Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415 LastLast
Results 145 to 156 of 176

Thread: Oral Arguments

  1. #145
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,182


    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Scalia understands the importance of allowing the people, via their representatives and not via the judiciary, to determine the constitutionality of laws.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Just because Congress passes a law doesn't make it constitutional. And if a law is thrown out on those very grounds, then SCOTUS did their job they manner in which it was intended in the very document they are trying to uphold.
    Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but these two posts seem to be saying the exact opposite of each other. In one you seem to say that is the job of people and their elected leaders go decide if something is constitutional. In the second you say Congress is not the arbiter of constitutionality, the courts are.

    Which is your opinion?


    ---
    I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?x3sv4l
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  2. #146
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    23,307

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but these two posts seem to be saying the exact opposite of each other. In one you seem to say that is the job of people and their elected leaders go decide if something is constitutional. In the second you say Congress is not the arbiter of constitutionality, the courts are.

    Which is your opinion?
    Those two do seem to contradict one another. I can go on and on about the topic of judicial restraint, "activism" etc. But in order to keep with brevity, they are both correct.

    When legislation is created, it may stand the muster of judicial review eventually. Ergo, it's job one of the people, via their legislature, to enact laws that are in fact Constitutional. There are disagreements and thus, laws sometimes must stand the test of judicial review.

    The healthcare law, for those of us who believe in a dead constitution (one where the letter of the law is followed, if you desire to change the const. you must do so i the prescribed manner in the const., nothing ought to be found to be constitutional least there is language in the constitution, 10th Amendment rules when there is an absent of specific language, etc) is one that's unconstitutional, since there is no specific language written in the document pertaining to the Federal Government's power to compel you to purchase anything.

    Those on your side of the fence would argue that the Commerce Clause makes it constitutional. However, my side would argue that the expansion of the clause past it's original intent is also unconstitutional.

    It's the expansion of the Commerce Clause and lack of judicial restraint that have led to a apathetic society. Why be involved in what you believe in if all that hard work overturned by the whims of a court that do not follow the constitution. Now your side has been the beneficiary of legislation from the bench, Roe v. Wade being the most notoriuous example.

    But no, there are cases, such has Kelo v. City of New London as an example, where the liberal side were burned by a creation they started all the way back to the Warren Court.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  3. #147
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    28,304
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Just for input's sake, but one of the biggest reasons why there is such an issue with health insurance as it has stood is because the folks who don't have it go to the ER for simple things, clog it up, waste doctor's time, and pick up free medication that they don't ever pay back because ethically, the ER has to treat them. That's why it's so hard to get in to see a private doctor these days and why they have waiting lists.


    I would imagine that - eventually - by making everyone maintain some form of health insurance would cause insurance rates in general to drop because it would be alleviating the number of folks clogging up ER's and emergency-care facilities.

    However, the big problem I see with all of this is most of those folks who didn't have health care to begin with aren't going to be able to afford anything anyway, so where is that money going to come from?


    ...speaking of which, I did some simple math and I paid out 31.34% of my income this past year to taxes and I STILL owed Maryland over $500.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  4. #148
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,358

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Just for input's sake, but one of the biggest reasons why there is such an issue with health insurance as it has stood is because the folks who don't have it go to the ER for simple things, clog it up, waste doctor's time, and pick up free medication that they don't ever pay back because ethically, the ER has to treat them. That's why it's so hard to get in to see a private doctor these days and why they have waiting lists.
    Help me out here. How does people going to the ER for free make doctors have waiting list?


    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    I would imagine that - eventually - by making everyone maintain some form of health insurance would cause insurance rates in general to drop because it would be alleviating the number of folks clogging up ER's and emergency-care facilities.
    If it were that simple than you may have a point. However there is so much more to it than that. For instance, Insurance companies will have to cover preventative things like, Colonoscopys, mammograms etc with no copay. The recent law that insurance companies have to provide contraception "free of charge". I think we can all agree companies (insurance or others) won't just give things for free -they raise their rates.
    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    However, the big problem I see with all of this is most of those folks who didn't have health care to begin with aren't going to be able to afford anything anyway, so where is that money going to come from?

    ...speaking of which, I did some simple math and I paid out 31.34% of my income this past year to taxes and I STILL owed Maryland over $500.
    You answered your own question.




  5. #149
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    12,242
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Glad to see you over here Solo.

    It sounds like you didn't take enough taxes out despite the 31+%. Same thing happened to
    me but I didn't take enough out of my soc sec checks and owed the same amount.

    This health care doesn't save any money and as I pointed out before, the costs have already
    exceeded the original estimates by $1.8T just like we said it would. The White HOuse also
    said the middle class would have to be paying extra taxes for something.

    As Greg always says - nothing is free. Somebody pays for it. If OBY is re-elected he will
    ruin the insurance industry like he's doing the coal industry now and the gov't will be
    the main insurer meaning more taxes.

    We also pointed out that medicare and soc sec count for about 1/2 of our national debt.
    UBER RAVENS FAN AND HISTORIAN GURU.




  6. #150
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    12,242
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Does anyone think anyone tipped OBY off on the SC vote Friday? Unusual
    comments from a Prez who sure seems worried. Kagan would be the usual
    suspect in tipping him off.

    Don't be surprised if a justice has an accident or his child goes missing-lol.


    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../2867429/posts
    UBER RAVENS FAN AND HISTORIAN GURU.




  7. #151
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    28,304
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Help me out here. How does people going to the ER for free make doctors have waiting list?
    Because private practices won't accept anyone without health insurance of some sort. It's a vicious circle. It's their way of making sure that they are getting their just dues and not having a bunch of folks in with common colds looking for meds. More and more folks would prefer to go to private doctors because the health care is better than what you'd get in ER's since those privatized doctors aren't as overworked and aren't forced to see patients regardless of them being insured or not.

    When I was in the Navy I was stationed in a remote area and the closest hospital was about 45 min away. I had torn my shoulder pretty bad and I had to wait in the ER for some time because the ER doctors were bogged down with other patients. Two of which who were in front of me who didn't have insurance and were there with a sinus infection and a common flu. When I finally got in to get xrays, the xray tech told me it probably would have been faster for me to be flown to the Naval Hospital nearly 2 hours away.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  8. #152
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,358

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Because private practices won't accept anyone without health insurance of some sort. It's a vicious circle. It's their way of making sure that they are getting their just dues and not having a bunch of folks in with common colds looking for meds. More and more folks would prefer to go to private doctors because the health care is better than what you'd get in ER's since those privatized doctors aren't as overworked and aren't forced to see patients regardless of them being insured or not.
    That’s not entirely true. I’ve had times as has my wife where we’ve needed to go to the doctor and not had insurance. She broke her foot and all we had to do was pay for the visit and walking boot etc.

    Matter of fact, recently, even though I had insurance I asked a tech who was doing some work how much things would cost if I paid cash, she said it was 40% less. Main reasons were less paperwork, bureaucracy, no need to pay someone to bill the insurance company fight with the insurance company and then come after the patient for the rest.




  9. #153
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    23,307
    Each doctor is his own business so they can set their own terms as far as how a patient pays.

    I know a doctor who is friends with my wife and she often gives free service if the person cannot pay. She also charged my wife straight cash homie when she was having issues with her gallbladder. And it was MUCH cheaper than going through our insurance.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  10. #154

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Our national health care system is a mess that will get worse, not better, with time.

    Legislation seems the obvious way to address it. And the Commerce Clause has been the tool of such legislation going back to the Civil Rights Act and the New Deal and beyond.

    The decision could go either way. I'm inclined to think the ACA should be upheld because of the enormous power already given to Congress, by the courts, in its application of the Commerce Clause. It is possible that this version of the Supremes, as conservative as it is, will dial the Commerce Clause back some and gut the ACA.

    As a practical matter I think that's a shame, because the health care system is a joke and will only get worse with the passage of time, but the reality is this decision could *legitimately* go either way. Just because a person doesn't like the ACA does not mean (a) anyone who supports it is a liberal or whatever label you want to give him, or (b) the Supreme Court is cosmically right, assuming for a moment it strikes down the law. It could honestly go either way, like many cases the Supreme Court takes.

    For what it's worth, I think anybody who both decries an "activist" judiciary (or wants "judicial restraint") and wants to see the Supreme Court take down the ACA is acting like a hypocrite.
    Last edited by festivus; 04-03-2012 at 02:06 PM.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  11. #155
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,358

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Our national health care system is a mess that will get worse, not better, with time.
    Legislation seems the obvious way to address it. And the Commerce Clause has been the tool of such legislation going back to the Civil Rights Act and the New Deal and beyond.
    A few things. What is wrong (in your opinion) with the health care system and what could fix it or why is legislation the way to go? And lastly, how does the commerce clause make it okay for the government to tell you to buy something? And if they can tell you to buy health insurance, what’s to stop them from saying, you need to buy an electric car because it’s making cars others are buying too expensive (just a hypothetical example)

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    For what it's worth, I think anybody who both decries an "activist" judiciary (or wants "judicial restraint") and wants to see the Supreme Court take down the ACA is acting like a hypocrite.
    Well… that’s like... your opinion, man.
    If it’s unconstitutional how is wanting the justices to not be an activist and put their ideology aside and rule it so, be acting like a hypocrite?




  12. Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Our national health care system is a mess that will get worse, not better, with time.
    You'll get no argument from me on this as this has been the trend for quite some time which is why the government has been trying to address the issue for quite some time as well.
    Doesn't mean that the ways they try and address it and changes they seem to want to incorporate from one administration to the next are the appropriate way to do it either.
    There's stuff in there that I and many others are in favor of, and stuff that many are not.

    Seems we've been given a choice with this thing which is all or nothing which many are opposed to.

    Just because something's broke doesn't mean you scrap the whole thing or a good deal of the existing methods and replace it with stuff that will cause it's own set of problems which is what a lot of people think or see happening.

    It is possible that this version of the Supremes, as conservative as it is, will dial the Commerce Clause back some and gut the ACA.
    Doing that would require the Supreme Court to read the entire bill (2700 pages) and pick and choose what they feel is appropriate and legal, and what is not.
    They've basically already said they aren't doing that and it's not their job to do it.

    According to the side of the aisle that is in favor of the healthcare act, gutting it (primarily the mandate part) pretty much renders the rest unobtainable and can't survive without the mandate.
    Will Die A Ravens Fan!!




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland