Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Federal Judge In D.C. Upholds Health Care Reform, Says Some Arguments 'Ignore Reality'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 08:00 PM
Original message
Federal Judge In D.C. Upholds Health Care Reform, Says Some Arguments 'Ignore Reality'
Federal Judge In D.C. Upholds Health Care Reform, Says Some Arguments 'Ignore Reality'
Ryan J. Reilly | February 22, 2011, 7:51PM

A federal judge on Tuesday upheld the health care reform law signed last year by President Barack Obama and found that Congress had the clear authority to regulate health insurance under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler's 64-page ruling (below) takes aim at the argument espoused by many conservatives which holds that the passive act of not purchasing health insurance does not constitute an activity that can be regulated under the Commerce Clause.

"It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance is not 'acting,' especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice," Kessler writes. "Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality."

Kessler, however, rejected the argument that Congress had the authority to enact the Affordable Care Act under the General Welfare Clause because Congress "did not intend to operate as a tax."

<SNIP>

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/federal-judge-in-dc-upholds-health-care-reform-says-some-arguments-ignore-reality.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yep and it is very obvious how weak the arguments are and how
politically motivated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
2. A whole new can of worms here:
Kessler, however, rejected the argument that Congress had the authority to enact the Affordable Care Act under the General Welfare Clause because Congress "did not intend to operate as a tax."


If I read this correctly - it's saying it became a law with an improper procedure (majority votes) instead of the 60 votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. If you read the decision...
Edited on Tue Feb-22-11 08:50 PM by boppers
There are multiple clauses that were invoked.... Commerce, Necessary and Proper, and General Welfare.

Jump to page 26 if you don't want to read the whole thing.

edit: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. No. Simply put, this judge does not agree with using that provision as legal rationale for the law.
No big deal. The Commerce Clause will carry the day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-11 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 04:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC