Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Aneristic Illusions => Topic started by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:02:32 PM

Title: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:02:32 PM
A federal judge in Florida has tossed out the sweeping health care reform law championed by President Barack Obama, setting up what is likely to be a contentious Supreme Court challenge over the legislation in coming months.

Monday's sweeping ruling came in the most closely watched of the two dozen separate challenges to the law. Florida along with 25 states had filed a lawsuit last spring, seeking to dismiss a law critics had labeled "Obamacare."

U.S. District Judge Robert Vinson declared unconstitutional the key provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- the so-called "individual mandate" requiring most Americans to buy health insurance by 2014 or face penalties. Vinson also declared unconstitutional the section of the act that withholds Medicare funds from states that refuse to participate.

But unlike another federal judge who ruled the individual mandate unconstitutional last month, Vinson ruled that the unconstitutionality voided the entire act.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/31/health.care.unconstitutional/index.html?hpt=T2


I wonder if the Supreme Court will be Justices or Puppets on this one?
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Requia ☣ on February 01, 2011, 04:04:01 PM
So he's ruling that nobody can regulate healthcare, ever?

Fucking moron.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Phox on February 01, 2011, 04:05:16 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 04:02:32 PM
I wonder if the Supreme Court will be Justices or Puppets on this one?
Considering who's currently on the bench, the words might as well be interchangeable at the moment. The only question is which side pulls the strings harder.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:06:29 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 01, 2011, 04:04:01 PM
So he's ruling that nobody can regulate healthcare, ever?

Fucking moron.

No. He is saying it violates the constitution.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:09:20 PM
Quote from: Doktor Phox on February 01, 2011, 04:05:16 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 04:02:32 PM
I wonder if the Supreme Court will be Justices or Puppets on this one?
Considering who's currently on the bench, the words might as well be interchangeable at the moment. The only question is which side pulls the strings harder.

I just hope the debate will be published.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: LMNO on February 01, 2011, 04:10:19 PM
And the problem is, the Dems didn't put a separation clause in the damn thing.

Usually, there's a bit in there that says, "any invalidity or unenforceability of one or more provisions of this Agreement shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement."

Because that's not in there, if one thing is invalid, the entire thing is invalid.


Yippee.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Requia ☣ on February 01, 2011, 04:14:17 PM
Pretty sure thats only true for contracts, not laws.  I've never seen that clause in a bill, and I know numerous bills that have been partially struck down.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: LMNO on February 01, 2011, 04:16:30 PM
Source. (http://www.slate.com/id/2281290/)
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:17:51 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 01, 2011, 04:14:17 PM
Pretty sure thats only true for contracts, not laws.  I've never seen that clause in a bill, and I know numerous bills that have been partially struck down.

Without the clause it is up to the judge as to whether the bill is entirely or partially is voided. We now have two judges one who has found the rest of the bill is allowable and one who has found the opposite.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Luna on February 01, 2011, 04:19:18 PM
Article on the topic here (on a fairly conservative website).

http://www.redstate.com/ben_domenech/2010/08/17/severability-and-obamacare/

Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:19:46 PM
But unlike another federal judge who ruled the individual mandate unconstitutional last month, Vinson ruled that the unconstitutionality voided the entire act.

"I must reluctantly conclude that Congress exceeded the bounds of its authority in passing the Act with the individual mandate. That is not to say, of course, that Congress is without power to address the problems and inequities in our health care system," wrote Vinson.


"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications," Vinson wrote, adding, "At a time when there is virtually unanimous agreement that health care reform is needed in this country, it is hard to invalidate and strike down a statute titled "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

The Severability Clause actually carries great weight.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:33:51 PM
Am I alone in wishing The Patriot Act would come under this tight of scrutiny?
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Faust on February 01, 2011, 04:39:05 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 04:33:51 PM
Am I alone in wishing The Patriot Act would come under this tight of scrutiny?

Most sane people in america and EVERY single person in the world outside of america would concur.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 04:39:13 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 01, 2011, 04:10:19 PM
And the problem is, the Dems didn't put a separation clause in the damn thing.

