The Obama health care plan seems reasonable until you get to the part where if you aren't ensured and refuse to purchase the Obamacare, you'll be taxed. That's not to say that if you already have insurance, you'll still be taxed. Rather, in the technical sense, the national government is requiring you to buy a certain product, even if you do not want. If you refuse, which you have the complete right to do, you'll be taxed, an act that is undoubtedly protected because the congress has the power to tax citizens. But the issue is the national government regulating what the American citizens buy. It's similar to making them buy an American made care instead of a German made one, or requiring every citizen to eat a particular food or do a certain exercise-- because it's "good" for them. Since when does the national government, a government that is supposed to limited in its control and reign, tell you what's good for you? That being said, Obamacare is definitely unconstitutional because it encroaches on an American citizen's right of free will,a reasonable expectation. Sure congress might defend it as yet another government program that is protected by the commerce clause and their right to tax the people, but essentially what they're doing is telling citizens what to buy and penalizing them for defiance. The framers of the constitution would have vehemently refused such a law, a should the current American government officials and people.
The fact about the healthcare that I do not like is that everyone is required to have it. To me it is kind of like forcing us to take public transportation. I understand that it is tough for people who can’t afford healthcare so I think a better option would be to help make healthcare more accessible to people with lower incomes.
I honestly don't carry much of an opinion about this issue. To me, the health plan seems like it was created with noble intentions, but ten months of being caught up in the ridiculous chaos of bi-partisan opposiont has turned it into somthing that is looked upon with contempt by many. I think the constitutionality of the the plan lies more in the question of whether or not it can be pushed upon those who don't necessesarily want it while the states are forced to pay for it. I think that part of the entire thing is unconstitutional. As for the bill itself, I'm not really sure.
Obamacare is constitutional because citizens are still allowed to choose whatever policy they would like. The only obstacle for this policy is the tax penalty for not having insurance. Congress has the power to tax citizens for the right reasons under the elastic clause. In addition, Obamacare actually is (at a stretch) protected under the commerce clause. It is comparable to having insurance while driving. Health insurance is a dire necessity for anyone- even the supposed "healthy" faction. Although the structure of the policy is not the greatest, it is constitutional.
Yes, technically ObamaCare could be considered constitutional due to the 16th amendment because he is enforcing a tax if you don't comply with law. The deal is that you either buy a government approved healthcare or get taxed. Now is it right to force people to buy healthcare? In my opinion, no. Though it seems wrong that we have to pay for those who don't pay for their own healthcare, I still don't think the government should force us into buying insurance if we choose that we don't want to. The government should not be deciding our every move for us or try to control our lives because they do not know the specifics or personal information about everyone. Also ObamaCare would be the start of what is known as social medicine, in which everyone gets the same service, treatments, medicines, ect. This method has been used in other countries and has not seemed to work out to well for the people. Though everyone recieves the same services, it does not necessarily mean that the services they are recieving are the best, just equal.
I believe it's unconstitutional because the federal government shouldn't force people to buy something they don't want to buy. I feel like it violates our liberties as American citizens. Not everyone has the money to pay for this reorganization of healthcare and the addition of being taxed when you don't comply is ridiculous. Americans should be allowed to choose whether or not they want to buy insurance. Not everyone's situation is equal so not everyone should be forced to pay for this.
I can't believe that this medical plan was even considered...I have been interested in the medical field since I was a kid and now I am not so sure that it is a safe career choice. If I won't make any money how will I pay off my student loans for medical school? Doctors making less money would be completly unfair. Why should someone who paid hundreds of thousands of dollars and complete years of school make the same amount of money as someone who has a liberal arts degree...they deserve every penny of what they make. The shortage of money and resources for hospitals with this medical plan would just be unreal. If I need an emergency heart transplant or something I don't want to be put on a waiting list...some people can't wait that long. If you want insurance buy insurance, the government shouldn't force the public to get insurance. The fact that they are pretty much forcing the public to buy something makes this unconstitutional.
From my understanding, "Obamacare" is perfectly constitutional. The part of the law which has been attacked as unconstitutional is the tax -- citizens are given a choice to either purchase their own health insurance through their employer or otherwise, or pay a tax which goes to support the subsidized health care system.
Under Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution, "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." The tax will provide affordable health insurance for the 44 million Americans, which is providing for the general welfare of the United States and its citizens, and therefore clearly constitutional under Section 8 Clause 1.
To say that this tax is unconstitutional would be to say that the government is not allowed to levy taxes at all. Those who call this unconstitutional must have our Constitution, which clearly gives the federal government the right to levy taxes, confused with the Articles of Confederation, which were thrown out more than 200 years ago.
From my understanding, "Obamacare" is perfectly constitutional. The part of the law which has been attacked as unconstitutional is the tax -- citizens are given a choice to either purchase their own health insurance through their employer or otherwise, or pay a tax which goes to support the subsidized health care system.
Under Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution, "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." The tax will provide affordable health insurance for the 44 million Americans without coverage, which is providing for the general welfare of the United States and its citizens, and therefore clearly constitutional under Section 8 Clause 1.
To say that this tax is unconstitutional would be to say that the government is not allowed to levy taxes at all. Those who call this unconstitutional must have our Constitution, which clearly gives the federal government the right to levy taxes, confused with the Articles of Confederation, which were thrown out more than 200 years ago.
I don't believe that Obamacare is constitutional because there is no ammendment in the U.S. constitution that states that all citizens of the United States have to have health care. If U.S. citizens don't want to have health insurance, then they shouldn't be forced to buy it. How do they expect people on minimum wage to pay Obamacare's premiums?? Yes the bill says that people on lower incomes will be reimbursed on their tax returns at the end of the year, but that still leaves them the issue of paying for the insurance up front anyways. Also healthcare insurance, like most other insurance, should be completely optional. No one requires you to have flood insurance if you decide to live in a flood plain, no one requires you to have fire insurance if you live in California in the middle of wildfire season. If someone chooses not to get medical coverage then that should be their own personal decision. Our government throws out the illusion that we have freedom to make our own decisions but by forcing people to buy this healthcare is just showing America that a bunch of hypocrites are residing in our capital. The 14th amendment states that no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property. By making people pay for healthcare, especially lowerclass citizens, you are stripping everyone of their liberty and potentially taking away poorer citizen's right to property, because they won't be able to afford the healthcare and rent at the same time. No where in the 14th amendment does it say that people must take the best care of their lives and buy mandatory healthcare in order to insure their health. If someone doesn't want healthcare, or better yet, to pay for everyone else's healthcare, then it is unconstitutional to force them to do so.
I think the ObamaCare is constitutional, although it has minor problems that will cause confussion and arguments. It is protected under the the Constitution, because the elastic clause is written for to help people and nation. Like making a national bank was the hot potato, but after all it did help the U.S. to grow and protected from the European countries. Also this health care would be something like the secondary education. Many people disagreed because the fund that will be caused and too much things will be needed like teachers, and schools, after the growing pain, the U.S. step it out.
The Obamacare is something I feel like is unconstitutional because it is more forced onto the citizens of the nation. It is not stated in the Constitution that all people must have healthcare. Yes it will bring the big benefits for those covered by the plan, but its up to the citizens to choose if they would like to have that benefit. For many, the Obamacare is expensive and can't be paid for, taking away the benefit of healthcare. What the national government should try to solve is the factor of how citizens are going to be able to pay for the plan without emptying their wallets. Mainly on how better it is accessible to all of America's citizens.
