner was required to deduct 20 cents from each sailor’s monthly pay and forward those receipts to the service, which in turn provided injured sailors hospital care. Failure to pay or account properly was discouraged by requiring a law violating owner or ship's captain to pay a 100 dollar fine.




http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/1StatL605.pdf

CHAP. LXXVII – An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled -

That from and after the first day of September next, the master or owner of every ship

or vessel of the United States, arriving from a foreign port into any

port of the United States, shall, before such ship or vessel shall be

admitted to an entry, render to the collector a true account of the

number of seamen, that shall have been employed on board such vessel

since she was last entered at any port in the United States,-and shall

pay to the said collector, at the rate of twenty cents per month for every

seaman so employed; which sum he is hereby authorized to retain out

of the wages of such seamen.



SEC2. . And be it further enacted, That from and after the first day

of September next, no collector shall grant to any ship or vessel whose

enrolment or license for carrying on the coasting trade has expired, a

new enrolment or license before the master of such ship or vessel shall

first render a true account to the collector, of the number of seamen,

and the time they have severally been employed on board such ship or

vessel, during the continuance of the license which has so expired, and

pay to such collector twenty cents per month for every month such

seamen have been severally employed, as aforesaid; which sum the said

master is hereby authorized to retain out of the wages of such seamen.

And if any such master shall render a false account of the number of men, and the length of time they have severally been employed, as is

herein required, he shall forfeit and pay one hundred dollars.



SEC3. . And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the

several collectors to make a quarterly return of the sums collected by

them, respectively, by virtue of this act, to the Secretary of the Treasury;

and the President of the United States is hereby authorized, out of the same, to provide for the temporary relief and maintenance of sick or

disabled seamen, in the hospitals or other proper institutions now established

in the several ports of the United States, or, in ports where no

such institutions exist, then in such other manner as he shall direct:

Provided, that the monies collected in any one district, shall be expended

within the same.



SEC. 4. .And be it further enacted, That if any surplus shall remain

of the monies to be collected by virtue of this act, after defraying the

expense of such temporary relief and support, that the same, together ,

with such private donations as may be made for that purpose (which the

President is hereby authorized to receive) shall be invested in the stock

of the United States, under the direction of the President; and when,

in his opinion, a sufficient fund shall be accumulated, he is hereby

authorized to purchase or receive cessions or donations of ground or

provision for buildings, in the name of the United States, and to cause buildings,

when necessary, to be erected as hospitals for the accommodation of sick and disabled seamen.



SEC5. . And be it further enacted, That the President of the United

States be, and he is hereby authorized to nominate and appoint, in

such ports of the United States, as he may think proper, one or more

persons, to be called directors of the marine hospital of the United

States, whose duty it shall be to direct the expenditure of the fund

assigned for their respective ports, according to the third section of this

act; to provide for the accommodation of sick and disabled seamen,

under such general instructions as shall be given by, the President of

the United States, for that purpose, and also subject to the like general

instructions, to direct and govern such hospitals as the President may

direct to be built in the respective ports: and that the said directors

shall hold their offices during the pleasure of the President, who is

authorized to fill up all vacancies that may be occasioned by the death

or removal of any of the persons so to be appointed. And the said

directors shall render an account of the monies received and expended

by them, once in every quarter of a year, to the Secretary of the Treasury,

or such other person as the President shall direct; but no other

allowance or compensation shall be made to the said directors, except

the payment of such expenses as they may incur in the actual discharge

of the duties required by this act.



APPROVED July 16, 1798.
 
Originally Posted by Yurt
h/c is very different from the militias. there is no executive or legislative power to force someone to purchase h/c insurance, unlike the early use of war powers which are for the national defense.

You really should stop listening to Glenn Beck and Limbaugh. Or, you should at least do your own research before blindly accepting their propaganda.

President John Adams and the 5th Congress in 1798 created a law authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance.

Furthermore, the law authorized the President to use any surplus the government had from collecting this tax to purchase property on which to build maritime hospitals. "Strict constitutional constructionism" my ass. Limbaugh has been lying to you.

In July, 1798, Congress passed, and President John Adams signed into law “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen,” authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance.

This legislation also created America’s first payroll tax, as a ship’s owner was required to deduct 20 cents from each sailor’s monthly pay and forward those receipts to the service, which in turn provided injured sailors hospital care. Failure to pay or account properly was discouraged by requiring a law violating owner or ship's captain to pay a 100 dollar fine.



http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/1StatL605.pdf

CHAP. LXXVII – An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled -

That from and after the first day of September next, the master or owner of every ship

or vessel of the United States, arriving from a foreign port into any

port of the United States, shall, before such ship or vessel shall be

admitted to an entry, render to the collector a true account of the

number of seamen, that shall have been employed on board such vessel

since she was last entered at any port in the United States,-and shall

pay to the said collector, at the rate of twenty cents per month for every

seaman so employed; which sum he is hereby authorized to retain out

of the wages of such seamen.