Do you think that was an accident?  An oversight?  Perhaps the little forms engine they use to create it broke down?  And I am sure our energetic and thoughtful representatives all happened to miss it as they read the entire bill, just like they read every other bill.

:lulz:

If anyone thought there was a difference between the dems and the neocons, this should have dispelled it.

But it won't.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 04:43:37 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 04:39:13 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 01, 2011, 04:10:19 PM
And the problem is, the Dems didn't put a separation clause in the damn thing.

Do you think that was an accident?  An oversight?  Perhaps the little forms engine they use to create it broke down?  And I am sure our energetic and thoughtful representatives all happened to miss it as they read the entire bill, just like they read every other bill.

:lulz:

If anyone thought there was a difference between the dems and the neocons, this should have dispelled it.

But it won't.

Tribal monkeys are tribal. :(
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:17:11 PM
I was really surprised that they put a mandate in there to begin with. Seemed like a easy way for the whole thing to get trashed. I mean, its pretty clearly outside the powers granted to the Federal government by the Constitution. Seemed like an easy handle to pull the whole thing down with when it was first discussed.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:20:16 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:17:11 PM
I was really surprised that they put a mandate in there to begin with.

That's when I knew the fix was in.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:22:48 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:20:16 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:17:11 PM
I was really surprised that they put a mandate in there to begin with.

That's when I knew the fix was in.

I agree 100%
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: LMNO on February 02, 2011, 06:25:34 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:17:11 PM
I was really surprised that they put a mandate in there to begin with. Seemed like a easy way for the whole thing to get trashed. I mean, its pretty clearly outside the powers granted to the Federal government by the Constitution. Seemed like an easy handle to pull the whole thing down with when it was first discussed.

It was the only way to get the insurance co. lobbyists on board.  Which should say something about the inordinate amount of power lobbyists have in Washington.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 02, 2011, 06:29:10 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 02, 2011, 06:25:34 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:17:11 PM
I was really surprised that they put a mandate in there to begin with. Seemed like a easy way for the whole thing to get trashed. I mean, its pretty clearly outside the powers granted to the Federal government by the Constitution. Seemed like an easy handle to pull the whole thing down with when it was first discussed.

It was the only way to get the insurance co. lobbyists on board.  Which should say something about the inordinate amount of power money lobbyists have in Washington.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: LMNO on February 02, 2011, 06:30:30 PM
You don't honestly think there's a difference between those two words, do you?
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Adios on February 02, 2011, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 02, 2011, 06:30:30 PM
You don't honestly think there's a difference between those two words, do you?

Under some circumstances I do. Lawmakers already have power, but they never have enough money.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:39:26 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 02, 2011, 06:30:30 PM
You don't honestly think there's a difference between those two words, do you?

Under some circumstances I do. Lawmakers already have power, but they never have enough money.

No.  They have the power granted to them by lobbyist/contributor money.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Cain on February 03, 2011, 04:16:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 04:39:13 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 01, 2011, 04:10:19 PM
And the problem is, the Dems didn't put a separation clause in the damn thing.

Do you think that was an accident?  An oversight?  Perhaps the little forms engine they use to create it broke down?  And I am sure our energetic and thoughtful representatives all happened to miss it as they read the entire bill, just like they read every other bill.

:lulz:

If anyone thought there was a difference between the dems and the neocons, this should have dispelled it.

But it won't.

Who actually drafted the legislation again?

Not the offices of this Senator and that, the actual names of the people involved?

We all know that Senators are too busy campaigning for money, having affairs, doing blow and appearing on TV shows to actually draft legislation.  They're lawyers for the most part, or ex-soldiers, not policy wonks.  But the people who work for them...well, they're policy wonks.  Usually well groomed policy wonks coming from a small number of influential think-tanks.

Just saying, since modern democracy runs less on "one man, one vote" and more on thousands of technocratic specialists writing things up all day long, knowing which invisible technocrats wrote the legislation may give an insight into who is actually running the health care system.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Kai on February 03, 2011, 04:29:47 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 03, 2011, 04:16:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 04:39:13 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on February 01, 2011, 04:10:19 PM
And the problem is, the Dems didn't put a separation clause in the damn thing.