Obama's health care plan is unconstitutional because it essentially forces American's to pay a tax to be a citizen. The government is stretching the Constitution to its breaking point by justifying the mandate as a tax, which is legal under the 16th amendment . The government is forcing Americans to buy a certain product. Proponents of Obamacare could argue that car insurance works the same way. Every driver is subjected to the requirement of having car insurance. But driving a car is a choice, while living is not. There are many alternatives to driving to avoid having to purchase car insurance, as opposed to Obamacare where every American is taxed to live.
Although I believe the tax part of the healthcare plan is constitutional because of the 16th Amendment as others have already mentioned, I don't think the government has the power to force everyone to choose one or the other. In my opinion, forcing people to get health care no matter their economic or social situation could be considered violating our rights to life, liberty, and property. Americans should be able to make their own decision on if they want health care or not. Making healthcare a right of the government to enforce is stretching the elastic clause a little too far. Although the government may have good intentions by making healthcare mandatory, the idea of forcing it upon everyone, including people who can't afford it, is taking it too far. Making health care more available to a wide variety of people would be a better compromise for this issue I think.
I don't think ObamaCare is constitutional because one of the amendments is to have rights. If people chose not to be insured then the government shouldn't force people to be insured or pay taxes. Plus with the ObamaCare, like the cartoon shows, there is going to be a shortage of doctors with a lot more people trying to go to the hospital. So, just because the government gave insurance to all Americans doesn't mean it solves the problem if a person needs to wait months when they need to see the doctor immediately.
Obamacare has been largely criticized for its supposed unjust exercise of federal government power. This bill will require states to spend billions of dollars to readjust their health-care markets and to expand those who can enroll in medicaid, whether they can afford it or not. This bill also interferes with the "individual mandate" since every citizen who fails to comply with purchasing government approved health insurance will have to pay a 2% income tax. Basically every American citizen is being required to buy a private product in order to be considered a law abiding citizen. This would be considered an improvement to those previously denied health coverage due to pre-existing conditions or those who just couldn't afford health insurance from the beginning. However, Americans will begin to be denied freedoms with health coverage that they once had. Americans will no longer be able to choose what comes in their plan and will start paying for coverages that they don't even need. Individuals will also no longer be rewarded for being healthy. Younger and healthier citizens will have to pay as much as older, unhealthy residents. This would be the same concept as car insurers charging safe drivers as much on insurance as reckless drivers prone to accidents. Another negative aspect is that Americans will no longer be free to choose their own doctors and have doctor visits as they please. Each person will be assigned their own primary physician who decides which services and specialists are right for you. There are far more negative effects, such as the fact that this health care plan will put the United States in much more massive debt after a matter of years. HOWEVER, when it comes to the debate of whether Obamacare is constitutional or not, it actually is. This health care plan is justified under the commerce clause, since health care is a form of interstate commerce and federal government does have a superior right over this. The penalty tax is also constitutional under the 16th amendment which guarantees that "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." Despite the numerous rights taken away from Americans who have previously had no trouble with the health care system, Obamacare is indeed constitutional.
I believe ObamaCare is unconstitutional, in the fact that the government should not force people to buy a certain product if they do not want to. Also, if this bill does result in a medical physician's paycheck lowering, what then is their initiative to do what they need to do quickly. If they loose their motivation, whose to say it wont take years to get a treatment that you need right away and by the time they get to you, it could be too late. I know a lady who is a missionary in Whales, and she has a sever back problem, and if she had gotten it treated over seas she would've been on the waiting list for up to 2 years on something that needed to be fixed now. That is the direction, I believe, that ObamaCare is taking us, and it is in the wrong direction. Government should not be able to tell you what product to buy with your own money and if you do what you want, (free will), they will punish you with taxes.
I believe that Obama Care is constitutional, because it serves a good cause. It's like the current laws on car insurance, it is mandatory to have one or you'd get penalized. The article makes a statement that it's constitutional because under the 16th amendment it is to be a "tax" on the citizens for benefits. Although it feels kind of like a socialist act, because it's a step towards creating equality for all.
ObamaCare, although it may be seen as Constitutional by a few Americans, is not right and goes against every ideal our nation is built upon. If this bill is not challenged and implemented then there will be no limitations of Congress and the federal government to control our lives as American Citizens. This health care bill exceeds the powers granted to congress, and it violates our individual rights. What is stopping the government from using this as a step to eventual control and regulation of every aspect of our lives. America believes in the idea of rugged individualism. How hard you work dictates what you get in return. However by forcing every person to buy the same health care the government is strengthening the idea of Collectivism and throwing out the individual. ObamaCare should not even be considered as a viable option for healthcare, and if left unchallenged is an eventual step towards a tyrannical government with no concern for human liberties, and an eventual step towards socialism in America.
I agree with Shieun when she says that ObamaCare is not only constitutional, but also that it has problems.. But I think that as a whole, it's a step in the right direction. Other superpowers in the world, and Canada, are doing very well with socialized medicine; I don't see how America could not. Governments should take care of their citizens, it is their duty. It's not about doctors becoming government paid employees, it's about the people in this nation who cannot afford basic medical and dental costs being taken care of. And also for Americans with pre-existing conditions who cannot receive health care coverage.
I think ObamaCare is constitutional. The main goal is to cover Americans that don't have insurance. I think it's more to tackle "better safe than sorry." Many democratic presidents have wanted t national insurance coverage plan for a while with FDR and his Social Security and Truman with the proposal of a national healthcare programme. I believe that the healthcare programme will benefit the nation in that everyone will be able to afford the benefits of healthcare. However, nationalising the Medicinal Market could be detrimental to the nation. The government could possibly study the English healthcare system and how the nation upkeeps the quality of healthcare. In Singapore, doctors and surgeons are constantly subject to reviews to ensure that they provide the best possible quality of healthcare out there. Naturally the government would have to take on funding of equipment and services to keep incentives for the healthcare market. Incentives drive the private and public markets where rational buyers and sellers think at the margin. These incentives will help push above the margin to result in providing the best possible care out there. If the government steps in and takes a more active role in caring for the producers since the consumers are already taken care of, it is possible to upkeep the best medical system in the world.
I found this article and thought it was interesting in providing more background:
I believe that ObamaCare is constitutional, but its constitutionality is in a very precarious position. The government shouldn't go ahead with every plan just because it's technically legal -- public opinion, effects of the plan, and the spirit of the Constitution must be considered. The plan violates all three of these criteria: 1. Public opinion: A recent Kaiser Health Tracking poll showed that public approval is down to 43%. A truly valuable plan carried out by competent politicians would be able to achieve a higher rate of approval. It's a serious sign of distress that such a big plan is so widely disapproved of. A strong country's policies should be primarily supported by its people, especially in issues of economics. 2. Effects of the Plan: This part is a little more uncertain, because ObamaCare seems to be a relatively unique plan for health care. However, we can tell that some aspects of the plan, such as the government option, may not work as well as hoped, based off the British health care system. The potential effects on doctor's salaries can also not be ignored. 3. Spirit of the Constitution: This is the only flaw of ObamaCare that is insurmountable. The fact that Americans could be taxed into doing something that is only arguably "for their own good" definitely defies the Constitution's spirit of freedom and personal liberties.
Although it is constitutional, ObamaCare is not perfect. Its major flaws must be corrected before it is implemented -- otherwise, it could represent a huge step backward for America.
The Obamacare seems pretty reasonable. However, there is a tax penalty, which I find unjust. Everyone must get auto insurance, but only if they have a car. In addition driving a car is a privilege with requirements. However, this Obamacare is not a privilege. It's a mandatory insurance. We have no right or say on this. Then again, there is the elastic clause. This vague, big power may be enough to make the Obamacare constitutional. Many states are fighting against this, which looks like a battle between states and federal power, but I think the federal power will win.
