2011-02-24, 07:11 AM
^^^ Rationalizing the creation of a bill outside of Congress's power by using comparisons to life threatening illness and other such extremes ^^^
I would hope that people would be swift to kill stuff that is unconstitutional! I don't hate "Obamacare" (I prefer to just call it "the new health care bill"), but if Congress is overstepping its bounds and forcing us to do something which is not allowed by the Commerce clause I would want the government to be put in its place regardless of how good or not the bill is for the people.
The constitution is a contract with the people. You don't go around pushing the meaning the contract even if it's good for the people. That's bad business and bad governance. If you want to change the scope of government - fine, change the contract. But don't go pushing the limits of what the contract states. Otherwise, we common peoplefolk don't know what can be expected from our government as the rules set forth by the constitution are pushed and pushed into meaninglessness.
If it ends up being considered constitutional, I'm fine with that. If it's not constitutional, rip that part out and start over again. By the time its constitutionality is considered Republicans might have another majority in both houses of Congress considering how the previous election went. Then we'll see if they really can design a health care law that is fair and responds well to natural market forces.
I would hope that people would be swift to kill stuff that is unconstitutional! I don't hate "Obamacare" (I prefer to just call it "the new health care bill"), but if Congress is overstepping its bounds and forcing us to do something which is not allowed by the Commerce clause I would want the government to be put in its place regardless of how good or not the bill is for the people.
The constitution is a contract with the people. You don't go around pushing the meaning the contract even if it's good for the people. That's bad business and bad governance. If you want to change the scope of government - fine, change the contract. But don't go pushing the limits of what the contract states. Otherwise, we common peoplefolk don't know what can be expected from our government as the rules set forth by the constitution are pushed and pushed into meaninglessness.
If it ends up being considered constitutional, I'm fine with that. If it's not constitutional, rip that part out and start over again. By the time its constitutionality is considered Republicans might have another majority in both houses of Congress considering how the previous election went. Then we'll see if they really can design a health care law that is fair and responds well to natural market forces.