SEC2. . And be it further enacted, That from and after the first day

of September next, no collector shall grant to any ship or vessel whose

enrolment or license for carrying on the coasting trade has expired, a

new enrolment or license before the master of such ship or vessel shall

first render a true account to the collector, of the number of seamen,

and the time they have severally been employed on board such ship or

vessel, during the continuance of the license which has so expired, and

pay to such collector twenty cents per month for every month such

seamen have been severally employed, as aforesaid; which sum the said

master is hereby authorized to retain out of the wages of such seamen.

And if any such master shall render a false account of the number of men, and the length of time they have severally been employed, as is

herein required, he shall forfeit and pay one hundred dollars.



SEC3. . And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the

several collectors to make a quarterly return of the sums collected by

them, respectively, by virtue of this act, to the Secretary of the Treasury;

and the President of the United States is hereby authorized, out of the same, to provide for the temporary relief and maintenance of sick or

disabled seamen, in the hospitals or other proper institutions now established

in the several ports of the United States, or, in ports where no

such institutions exist, then in such other manner as he shall direct:

Provided, that the monies collected in any one district, shall be expended

within the same.



SEC. 4. .And be it further enacted, That if any surplus shall remain

of the monies to be collected by virtue of this act, after defraying the

expense of such temporary relief and support, that the same, together ,

with such private donations as may be made for that purpose (which the

President is hereby authorized to receive) shall be invested in the stock

of the United States, under the direction of the President; and when,

in his opinion, a sufficient fund shall be accumulated, he is hereby

authorized to purchase or receive cessions or donations of ground or

provision for buildings, in the name of the United States, and to cause buildings,

when necessary, to be erected as hospitals for the accommodation of sick and disabled seamen.



SEC5. . And be it further enacted, That the President of the United

States be, and he is hereby authorized to nominate and appoint, in

such ports of the United States, as he may think proper, one or more

persons, to be called directors of the marine hospital of the United

States, whose duty it shall be to direct the expenditure of the fund

assigned for their respective ports, according to the third section of this

act; to provide for the accommodation of sick and disabled seamen,

under such general instructions as shall be given by, the President of

the United States, for that purpose, and also subject to the like general

instructions, to direct and govern such hospitals as the President may

direct to be built in the respective ports: and that the said directors

shall hold their offices during the pleasure of the President, who is

authorized to fill up all vacancies that may be occasioned by the death

or removal of any of the persons so to be appointed. And the said

directors shall render an account of the monies received and expended

by them, once in every quarter of a year, to the Secretary of the Treasury,

or such other person as the President shall direct; but no other

allowance or compensation shall be made to the said directors, except

the payment of such expenses as they may incur in the actual discharge

of the duties required by this act.



APPROVED July 16, 1798.


Excellent catch and provided informtion.

The anti-Obama crowd whirl like dervishes to try and find a reason to justify their crys of "foul" regarding healthcare reform. That one of their stalwart right winger allies on the SCOTUS inadvertently hands Obama a ruling that further cements the bills passage and legitimacy is just driving them to distraction.

But all this is moot meanderings anyway...because as I pointed out on another post, the federal gov't ALREADY REGULATES THE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES BY GRANTING THEM EXEMPTION FROM ANTI-TRUST LAWS. Seems the anti-Obama folk just don't realize that they can't have it both ways.
 
The right wing's inconsistencies on limited government do nothing but create precedent for more and more and government regulation in the market.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/mar/29/reform-backers-cite-court-ruling/

WASHINGTON – Defenders of the newly enacted national health care law and its rule that all Americans get health insurance have a powerful and recent Supreme Court precedent on their side, a 2005 ruling that upheld federal restrictions on home-grown marijuana in California.

At issue in that case, like the coming challenge to the health care mandate, was the reach of the federal government’s power.

Conservative Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy joined a 6-3 ruling that said Congress could regulate marijuana that was neither bought or sold on the market but rather grown at home legally for sick patients. They said the Constitution gave Congress nearly unlimited power to regulate the marketplace as part of its authority “to regulate commerce.” Even “non-economic local activity” can come under federal regulation if it is “a necessary part of a more general regulation of interstate commerce,” Scalia wrote.

Scalia has always been a supporter of a strong federal government.
 
Excellent catch and provided informtion.

The anti-Obama crowd whirl like dervishes to try and find a reason to justify their crys of "foul" regarding healthcare reform. That one of their stalwart right winger allies on the SCOTUS inadvertently hands Obama a ruling that further cements the bills passage and legitimacy is just driving them to distraction.

But all this is moot meanderings anyway...because as I pointed out on another post, the federal gov't ALREADY REGULATES THE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES BY GRANTING THEM EXEMPTION FROM ANTI-TRUST LAWS. Seems the anti-Obama folk just don't realize that they can't have it both ways.

:palm:

i've always been against those rules and so have other repubs...stop reading all your information from loony left wing sites and broaden your horizons
 
You really should stop listening to Glenn Beck and Limbaugh. Or, you should at least do your own research before blindly accepting their propaganda.

President John Adams and the 5th Congress in 1798 created a law authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance.

Furthermore, the law authorized the President to use any surplus the government had from collecting this tax to purchase property on which to build maritime hospitals. "Strict constitutional constructionism" my ass. Limbaugh has been lying to you.

you should really stop being such a dishonest hack. you didn't do your own research, you read this off of a left wing site...yet you accuse me getting my sources from two people i never listen to unless i happen to be extremely bored driving somewhere....

i suggest you research the act a little more, because its embarrassing you're trying to equate the two
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Excellent catch and provided informtion.

The anti-Obama crowd whirl like dervishes to try and find a reason to justify their crys of "foul" regarding healthcare reform. That one of their stalwart right winger allies on the SCOTUS inadvertently hands Obama a ruling that further cements the bills passage and legitimacy is just driving them to distraction.

But all this is moot meanderings anyway...because as I pointed out on another post, the federal gov't ALREADY REGULATES THE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES BY GRANTING THEM EXEMPTION FROM ANTI-TRUST LAWS. Seems the anti-Obama folk just don't realize that they can't have it both ways.

:palm:

i've always been against those rules and so have other repubs...stop reading all your information from loony left wing sites and broaden your horizons

So you're in FAVOR of a return of the days when monopolies stifled the "free enterprise" you neocons swear will solve all ills? Or are you in FAVOR of gov't regulation against monopolies? Make up your mind, because the healthcare insurance companies favor the former. Once you get your act together, we can continue.
 
So you're in FAVOR of a return of the days when monopolies stifled the "free enterprise" you neocons swear will solve all ills? Or are you in FAVOR of gov't regulation against monopolies? Make up your mind, because the healthcare insurance companies favor the former. Once you get your act together, we can continue.

get off the crack
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
So you're in FAVOR of a return of the days when monopolies stifled the "free enterprise" you neocons swear will solve all ills? Or are you in FAVOR of gov't regulation against monopolies? Make up your mind, because the healthcare insurance companies favor the former. Once you get your act together, we can continue.

get off the crack

Come on, Yurtle old thing.....someone with such strong convictions as you should be able to make a simple choice such as this. Come, come Yurt....no guts, no glory.
 
You really should stop listening to Glenn Beck and Limbaugh. Or, you should at least do your own research before blindly accepting their propaganda.

President John Adams and the 5th Congress in 1798 created a law authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance.

Furthermore, the law authorized the President to use any surplus the government had from collecting this tax to purchase property on which to build maritime hospitals. "Strict constitutional constructionism" my ass. Limbaugh has been lying to you.
It forces the employer to buy the insurance, for which they "can" deduct from your pay. This is pretty much exactly what most employers do for their employees, and did, well before Obamacare.
 
So you're in FAVOR of a return of the days when monopolies stifled the "free enterprise" you neocons swear will solve all ills? Or are you in FAVOR of gov't regulation against monopolies? Make up your mind, because the healthcare insurance companies favor the former. Once you get your act together, we can continue.

I think its funny that anyone who you disagree with is a neocon. you're such a tool.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
So you're in FAVOR of a return of the days when monopolies stifled the "free enterprise" you neocons swear will solve all ills? Or are you in FAVOR of gov't regulation against monopolies? Make up your mind, because the healthcare insurance companies favor the former. Once you get your act together, we can continue.

I think its funny that anyone who you disagree with is a neocon. you're such a tool.

So like Yurtle, YOU don't have the guts to answer a simple question either.
 
But at least he's not an emotional crybaby, like you. :cof1:

as i said, you are going to run all over the board whining about what happened today....and all you've done is prove me right

your obsession is disturbing. why don't you grow up, take it and move on you fucking whiner....but oh no, now the board is going to have to put up with you running all over and making stupid posts like this SOLELY because of me telling you that you were wrong in ANOTHER thread.
 
as i said, you are going to run all over the board whining about what happened today....and all you've done is prove me right

your obsession is disturbing. why don't you grow up, take it and move on you fucking whiner....but oh no, now the board is going to have to put up with you running all over and making stupid posts like this SOLELY because of me telling you that you were wrong in ANOTHER thread.

DAMN; here you are, still whining.

GAWD you cry a lot, for someone who professes to be male.
Are you EMO, not that there's anything wrong with that??
 
Back
Top