Do you think that was an accident?  An oversight?  Perhaps the little forms engine they use to create it broke down?  And I am sure our energetic and thoughtful representatives all happened to miss it as they read the entire bill, just like they read every other bill.

:lulz:

If anyone thought there was a difference between the dems and the neocons, this should have dispelled it.

But it won't.

Who actually drafted the legislation again?

Not the offices of this Senator and that, the actual names of the people involved?

We all know that Senators are too busy campaigning for money, having affairs, doing blow and appearing on TV shows to actually draft legislation.  They're lawyers for the most part, or ex-soldiers, not policy wonks.  But the people who work for them...well, they're policy wonks.  Usually well groomed policy wonks coming from a small number of influential think-tanks.

Just saying, since modern democracy runs less on "one man, one vote" and more on thousands of technocratic specialists writing things up all day long, knowing which invisible technocrats wrote the legislation may give an insight into who is actually running the health care system.

According to an article you posted before, the policy wonks hail from the american university system.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Cain on February 03, 2011, 04:47:06 AM
True.  But not terribly helpful, as so do the members of Senate themselves.

It would be more helpful to get a full career background on them - think tanks, advisory committees, private sector enterprises etc and see if any correlation between backgrounds could be discovered.  I mean, it's not entirely likely, but imagine if, for example, several of the major writers of the Health care bill all worked for a private research group funded in part by a certain medical insurance company.

This happens a lot in foreign policy, but that is a far more politicized issue than most, and with a far smaller pool of expertise as well...but it would be interesting to see if and to what extent that pattern replicates elsewhere...
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Cain on February 03, 2011, 01:27:49 PM
Turns out Liz Fowler, special aide to Max Baucus, worked for the insurance giant Wellpoint for several years before going to work for the Senator, and was intimately involved in the writing of the bill.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Jenne on February 03, 2011, 05:06:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 03, 2011, 01:27:49 PM
Turns out Liz Fowler, special aide to Max Baucus, worked for the insurance giant Wellpoint for several years before going to work for the Senator, and was intimately involved in the writing of the bill.

Not surprising.  It is facts such as these that drive off very good people from even going into politics at the outset.  Because once they make it into some sort of inner circle where the "man behind the curtain" is revealed, they pull back in total horror at what they behold.  Americans really have no clue, I think, in general, about the machine that is the lawmaking monster in our government. 

Aides write the speeches and strategies based on internet searches and newsfeeds.  PAC members drive campaigns (the same ones who pay into said campaigns), and their movements are usually unabated by their candidates, however brutal/morally bankrupt they may be.  And the policy researchers and writers usually come from think tanks that contribute a one-sided agenda, and people who also come from some bigwig corporation who have a lot to lose and a lot to gain by just sitting at the table.  Joe Blow never has a CHANCE against such things.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Requia ☣ on February 05, 2011, 05:19:58 AM
I got around to asking a lawyer friend about the severability clause, he said entire bills only get struck down when the unconstitutional clause is so central to the bill that the remaining clauses would serve no purpose.  So I stand by my initial reaction that the judge is smoking Tea Party flavored crack.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on February 07, 2011, 09:57:18 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 05, 2011, 05:19:58 AM
I got around to asking a lawyer friend about the severability clause, he said entire bills only get struck down when the unconstitutional clause is so central to the bill that the remaining clauses would serve no purpose.  So I stand by my initial reaction that the judge is smoking Tea Party flavored crack.

IIRC, the supporters of the bill also claimed that this clause was absolutely necessary because it was the only way to stop people from waiting until they get sick to go get insurance.
Title: Re: Health care struck down.
Post by: Requia ☣ on February 07, 2011, 11:11:36 PM
That was lobbying, not part of the bill itself.  Also totally untrue, since waiting till you get sick to get coverage wouldn't work unless its employer provided healthcare (they can wait up to a year before covering you if you have a gap in coverage).