The following is an update to my previous post, but it is so good, it deserves it's own section of the blogosphere.
As you may know, especially after my last post, I do not agree with the Affordable Care Act (aka, Obama Care or Socialism In A Can). I've attempted to relay that sentiment at times, but sometimes other people say it better.
In this case, the judges from the 11th Circuit Court have said it magnificently. Why reinvent the wheel? Especially if you have other things to do.
The Court wrote, "The government's position amounts to an argument that the mere fact of an individual's existence substantially affects interstate commerce, and therefore Congress may regulate them at every point of their life. This theory affords no limiting principles in which to confine Congress's enumerated power."
In other words, if the White House's and Congress's view on this hold, it can force individuals to enter contracts with private companies from birth to death. In other words, there are no longer any limits on what Congress can do.
The Court continues, "Every day, Americans decide what products to buy, where to invest or save, and how to pay for future contingencies such as their retirement, their children's education, and their health care. The government contends that embedded in the Commerce Clause is the power to override these ordinary decisions and redirect those funds to other purposes."
The government has never claimed a power like this in the form of an individual mandate. The Obama administration claims that health care is somehow inherently different from other economic decisions. The 11th Circuit retorts that these claims are "ad hoc, devoid of constitutional substance, incapable of judicial administration--and consequently, illusory....they are not limiting principles, but limiting circumstances...(that) imperil our federalist structure."
I'm not quite sure what that means, but I think they are saying the former law professor who is now the President should just teach law, not practice it.
As you may know, especially after my last post, I do not agree with the Affordable Care Act (aka, Obama Care or Socialism In A Can). I've attempted to relay that sentiment at times, but sometimes other people say it better.
In this case, the judges from the 11th Circuit Court have said it magnificently. Why reinvent the wheel? Especially if you have other things to do.
The Court wrote, "The government's position amounts to an argument that the mere fact of an individual's existence substantially affects interstate commerce, and therefore Congress may regulate them at every point of their life. This theory affords no limiting principles in which to confine Congress's enumerated power."
In other words, if the White House's and Congress's view on this hold, it can force individuals to enter contracts with private companies from birth to death. In other words, there are no longer any limits on what Congress can do.
The Court continues, "Every day, Americans decide what products to buy, where to invest or save, and how to pay for future contingencies such as their retirement, their children's education, and their health care. The government contends that embedded in the Commerce Clause is the power to override these ordinary decisions and redirect those funds to other purposes."
The government has never claimed a power like this in the form of an individual mandate. The Obama administration claims that health care is somehow inherently different from other economic decisions. The 11th Circuit retorts that these claims are "ad hoc, devoid of constitutional substance, incapable of judicial administration--and consequently, illusory....they are not limiting principles, but limiting circumstances...(that) imperil our federalist structure."
I'm not quite sure what that means, but I think they are saying the former law professor who is now the President should just teach law, not practice it.
No comments:
Post a Comment