What a wonderful cartoon. It seems as though it is a rip off of Lyndon B. Johnson's Medicare, with a less catchy name. Except medicare was aimed at people over 65 while Obamacare is considered for everyone. Although Obamacare promotes positive things such as prohibiting denial of coverage and establishing health exchange, taxes undercut the goods by placing more burdens on the people of the nation. I believe the act is unconstitutional because it is aimed at everyone, even if one does not need it. Along with that, everyone will have to pay taxes once again to support this act. Just like the picture claims, obamacare may include delayed treatments, elevated taxes, shortage of doctors, and even death. The base idea of Obamacare has good intentions, however, most policies like this will only work for a little while. Then it will become a pain to keep up with in the long run.
ObamaCare seems to have noble intentions: provide every American with affordable health care. But is it really the national government's job to make sure everyone has insurance? The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act extends the meaning of the Commerce Clause and the Elastic Clause far beyond their original intent. The 10th amendment states that the powers of the national government are limited to only those that are specifically granted in the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution does it allow federal government to require citizens to purchase a certain product. One the other hand, the 16th amendment does allow Congress to impose and collect taxes "from whatever source derived". Thus, if seen purely as just another tax, it seems completely constitutional. And if the national government can PROHIBIT the purchase of a product, as in the case of Gonzales v. Raich, what's to stop it from penalizing those who do not purchase one? The powers of federal government do reign supreme over those of state governments, and the tax provides for the "general welfare" of Americans. Thus, as a tax issue, ObamaCare is constitutional. It seems to me that the real problem is that people simply don't want to pay more taxes, especially at a time when many are struggling just to make ends meet, which is understandable. However, if the tax is meant to provide for the general welfare for Americans, shouldn't we, as Americans, be willing contribute? We're not giving up our rights; we're allowing others to have theirs (as idealistic as that sounds...). Maybe it should be a matter for the state governments to handle, like car insurance, so that healthcare is not absolutely uniform and state powers won't be compromised. Ultimately, it's up to the federal judges.
I don't think ObamaCare is constitutional. Yes, the 16th amendment gives the government to lay and collect taxes but I don't think it gives the government the right to FORCE the tax upon people. People shouldn't be obligated to buy the health insurance. In fact, government nudging people to buy the government funded insurance is strictly against the 14th amendment in my opinion. Insurance should be an option for people, not a requirement.
I look at this whole issue on whether Obamacare is constitutional or not is another example of creeping socialism in America. I don't think Americans should be surprised by this type of policy when the same government forces everybody to have auto insurance for their vehicle and require taxes towards Social Security. We've already seen examples of institutions darn near socialism such as the Tennessee Valley Authority and the platform of the Progressive Party. It is virtually impossible to run a government without institutions favoring a socialism-approach, but in this case Obamacare is not the right answer Americans need. Forcing citizens to purchase healthcare and owning a monopoly over the industry is ludicrous. The profits made in the medical industry and the salaries of medical field workers would all decrease. A student's degree from med-school would also be worth much less. Although the government has the right to tax, they shouldn't use this right as a threat to purchase medical care.
The new health care policy is ridiculous. A person should not be forced to purchase health care for themselves, especially if they dont want or cant afford it. Plus the federal government trying to control it by claiming that it is interstate commerce is just stupid, no goods or services are crossing state lines. Overall the attempt on health care reform doesnt seem like a bad idea, but personally i think Obama is going about it completely wrong
The bill itself is constitutional. Everyone having health care is not such a bad idea. The only bad ideas are that the people get taxed if they refuse to oblige and the fact that everyone is forced to have it. Forcing Americans to buy something is unconstitutional in my book. The government should not force anyone to buy anything. People have the right to choose and taking away that freedom with this bill causes too much controversy and puts more doubt in the government.
I don’t think Obama Health care should be constitutional. I don’t think people should be forced to have health care if they do not want to. Its in there own will to have one if they want to. And if the people do get taxed without having a health care, wouldn’t that violate our liberties as U.S citizens?
I feel that Obamacare is not constitutional because it is forcing those who maybe can't afford healthcare in the first place to purchase it and have to spend money which they don't have and if they don't purchase it, they must pay taxes, so there is no slack for the lower classes which is what this bill is intended for. It may seem that it is like car insurance, which everyone must have, but that is different that health insurance in many different ways, since you can't really charge someone at speeds of 60 mph and do thousands of dollars worth of damage. I honestly would rather not be persecuted for walking around without a healthcare plan.
Obama care seems constitutional although it has taken a large beating from the public and the media. Overall, it is trying to help bring health care to all Americans but like most things, it has its flaws. It might hurt states as it says in the article because it will be a large burden for the states to support. It will be beneficial to many Americans who don’t have healthcare currently although these people may not want to pay for it. It is also beneficial because kids can stay on their parent’s healthcare plan until they’re 26. This will help graduates in college get healthcare when they otherwise may have not been able to.
As of right now I don't have that much of an opinion on the healthcare issue. I feel as if I have a long way to go before I have to start worrying about paying taxes and getting my own health insurance. As for if its unconstitutional or not, I think it is unconstitutional. We do not live in a communist country, where our government can force us to have something otherwise we get a punishment, that is just ridiculous.
As many other people have said, this Obamacare plan isn't so bad. Health care should be considered good and a healthy country is generally a more productive country. But I can't completely agree with the tax penalty on those who don't purchase because it seems as if the federal government might be stretching the elastic clause too far. The power to tax is definitely legal for Congress but may be too exaggerated here. Overall, I think that the universal healthcare program will be successful even if there are questions about constitutionality.
Technically, I would say Obamacare is constitutional but in my opinion I don't see us getting very far with it. It appears as though the supporters of Obamacare have found every possible loophole in Court cases to justify themselves with this plan. However, the question then becomes, if such a healthcare plan IS constitutional, where is the line drawn? If the government is allowed to force citizens to buy healthcare or pay a tax instead, what's to say that they wont apply this system to other areas? Whether you have Obamacare or not, one still is required to pay money. Money that some people just don't have.
Although not particularly favorable, Obama's health care plan is constitutional. According to the Constitution, the federal government is allowed to levy taxes to provide for the general welfare of the citizens of the U.S. (In this case, the taxes providing for health insurance.) It's arguable that it is unconstitutional to 'force' a citizen to pay for health care although they may not want it/find it necessary or to tax those who don't comply, but ObamaCare is nonetheless constitutional. Taxes seem to be the most controversial issue concerning Obama's health care plan. It may not be completely justifiable or right, but technicalities make these taxes by the federal government constitutional.
In my eyes, the ObamaCare is technically constitutional due to the elastic clause. The government is allowed to take any necessary actions for the betterment of our nation. They think that it will help our nation, but actually the cons outweight the pros. Of course, everyone now will be insured with healthcare, but there are some strings attach. With everyone having health insurance, more are likely to frequently visit the doctors. This can cause long waits, regardless of how serious the illness is. ObamaCare also causes a decrease in salary for doctors, which may in turn cause a decrease in doctors. These people spend about ten years of effort and money to get into those perfession and should definitely deserve every penny of their salary and not to have it decreased. I understand that healthcare in our nation is becoming a growing problem but with the help of Medicare and Medicaid, more and more people who couldn't afford healthcare before are able to obtain access to some.
ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it inhibits the rights of people. It makes people buy healthcare or pay a tax for the healthcare they refused to buy. This basically forces people to pay for something they had no intentions of becoming involved with. Not only does this policy push something that should be optional as a must but it also pushes a decrease in medical care quality. ObamaCare would decrease the pay of physicians and doctors which would lead to a decrease in medical care quality.
