Quantcast

Who else is going looting?!?!??!?!

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Democracy has collapsed!!

Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Im gonna go rapid fire some amunition into the sky and then load up on plasmas. See you pussies later! Fags.
 

DamienC

Turbo Monkey
Jun 6, 2002
1,165
0
DC
Good morning comrades. I would love to stay and chat but I'm late for my first death panel meeting to decide which of my elderly neighbors gets "retired" first. Then off to the bread ration line! I hope they scan the bar code on my forehead correctly this time.
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
21,521
7,074
Colorado
Given that 10 states just sued the federal government for forcing liabilities onto them makes me think that there are a large number of people that don't want this...
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,241
20,025
Sleazattle
So ten states are suing over a bill that hasn't been passed yet? Sounds more like ten states need to go back to law school.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Given that 10 states just sued the federal government for forcing liabilities onto them makes me think that there are a large number of people that don't want this...
That would make you think that.




I haven't even looked...... just let me guess


Louisianna
Texas
Alabama
Kentucky
Idaho
Arizona
Oklahoma
Kansas
......hmmm....maybe a montana in there but not so sure, could be a dakota
Missouri
Probably an Iowa-ish state as well


How many did I get?

And why do you think those would be my guesses?
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,373
0
SF
Given that 10 states just sued the federal government for forcing liabilities onto them makes me think that there are a large number of people that don't want this...
I noticed that reconciliation was used to push through 3 budgets under Dubya and almost got Alaskan oil drilling attached to the last budget.

No complaints then. I never heard of reconciliation and its threat to our freedom until Republicans screamed bloody murder about giving hc to the uninsured.

I'm sure this is more political grandstanding...
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,241
20,025
Sleazattle
That would make you think that.




I haven't even looked...... just let me guess


Louisianna
Texas
Alabama
Kentucky
Idaho
Arizona
Oklahoma
Kansas
......hmmm....maybe a montana in there but not so sure, could be a dakota
Missouri
Probably an Iowa-ish state as well


How many did I get?

And why do you think those would be my guesses?

Actually I think Virginia is on the list of those state who 'want' to. And as far as the state wanting to it is the State Attorney General. The same wing-nut AG who recently proclaimed that it was illegal for Va State Universities to Not discriminate because of sexual orientation because no bill was passed by the state legislatures specifically stating so. We are not talking about affirmative action for gays but basically allowing or even encouraging anyone in the hiring/admissions process to discriminate.

He was eventually fed a steaming cup of STFU by his wing-nut boss/governor when the public got pissed off.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
In a few years, the joker will be paying for my health insurance!!!

I'm going to go try 720s at the dirtjumps as soon as it happens. I'm on a free ride to success!!
What's funny is that he *might* be the only person on this board making $250k+ and so be affected by the tax increase, although I could be wrong. If he is, I'm going to quit my job and work 2 crappy low-end minimum wage jobs to ensure that I'm one of those slackers without health insurance and somewhere in the 100-400% of the poverty line. I figure that it'll only take about 60-70 hours of work per week for me to be a shiftless lazy bum who can leach off of the hard work of others! :thumb:
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
If organ harvesting counts as looting, I'm already in it, brother.

I won't let Obama send Jude Law to hunt down my liver.
 

X3pilot

Texans fan - LOL
Aug 13, 2007
5,860
1
SoMD
Given that 10 states just sued the federal government for forcing liabilities onto them makes me think that there are a large number of people that don't want this...
Just playing the dumb hick here, but I'm pretty sure that they can't sue yet because it isn't officially law yet. And when they do, it can't be on the basis of states rights, because the supremacy clause limits states challenges to federal law that is passed and administered withing the framework of the Constitution and federal law of that nature is considered supreme law of the land. The only challenges will have to be brought based on individual injury or hardship of a citizen or limited group of citizens and considering that the first effect of the HR will not take place until 2014, any law suits brought before that by states will most likely be considered frivolous in the eyes of the federal courts.

Just theorizing.
 

Squeak

Get your pork here.
Sep 26, 2001
1,546
0
COlo style
Heard a Rep. Attorney General say on NPR that they are suing based on the constitutionality of the bill (that is the only way they can). Apparently, they are claiming that it is the act of forcing people to "purchase" something is not constitutional. A "commerce clause" in a supreme court case about some farmer and wheat.

ahh here is a link (not the best but i am lazy)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203917304574412793406386548.html

Anyway, I was all smiles today at work with all the right wing insurance people were fit to be tied, and ready to revolt against the commies, atheists, pinko's and homosexuals. I have listened to their crap for months, and its nice to see them eat crow.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
Heard a Rep. Attorney General say on NPR that they are suing based on the constitutionality of the bill (that is the only way they can). Apparently, they are claiming that it is the act of forcing people to "purchase" something is not constitutional. A "commerce clause" in a supreme court case about some farmer and wheat.

ahh here is a link (not the best but i am lazy)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203917304574412793406386548.html

Anyway, I was all smiles today at work with all the right wing insurance people were fit to be tied, and ready to revolt against the commies, atheists, pinko's and homosexuals. I have listened to their crap for months, and its nice to see them eat crow.
So I was actually looking into the Constitutionality of this last night (arguing with a friend of a friend on FB), and at best it would be unclear. The Congress has the right to tax people any and every way they want:

Amendment 16: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
So that right there means that they could impose a tax on people that don't have health care. Furthermore, even if you were to successfully argue that through that act you were forcing people to buy something (and that was unconstitutional), TECHNICALLY you could do it this way:

Everyone pays a 2.5% income tax on all of their taxable income. Everyone WITH HEALTH INSURANCE gets a 2.5% refundable tax credit. Then instead of having it be a special tax on the 5% of the people who don't have health insurance, you would just have a 2.5% tax credit for the 95% of people who do have health insurance. Congress can give tax credits for anything they want (kids, buying a house, etc), so it would be rewarding the people with health insurance instead of penalizing the people without it.

Granted, that's not the way it's written, but it would be an easy way to get around any Constitutional issues that come up.
 
Last edited:

X3pilot

Texans fan - LOL
Aug 13, 2007
5,860
1
SoMD
Heard a Rep. Attorney General say on NPR that they are suing based on the constitutionality of the bill (that is the only way they can). Apparently, they are claiming that it is the act of forcing people to "purchase" something is not constitutional. A "commerce clause" in a supreme court case about some farmer and wheat.

ahh here is a link (not the best but i am lazy)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203917304574412793406386548.html

Anyway, I was all smiles today at work with all the right wing insurance people were fit to be tied, and ready to revolt against the commies, atheists, pinko's and homosexuals. I have listened to their crap for months, and its nice to see them eat crow.
Commerce clause:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:

“ [The Congress shall have power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes; ”
The significance of the Commerce Clause is described in the Supreme Court's opinion in Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005):

“ The Commerce Clause emerged as the Framers' response to the central problem giving rise to the Constitution itself: the absence of any federal commerce power under the Articles of Confederation. For the first century of our history, the primary use of the Clause was to preclude the kind of discriminatory state legislation that had once been permissible. Then, in response to rapid industrial development and an increasingly interdependent national economy, Congress “ushered in a new era of federal regulation under the commerce power,” beginning with the enactment of the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887 and the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890. ”

The Commerce Clause represents one of the most fundamental powers delegated to the Congress by the founders. The outer limits of the Interstate Commerce Clause power has been the subject of long, intense political controversy. Interpretation of the sixteen words of the Commerce Clause has helped define the balance of power between the federal government and the states and the balance of power between the two elected branches of the Federal government and the Judiciary. As such, it has a direct impact on the lives of American citizens.
 

X3pilot

Texans fan - LOL
Aug 13, 2007
5,860
1
SoMD
Didn't the US Supreme Court rule that the Commerce Clause allowed the Fed to go after marijuana even in states that had legalized it?
Yes, but the CSA was a bigger factor in that, I think. I personally disagree with the ruling that growing marijuana for personal medicla consumption falls into the commerce clause, using my analogy that if that's the case, then anyone who grows their own vegatables for consumption and you give some tomatoes away, the Feds could come down on you for affecting the interstate commerce of tomato growers.

In regard to the health care bill, the interstate and intrastate commerce of health insurance does fall into the commerce clause and therefore protects the bill.

But I'm not really a lawyer, soooooo
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
So I woke up this morning and reached over to my bedside table for the little red Mao book that Glenn Beck said was going to spontaneously appear in everyone's homes after health care passed. Couldn't find it though... Huh, maybe it'll appear tonight after Satan's Chosen One signs health care today.