I think that ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it forces Americans to buy healthcare or receive the punishment of a huge tax. I don't think that healthcare reform is a bad idea or that everyone in America having health insurance is negative at all, but to force Americans to buy "government approved" plans or suffer the consequences is wrong. Not all Americans can afford health insurance and some feel it is more beneficial for them to spend their money on what they feel is more necessary which should be within their rights. The government should not be able to force citizens to buy something.
Obamacare seems constitutional to me. The 14th amendment states that no individual shall be deprived of life, liberty, and property. To me, Obamacare is trying to protect everyone's lives by giving them all health insurance. The idea behind Obamacare is great, but implementation of Obamacare would be very difficult. First of all, many believe that it is unconstitutional. To that, I have to partially agree with. The government is taking a bigger role in people's lives, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. The government can be very helpful to people with programs like Medicare or Medicaid. Second of all, Obamacare would increase premium prices and wouldn't exactly help out the job market either. (http://www.theleafchronicle.com/article/20100905/COLUMNISTS91/9050301). Forcing this many people to have health care would put a huge strain on the health industry. So, all-in-all, even though I agree with Obamacare, or at least its ideology, I think there has to be a better way to change the health industry and its rising premiums.
I think obamacare is unconsitutional because it is taking away from the liberrty of the people. I think it is wrong to require people to have this kind of healthcare. i think it would be a good idea to somehow give poor people some type of health care funded by the government but it is unconstititutional to require the citizens to have obamacare. I also think a lot of doctors would quit working as harad at their job if their salary was hurt.
Undecided. Though the enumerated powers obviously don't grant federal control of the health care system, I don't find that anything within the constitution itself directly spells out that Obamacare, or any form of it, is prohibited. Some believe since the tenth amendment grants the "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, [as] reserved to the States respectively," Obamacare is unconstitutional. Others say that the Commerce Clause grants the national government the power. To my view, the Constitution provides no clear cut answer. However, the bill has passed. Whether or not this project was constitutional should have been considered and analyzed long ago.
Obamacare is constitutional because people can choose between whether they want obamacare or stick with their old plan. The only issue is the tax penalty if there is no evidence of insurance. They defend their position with the elastic clause, so no one can resist paying taxes. In my opinion, i don't think that everyone needs to have insurance, unless you have major health problems. For example my parents were talking about how if they had saved up the money that they paid the insurance company they could have used it now to buy a new car.
It's a complicated issue if you delve into it deeply; initially it appears ridiculous that the federal government is requiring every citizen to purchase health care. However the problem that arises is that whether or not you have health care insurance in this country you will still get treated just maybe not initially but you can always walk into an emergency room and despite whether or not you can afford treatment you will receive it. Therefore it needs to be studied as to whether or not its more cost-efficient for everyone to receive health care insurance and therefore preventive medicine or is our current system of "well if the problem is really serious and immediate we'll treat you anyway even if you don't have insurance."
I agree very strongly with some of the above comments in that this Obama care is very ridiclous. I believe a person should not be forced to purchase health care for themselves or face a tax if they choose not to. Despite all the negatives of this plan, I think this issue is a good one to tackle at this time, because many people in the United States do face difficulty with health care, but I believe they shouldn't force everyone to partake.
I found a good website that supports the new health care bill. It provides accurate information on why we would need it as Americans and how it would benefit the economy. If you click on the icon to the left, it goes into detail about why we need the healthcare bill. I found this website to be extremely helpful in explaining how small businesses would benefit.
ObamaCare could be considered constitutional but it's a ridiculous plan. This was only passed because the people in Congress felt it would be a waste of time if they didn't pass it. The idea seems nice but it places a lot of burdens on tax payers. I read this editorial in the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/23/obamacare-for-everyone-but-obama/)that this health care plan would cover Americans with the exeption of the president and congressmen in the House and Senate. It seems as though there is an elite class that is willing to impose burdens on the rest of us.
I believe Obamacare is unconstitutional. I don't think it is constitutional to make someone buy healthcare when they really don't need it. According to the 9th amendment, the courts are supposed to respect the people's unenumerated rights (rights not listed specifically in the Constitution); and I believe that the power of whether a person must buy healthcare is an unenumerated right. In addition, the salaries of medical service people (like doctors,nurses, etc) will decrease, which will create an unwillingness to enter that field. So, therefore, there may be a shortage in health care providers because no one will want to become a doctor because the salaries are unattractive.
I don't really take either side of this issue because there are different reasons why it could be both constitutional and unconstitutional. Obamacare is constitutional because Obama is trying to protect Americans' lives by having everyone get healthcare. Obamacare is also unconstitutional because Americans are being taxed if they do not buy healthcare. I also don't think this would help doctors because it would decrease their salaries which may result in a decline of doctors in our future. Although there may not be very many benefits to Obamacare, it was made with good intentions.
Imagine you are in a sweet bike shop. All the bikes are different. Some have bells and some have whistles. Now imagine the government is forcing you to buy the same bike everyone else has. Does that seem Constitutional to you? No it doesn't. Because it isn't. The same goes for Obamacare.
I'm not completely sure how I feel about Obamacare. It is constitutional in that it doesn't violate the rights of the people, however certain aspects should be considered with the initiation of this health care -- that being public opinion and also the cost of bringing this health care into effect. If the results of this health care are not what the government planned for (loss of money and jobs for doctors), is it worth it? And how much will ObamaCare cost for families? The reason why people don't have health care now is because they don't have money to buy it. So why should they buy ObamaCare or any other health care for that matter? And if they don't, is it fair to penalize them with a tax? My family currently doesn't have health care, but we have a choice of paying a tax, purchasing an expensive health care, or purchasing ObamaCare, with a price that is hopefully cheaper than other health care programs. I guess we'll just have to wait and see the effects of ObamaCare.
Here's an article from Politco about the many conservatives opposing ObamaCare.
I believe that obamacare is indeed unconstitutional. The argument some people make is that the government can regulate interstate commerce... Problem is this bill does not allow you to buy insurance from other states. Therefore there is no interstate commerce to regulate.Furthermore, even if that was not the case, lets say I could buy the insurance from other states, lets say I decide not to buy... Well then if I do not buy what is there to regulate?
The idea of universal healthcare seems rational enough, especially to the vast amount of people who are uninsured in our nation. However, the implementation of the bill is entirely unconstitutional. The fact that the government is essentially requiring everyone to have obamacare is infringing on the liberty of the people. Granted, any individual is permitted to still have their own health insurance if they so choose, but he/she must pay an extra tax on the personal health insurance. Therefore, although it is not explicitly stated that everyone is required to have this new insurance, everyone will be paying for it. This is essentially unconstitutional, because the government cannot tax on a product that a citizen does not even wish to receive.
i think obamacare is unconstutional because the 16th amendment states "the congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes" this mandate isnt shown to be an income, even though its a tax under the constution. people arent being able to excercise thier liberties and rights being forced to pay for a certain healthcare so they wont be breaking the law. and this could raise taxes for states in the future in which some might not be able to afford. the only alternative would be to raise taxes this would cause people really not to pay for healthcare especially people who dont make enough income and depend on health insurance.
The Obama health care plan seems reasonable until you get to the part where if you aren't ensured and refuse to purchase the Obamacare, you'll be taxed. That's not to say that if you already have insurance, you'll still be taxed. Rather, in the technical sense, the national government is requiring you to buy a certain product, even if you do not want. If you refuse, which you have the complete right to do, you'll be taxed, an act that is undoubtedly protected because the congress has the power to tax citizens. But the issue is the national government regulating what the American citizens buy. It's similar to making them buy an American made care instead of a German made one, or requiring every citizen to eat a particular food or do a certain exercise-- because it's "good" for them. Since when does the national government, a government that is supposed to limited in its control and reign, tell you what's good for you?
ReplyDeleteThat being said, Obamacare is definitely unconstitutional because it encroaches on an American citizen's right of free will,a reasonable expectation.
Sure congress might defend it as yet another government program that is protected by the commerce clause and their right to tax the people, but essentially what they're doing is telling citizens what to buy and penalizing them for defiance.
The framers of the constitution would have vehemently refused such a law, a should the current American government officials and people.
The fact about the healthcare that I do not like is that everyone is required to have it. To me it is kind of like forcing us to take public transportation. I understand that it is tough for people who can’t afford healthcare so I think a better option would be to help make healthcare more accessible to people with lower incomes.
ReplyDeleteI honestly don't carry much of an opinion about this issue. To me, the health plan seems like it was created with noble intentions, but ten months of being caught up in the ridiculous chaos of bi-partisan opposiont has turned it into somthing that is looked upon with contempt by many. I think the constitutionality of the the plan lies more in the question of whether or not it can be pushed upon those who don't necessesarily want it while the states are forced to pay for it. I think that part of the entire thing is unconstitutional. As for the bill itself, I'm not really sure.
ReplyDeleteObamacare is constitutional because citizens are still allowed to choose whatever policy they would like. The only obstacle for this policy is the tax penalty for not having insurance. Congress has the power to tax citizens for the right reasons under the elastic clause. In addition, Obamacare actually is (at a stretch) protected under the commerce clause. It is comparable to having insurance while driving. Health insurance is a dire necessity for anyone- even the supposed "healthy" faction. Although the structure of the policy is not the greatest, it is constitutional.
ReplyDeleteYes, technically ObamaCare could be considered constitutional due to the 16th amendment because he is enforcing a tax if you don't comply with law. The deal is that you either buy a government approved healthcare or get taxed. Now is it right to force people to buy healthcare? In my opinion, no. Though it seems wrong that we have to pay for those who don't pay for their own healthcare, I still don't think the government should force us into buying insurance if we choose that we don't want to. The government should not be deciding our every move for us or try to control our lives because they do not know the specifics or personal information about everyone. Also ObamaCare would be the start of what is known as social medicine, in which everyone gets the same service, treatments, medicines, ect. This method has been used in other countries and has not seemed to work out to well for the people. Though everyone recieves the same services, it does not necessarily mean that the services they are recieving are the best, just equal.
ReplyDeleteI believe it's unconstitutional because the federal government shouldn't force people to buy something they don't want to buy. I feel like it violates our liberties as American citizens. Not everyone has the money to pay for this reorganization of healthcare and the addition of being taxed when you don't comply is ridiculous. Americans should be allowed to choose whether or not they want to buy insurance. Not everyone's situation is equal so not everyone should be forced to pay for this.
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that this medical plan was even considered...I have been interested in the medical field since I was a kid and now I am not so sure that it is a safe career choice. If I won't make any money how will I pay off my student loans for medical school? Doctors making less money would be completly unfair. Why should someone who paid hundreds of thousands of dollars and complete years of school make the same amount of money as someone who has a liberal arts degree...they deserve every penny of what they make. The shortage of money and resources for hospitals with this medical plan would just be unreal. If I need an emergency heart transplant or something I don't want to be put on a waiting list...some people can't wait that long. If you want insurance buy insurance, the government shouldn't force the public to get insurance. The fact that they are pretty much forcing the public to buy something makes this unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteFrom my understanding, "Obamacare" is perfectly constitutional. The part of the law which has been attacked as unconstitutional is the tax -- citizens are given a choice to either purchase their own health insurance through their employer or otherwise, or pay a tax which goes to support the subsidized health care system.
ReplyDeleteUnder Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution, "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." The tax will provide affordable health insurance for the 44 million Americans, which is providing for the general welfare of the United States and its citizens, and therefore clearly constitutional under Section 8 Clause 1.
To say that this tax is unconstitutional would be to say that the government is not allowed to levy taxes at all. Those who call this unconstitutional must have our Constitution, which clearly gives the federal government the right to levy taxes, confused with the Articles of Confederation, which were thrown out more than 200 years ago.
From my understanding, "Obamacare" is perfectly constitutional. The part of the law which has been attacked as unconstitutional is the tax -- citizens are given a choice to either purchase their own health insurance through their employer or otherwise, or pay a tax which goes to support the subsidized health care system.
ReplyDeleteUnder Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution, "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." The tax will provide affordable health insurance for the 44 million Americans without coverage, which is providing for the general welfare of the United States and its citizens, and therefore clearly constitutional under Section 8 Clause 1.
To say that this tax is unconstitutional would be to say that the government is not allowed to levy taxes at all. Those who call this unconstitutional must have our Constitution, which clearly gives the federal government the right to levy taxes, confused with the Articles of Confederation, which were thrown out more than 200 years ago.
I don't believe that Obamacare is constitutional because there is no ammendment in the U.S. constitution that states that all citizens of the United States have to have health care. If U.S. citizens don't want to have health insurance, then they shouldn't be forced to buy it. How do they expect people on minimum wage to pay Obamacare's premiums?? Yes the bill says that people on lower incomes will be reimbursed on their tax returns at the end of the year, but that still leaves them the issue of paying for the insurance up front anyways. Also healthcare insurance, like most other insurance, should be completely optional. No one requires you to have flood insurance if you decide to live in a flood plain, no one requires you to have fire insurance if you live in California in the middle of wildfire season. If someone chooses not to get medical coverage then that should be their own personal decision. Our government throws out the illusion that we have freedom to make our own decisions but by forcing people to buy this healthcare is just showing America that a bunch of hypocrites are residing in our capital. The 14th amendment states that no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property. By making people pay for healthcare, especially lowerclass citizens, you are stripping everyone of their liberty and potentially taking away poorer citizen's right to property, because they won't be able to afford the healthcare and rent at the same time. No where in the 14th amendment does it say that people must take the best care of their lives and buy mandatory healthcare in order to insure their health. If someone doesn't want healthcare, or better yet, to pay for everyone else's healthcare, then it is unconstitutional to force them to do so.
ReplyDeleteI think the ObamaCare is constitutional, although it has minor problems that will cause confussion and arguments.
ReplyDeleteIt is protected under the the Constitution, because the elastic clause is written for to help people and nation. Like making a national bank was the hot potato, but after all it did help the U.S. to grow and protected from the European countries.
Also this health care would be something like the secondary education. Many people disagreed because the fund that will be caused and too much things will be needed like teachers, and schools, after the growing pain, the U.S. step it out.
The Obamacare is something I feel like is unconstitutional because it is more forced onto the citizens of the nation. It is not stated in the Constitution that all people must have healthcare. Yes it will bring the big benefits for those covered by the plan, but its up to the citizens to choose if they would like to have that benefit. For many, the Obamacare is expensive and can't be paid for, taking away the benefit of healthcare. What the national government should try to solve is the factor of how citizens are going to be able to pay for the plan without emptying their wallets. Mainly on how better it is accessible to all of America's citizens.
ReplyDeleteObama's health care plan is unconstitutional because it essentially forces American's to pay a tax to be a citizen. The government is stretching the Constitution to its breaking point by justifying the mandate as a tax, which is legal under the 16th amendment .
ReplyDeleteThe government is forcing Americans to buy a certain product. Proponents of Obamacare could argue that car insurance works the same way. Every driver is subjected to the requirement of having car insurance. But driving a car is a choice, while living is not. There are many alternatives to driving to avoid having to purchase car insurance, as opposed to Obamacare where every American is taxed to live.
Although I believe the tax part of the healthcare plan is constitutional because of the 16th Amendment as others have already mentioned, I don't think the government has the power to force everyone to choose one or the other. In my opinion, forcing people to get health care no matter their economic or social situation could be considered violating our rights to life, liberty, and property. Americans should be able to make their own decision on if they want health care or not. Making healthcare a right of the government to enforce is stretching the elastic clause a little too far. Although the government may have good intentions by making healthcare mandatory, the idea of forcing it upon everyone, including people who can't afford it, is taking it too far. Making health care more available to a wide variety of people would be a better compromise for this issue I think.
ReplyDeleteI don't think ObamaCare is constitutional because one of the amendments is to have rights. If people chose not to be insured then the government shouldn't force people to be insured or pay taxes. Plus with the ObamaCare, like the cartoon shows, there is going to be a shortage of doctors with a lot more people trying to go to the hospital. So, just because the government gave insurance to all Americans doesn't mean it solves the problem if a person needs to wait months when they need to see the doctor immediately.
ReplyDeleteObamacare has been largely criticized for its supposed unjust exercise of federal government power. This bill will require states to spend billions of dollars to readjust their health-care markets and to expand those who can enroll in medicaid, whether they can afford it or not. This bill also interferes with the "individual mandate" since every citizen who fails to comply with purchasing government approved health insurance will have to pay a 2% income tax. Basically every American citizen is being required to buy a private product in order to be considered a law abiding citizen. This would be considered an improvement to those previously denied health coverage due to pre-existing conditions or those who just couldn't afford health insurance from the beginning. However, Americans will begin to be denied freedoms with health coverage that they once had. Americans will no longer be able to choose what comes in their plan and will start paying for coverages that they don't even need. Individuals will also no longer be rewarded for being healthy. Younger and healthier citizens will have to pay as much as older, unhealthy residents. This would be the same concept as car insurers charging safe drivers as much on insurance as reckless drivers prone to accidents. Another negative aspect is that Americans will no longer be free to choose their own doctors and have doctor visits as they please. Each person will be assigned their own primary physician who decides which services and specialists are right for you. There are far more negative effects, such as the fact that this health care plan will put the United States in much more massive debt after a matter of years. HOWEVER, when it comes to the debate of whether Obamacare is constitutional or not, it actually is. This health care plan is justified under the commerce clause, since health care is a form of interstate commerce and federal government does have a superior right over this. The penalty tax is also constitutional under the 16th amendment which guarantees that "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." Despite the numerous rights taken away from Americans who have previously had no trouble with the health care system, Obamacare is indeed constitutional.
ReplyDeleteI believe ObamaCare is unconstitutional, in the fact that the government should not force people to buy a certain product if they do not want to. Also, if this bill does result in a medical physician's paycheck lowering, what then is their initiative to do what they need to do quickly. If they loose their motivation, whose to say it wont take years to get a treatment that you need right away and by the time they get to you, it could be too late.
ReplyDeleteI know a lady who is a missionary in Whales, and she has a sever back problem, and if she had gotten it treated over seas she would've been on the waiting list for up to 2 years on something that needed to be fixed now. That is the direction, I believe, that ObamaCare is taking us, and it is in the wrong direction. Government should not be able to tell you what product to buy with your own money and if you do what you want, (free will), they will punish you with taxes.
I believe that Obama Care is constitutional, because it serves a good cause. It's like the current laws on car insurance, it is mandatory to have one or you'd get penalized. The article makes a statement that it's constitutional because under the 16th amendment it is to be a "tax" on the citizens for benefits. Although it feels kind of like a socialist act, because it's a step towards creating equality for all.
ReplyDeleteObamaCare, although it may be seen as Constitutional by a few Americans, is not right and goes against every ideal our nation is built upon. If this bill is not challenged and implemented then there will be no limitations of Congress and the federal government to control our lives as American Citizens. This health care bill exceeds the powers granted to congress, and it violates our individual rights. What is stopping the government from using this as a step to eventual control and regulation of every aspect of our lives. America believes in the idea of rugged individualism. How hard you work dictates what you get in return. However by forcing every person to buy the same health care the government is strengthening the idea of Collectivism and throwing out the individual. ObamaCare should not even be considered as a viable option for healthcare, and if left unchallenged is an eventual step towards a tyrannical government with no concern for human liberties, and an eventual step towards socialism in America.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shieun when she says that ObamaCare is not only constitutional, but also that it has problems.. But I think that as a whole, it's a step in the right direction. Other superpowers in the world, and Canada, are doing very well with socialized medicine; I don't see how America could not. Governments should take care of their citizens, it is their duty. It's not about doctors becoming government paid employees, it's about the people in this nation who cannot afford basic medical and dental costs being taken care of. And also for Americans with pre-existing conditions who cannot receive health care coverage.
ReplyDeleteI think ObamaCare is constitutional. The main goal is to cover Americans that don't have insurance. I think it's more to tackle "better safe than sorry." Many democratic presidents have wanted t national insurance coverage plan for a while with FDR and his Social Security and Truman with the proposal of a national healthcare programme. I believe that the healthcare programme will benefit the nation in that everyone will be able to afford the benefits of healthcare. However, nationalising the Medicinal Market could be detrimental to the nation. The government could possibly study the English healthcare system and how the nation upkeeps the quality of healthcare. In Singapore, doctors and surgeons are constantly subject to reviews to ensure that they provide the best possible quality of healthcare out there. Naturally the government would have to take on funding of equipment and services to keep incentives for the healthcare market. Incentives drive the private and public markets where rational buyers and sellers think at the margin. These incentives will help push above the margin to result in providing the best possible care out there. If the government steps in and takes a more active role in caring for the producers since the consumers are already taken care of, it is possible to upkeep the best medical system in the world.
ReplyDeleteI found this article and thought it was interesting in providing more background:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html?scp=1&sq=obama%20care&st=cse
I believe that ObamaCare is constitutional, but its constitutionality is in a very precarious position. The government shouldn't go ahead with every plan just because it's technically legal -- public opinion, effects of the plan, and the spirit of the Constitution must be considered. The plan violates all three of these criteria:
ReplyDelete1. Public opinion: A recent Kaiser Health Tracking poll showed that public approval is down to 43%. A truly valuable plan carried out by competent politicians would be able to achieve a higher rate of approval. It's a serious sign of distress that such a big plan is so widely disapproved of. A strong country's policies should be primarily supported by its people, especially in issues of economics.
2. Effects of the Plan: This part is a little more uncertain, because ObamaCare seems to be a relatively unique plan for health care. However, we can tell that some aspects of the plan, such as the government option, may not work as well as hoped, based off the British health care system. The potential effects on doctor's salaries can also not be ignored.
3. Spirit of the Constitution: This is the only flaw of ObamaCare that is insurmountable. The fact that Americans could be taxed into doing something that is only arguably "for their own good" definitely defies the Constitution's spirit of freedom and personal liberties.
Although it is constitutional, ObamaCare is not perfect. Its major flaws must be corrected before it is implemented -- otherwise, it could represent a huge step backward for America.
The Obamacare seems pretty reasonable. However, there is a tax penalty, which I find unjust. Everyone must get auto insurance, but only if they have a car. In addition driving a car is a privilege with requirements. However, this Obamacare is not a privilege. It's a mandatory insurance. We have no right or say on this. Then again, there is the elastic clause. This vague, big power may be enough to make the Obamacare constitutional. Many states are fighting against this, which looks like a battle between states and federal power, but I think the federal power will win.
ReplyDeleteWhat a wonderful cartoon. It seems as though it is a rip off of Lyndon B. Johnson's Medicare, with a less catchy name. Except medicare was aimed at people over 65 while Obamacare is considered for everyone. Although Obamacare promotes positive things such as prohibiting denial of coverage and establishing health exchange, taxes undercut the goods by placing more burdens on the people of the nation. I believe the act is unconstitutional because it is aimed at everyone, even if one does not need it. Along with that, everyone will have to pay taxes once again to support this act. Just like the picture claims, obamacare may include delayed treatments, elevated taxes, shortage of doctors, and even death. The base idea of Obamacare has good intentions, however, most policies like this will only work for a little while. Then it will become a pain to keep up with in the long run.
ReplyDeleteObamaCare seems to have noble intentions: provide every American with affordable health care. But is it really the national government's job to make sure everyone has insurance?
ReplyDeleteThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act extends the meaning of the Commerce Clause and the Elastic Clause far beyond their original intent. The 10th amendment states that the powers of the national government are limited to only those that are specifically granted in the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution does it allow federal government to require citizens to purchase a certain product.
One the other hand, the 16th amendment does allow Congress to impose and collect taxes "from whatever source derived". Thus, if seen purely as just another tax, it seems completely constitutional. And if the national government can PROHIBIT the purchase of a product, as in the case of Gonzales v. Raich, what's to stop it from penalizing those who do not purchase one? The powers of federal government do reign supreme over those of state governments, and the tax provides for the "general welfare" of Americans. Thus, as a tax issue, ObamaCare is constitutional.
It seems to me that the real problem is that people simply don't want to pay more taxes, especially at a time when many are struggling just to make ends meet, which is understandable. However, if the tax is meant to provide for the general welfare for Americans, shouldn't we, as Americans, be willing contribute? We're not giving up our rights; we're allowing others to have theirs (as idealistic as that sounds...).
Maybe it should be a matter for the state governments to handle, like car insurance, so that healthcare is not absolutely uniform and state powers won't be compromised.
Ultimately, it's up to the federal judges.
I don't think ObamaCare is constitutional. Yes, the 16th amendment gives the government to lay and collect taxes but I don't think it gives the government the right to FORCE the tax upon people. People shouldn't be obligated to buy the health insurance. In fact, government nudging people to buy the government funded insurance is strictly against the 14th amendment in my opinion. Insurance should be an option for people, not a requirement.
ReplyDeleteI look at this whole issue on whether Obamacare is constitutional or not is another example of creeping socialism in America. I don't think Americans should be surprised by this type of policy when the same government forces everybody to have auto insurance for their vehicle and require taxes towards Social Security. We've already seen examples of institutions darn near socialism such as the Tennessee Valley Authority and the platform of the Progressive Party. It is virtually impossible to run a government without institutions favoring a socialism-approach, but in this case Obamacare is not the right answer Americans need. Forcing citizens to purchase healthcare and owning a monopoly over the industry is ludicrous. The profits made in the medical industry and the salaries of medical field workers would all decrease. A student's degree from med-school would also be worth much less. Although the government has the right to tax, they shouldn't use this right as a threat to purchase medical care.
ReplyDeleteThe new health care policy is ridiculous. A person should not be forced to purchase health care for themselves, especially if they dont want or cant afford it. Plus the federal government trying to control it by claiming that it is interstate commerce is just stupid, no goods or services are crossing state lines. Overall the attempt on health care reform doesnt seem like a bad idea, but personally i think Obama is going about it completely wrong
ReplyDeleteThe bill itself is constitutional. Everyone having health care is not such a bad idea. The only bad ideas are that the people get taxed if they refuse to oblige and the fact that everyone is forced to have it. Forcing Americans to buy something is unconstitutional in my book. The government should not force anyone to buy anything. People have the right to choose and taking away that freedom with this bill causes too much controversy and puts more doubt in the government.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think Obama Health care should be constitutional. I don’t think people should be forced to have health care if they do not want to. Its in there own will to have one if they want to. And if the people do get taxed without having a health care, wouldn’t that violate our liberties as U.S citizens?
ReplyDeleteI feel that Obamacare is not constitutional because it is forcing those who maybe can't afford healthcare in the first place to purchase it and have to spend money which they don't have and if they don't purchase it, they must pay taxes, so there is no slack for the lower classes which is what this bill is intended for. It may seem that it is like car insurance, which everyone must have, but that is different that health insurance in many different ways, since you can't really charge someone at speeds of 60 mph and do thousands of dollars worth of damage. I honestly would rather not be persecuted for walking around without a healthcare plan.
ReplyDeleteObama care seems constitutional although it has taken a large beating from the public and the media. Overall, it is trying to help bring health care to all Americans but like most things, it has its flaws. It might hurt states as it says in the article because it will be a large burden for the states to support. It will be beneficial to many Americans who don’t have healthcare currently although these people may not want to pay for it. It is also beneficial because kids can stay on their parent’s healthcare plan until they’re 26. This will help graduates in college get healthcare when they otherwise may have not been able to.
ReplyDeleteAs of right now I don't have that much of an opinion on the healthcare issue. I feel as if I have a long way to go before I have to start worrying about paying taxes and getting my own health insurance. As for if its unconstitutional or not, I think it is unconstitutional. We do not live in a communist country, where our government can force us to have something otherwise we get a punishment, that is just ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteAs many other people have said, this Obamacare plan isn't so bad. Health care should be considered good and a healthy country is generally a more productive country. But I can't completely agree with the tax penalty on those who don't purchase because it seems as if the federal government might be stretching the elastic clause too far. The power to tax is definitely legal for Congress but may be too exaggerated here. Overall, I think that the universal healthcare program will be successful even if there are questions about constitutionality.
ReplyDeleteTechnically, I would say Obamacare is constitutional but in my opinion I don't see us getting very far with it. It appears as though the supporters of Obamacare have found every possible loophole in Court cases to justify themselves with this plan. However, the question then becomes, if such a healthcare plan IS constitutional, where is the line drawn? If the government is allowed to force citizens to buy healthcare or pay a tax instead, what's to say that they wont apply this system to other areas? Whether you have Obamacare or not, one still is required to pay money. Money that some people just don't have.
ReplyDeleteAlthough not particularly favorable, Obama's health care plan is constitutional. According to the Constitution, the federal government is allowed to levy taxes to provide for the general welfare of the citizens of the U.S. (In this case, the taxes providing for health insurance.) It's arguable that it is unconstitutional to 'force' a citizen to pay for health care although they may not want it/find it necessary or to tax those who don't comply, but ObamaCare is nonetheless constitutional. Taxes seem to be the most controversial issue concerning Obama's health care plan. It may not be completely justifiable or right, but technicalities make these taxes by the federal government constitutional.
ReplyDeleteIn my eyes, the ObamaCare is technically constitutional due to the elastic clause. The government is allowed to take any necessary actions for the betterment of our nation. They think that it will help our nation, but actually the cons outweight the pros. Of course, everyone now will be insured with healthcare, but there are some strings attach. With everyone having health insurance, more are likely to frequently visit the doctors. This can cause long waits, regardless of how serious the illness is. ObamaCare also causes a decrease in salary for doctors, which may in turn cause a decrease in doctors. These people spend about ten years of effort and money to get into those perfession and should definitely deserve every penny of their salary and not to have it decreased.
ReplyDeleteI understand that healthcare in our nation is becoming a growing problem but with the help of Medicare and Medicaid, more and more people who couldn't afford healthcare before are able to obtain access to some.
ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it inhibits the rights of people. It makes people buy healthcare or pay a tax for the healthcare they refused to buy. This basically forces people to pay for something they had no intentions of becoming involved with.
ReplyDeleteNot only does this policy push something that should be optional as a must but it also pushes a decrease in medical care quality. ObamaCare would decrease the pay of physicians and doctors which would lead to a decrease in medical care quality.
I think that ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it forces Americans to buy healthcare or receive the punishment of a huge tax. I don't think that healthcare reform is a bad idea or that everyone in America having health insurance is negative at all, but to force Americans to buy "government approved" plans or suffer the consequences is wrong. Not all Americans can afford health insurance and some feel it is more beneficial for them to spend their money on what they feel is more necessary which should be within their rights. The government should not be able to force citizens to buy something.
ReplyDeleteObamacare seems constitutional to me. The 14th amendment states that no individual shall be deprived of life, liberty, and property. To me, Obamacare is trying to protect everyone's lives by giving them all health insurance. The idea behind Obamacare is great, but implementation of Obamacare would be very difficult.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, many believe that it is unconstitutional. To that, I have to partially agree with. The government is taking a bigger role in people's lives, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. The government can be very helpful to people with programs like Medicare or Medicaid.
Second of all, Obamacare would increase premium prices and wouldn't exactly help out the job market either.
(http://www.theleafchronicle.com/article/20100905/COLUMNISTS91/9050301). Forcing this many people to have health care would put a huge strain on the health industry. So, all-in-all, even though I agree with Obamacare, or at least its ideology, I think there has to be a better way to change the health industry and its rising premiums.
I think obamacare is unconsitutional because it is taking away from the liberrty of the people. I think it is wrong to require people to have this kind of healthcare. i think it would be a good idea to somehow give poor people some type of health care funded by the government but it is unconstititutional to require the citizens to have obamacare. I also think a lot of doctors would quit working as harad at their job if their salary was hurt.
ReplyDeleteUndecided. Though the enumerated powers obviously don't grant federal control of the health care system, I don't find that anything within the constitution itself directly spells out that Obamacare, or any form of it, is prohibited. Some believe since the tenth amendment grants the "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, [as] reserved to the States respectively," Obamacare is unconstitutional. Others say that the Commerce Clause grants the national government the power. To my view, the Constitution provides no clear cut answer. However, the bill has passed. Whether or not this project was constitutional should have been considered and analyzed long ago.
ReplyDeleteObamacare is constitutional because people can choose between whether they want obamacare or stick with their old plan. The only issue is the tax penalty if there is no evidence of insurance. They defend their position with the elastic clause, so no one can resist paying taxes. In my opinion, i don't think that everyone needs to have insurance, unless you have major health problems. For example my parents were talking about how if they had saved up the money that they paid the insurance company they could have used it now to buy a new car.
ReplyDeleteIt's a complicated issue if you delve into it deeply; initially it appears ridiculous that the federal government is requiring every citizen to purchase health care. However the problem that arises is that whether or not you have health care insurance in this country you will still get treated just maybe not initially but you can always walk into an emergency room and despite whether or not you can afford treatment you will receive it. Therefore it needs to be studied as to whether or not its more cost-efficient for everyone to receive health care insurance and therefore preventive medicine or is our current system of "well if the problem is really serious and immediate we'll treat you anyway even if you don't have insurance."
ReplyDeleteI agree very strongly with some of the above comments in that this Obama care is very ridiclous. I believe a person should not be forced to purchase health care for themselves or face a tax if they choose not to. Despite all the negatives of this plan, I think this issue is a good one to tackle at this time, because many people in the United States do face difficulty with health care, but I believe they shouldn't force everyone to partake.
ReplyDeleteI found a good website that supports the new health care bill. It provides accurate information on why we would need it as Americans and how it would benefit the economy. If you click on the icon to the left, it goes into detail about why we need the healthcare bill. I found this website to be extremely helpful in explaining how small businesses would benefit.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.standupforhealthcare.org/learn-more/quick-facts/12-reasons-to-support-health-care?gclid=CInY9b-l9KMCFcvr7QodXRac3A
ObamaCare could be considered constitutional but it's a ridiculous plan. This was only passed because the people in Congress felt it would be a waste of time if they didn't pass it. The idea seems nice but it places a lot of burdens on tax payers. I read this editorial in the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/23/obamacare-for-everyone-but-obama/)that this health care plan would cover Americans with the exeption of the president and congressmen in the House and Senate. It seems as though there is an elite class that is willing to impose burdens on the rest of us.
ReplyDeleteI believe Obamacare is unconstitutional. I don't think it is constitutional to make someone buy healthcare when they really don't need it. According to the 9th amendment, the courts are supposed to respect the people's unenumerated rights (rights not listed specifically in the Constitution); and I believe that the power of whether a person must buy healthcare is an unenumerated right. In addition, the salaries of medical service people (like doctors,nurses, etc) will decrease, which will create an unwillingness to enter that field. So, therefore, there may be a shortage in health care providers because no one will want to become a doctor because the salaries are unattractive.
ReplyDeleteI don't really take either side of this issue because there are different reasons why it could be both constitutional and unconstitutional. Obamacare is constitutional because Obama is trying to protect Americans' lives by having everyone get healthcare. Obamacare is also unconstitutional because Americans are being taxed if they do not buy healthcare. I also don't think this would help doctors because it would decrease their salaries which may result in a decline of doctors in our future. Although there may not be very many benefits to Obamacare, it was made with good intentions.
ReplyDeleteImagine you are in a sweet bike shop. All the bikes are different. Some have bells and some have whistles. Now imagine the government is forcing you to buy the same bike everyone else has. Does that seem Constitutional to you? No it doesn't. Because it isn't. The same goes for Obamacare.
ReplyDeleteI'm not completely sure how I feel about Obamacare. It is constitutional in that it doesn't violate the rights of the people, however certain aspects should be considered with the initiation of this health care -- that being public opinion and also the cost of bringing this health care into effect. If the results of this health care are not what the government planned for (loss of money and jobs for doctors), is it worth it? And how much will ObamaCare cost for families? The reason why people don't have health care now is because they don't have money to buy it. So why should they buy ObamaCare or any other health care for that matter? And if they don't, is it fair to penalize them with a tax? My family currently doesn't have health care, but we have a choice of paying a tax, purchasing an expensive health care, or purchasing ObamaCare, with a price that is hopefully cheaper than other health care programs. I guess we'll just have to wait and see the effects of ObamaCare.
ReplyDeleteHere's an article from Politco about the many conservatives opposing ObamaCare.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41777.html
I believe that obamacare is indeed unconstitutional. The argument some people make is that the government can regulate interstate commerce... Problem is this bill does not allow you to buy insurance from other states. Therefore there is no interstate commerce to regulate.Furthermore, even if that was not the case, lets say I could buy the insurance from other states, lets say I decide not to buy... Well then if I do not buy what is there to regulate?
ReplyDeleteThe idea of universal healthcare seems rational enough, especially to the vast amount of people who are uninsured in our nation. However, the implementation of the bill is entirely unconstitutional. The fact that the government is essentially requiring everyone to have obamacare is infringing on the liberty of the people. Granted, any individual is permitted to still have their own health insurance if they so choose, but he/she must pay an extra tax on the personal health insurance. Therefore, although it is not explicitly stated that everyone is required to have this new insurance, everyone will be paying for it. This is essentially unconstitutional, because the government cannot tax on a product that a citizen does not even wish to receive.
ReplyDeletei think obamacare is unconstutional because the 16th amendment states "the congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes" this mandate isnt shown to be an income, even though its a tax under the constution. people arent being able to excercise thier liberties and rights being forced to pay for a certain healthcare so they wont be breaking the law. and this could raise taxes for states in the future in which some might not be able to afford. the only alternative would be to raise taxes this would cause people really not to pay for healthcare especially people who dont make enough income and depend on health insurance.
ReplyDelete