The Commonwealth of Virginia will sue

[T-Dog]

In North Carolina, you must have car insurance in order to own a car. That's a state law. Yes the car insurance companies are private, but it's a buyers market. This is considered a great law by all sides.

Just like the car insurance law, once the initial anger over it passes and people see how it's done in practice, they will react accordingly. In NC, the opposition shut up because of how popular it was once the law went from the pages to practice.

So if this turns out to grow popularity with the people, these lawsuits will die down. If the other way around, those who voted for it will have an uphill battle for re-election.

[grizzaholic]

In North Carolina, you must have car insurance in order to own a car. That's a state law. Yes the car insurance companies are private, but it's a buyers market. This is considered a great law by all sides.

Just like the car insurance law, once the initial anger over it passes and people see how it's done in practice, they will react accordingly. In NC, the opposition shut up because of how popular it was once the law went from the pages to practice.

So if this turns out to grow popularity with the people, these lawsuits will die down. If the other way around, those who voted for it will have an uphill battle for re-election.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Good luck with that waste of money

Please explain and give references to where in the Constitution of the United States is says that our government has the power to pass into legislation a law that mandates the people of this country?


I wont hold my breath waiting.

[Skjellyfetti]

Please explain and give references to where in the Constitution of the United States is says that our government has the power to pass into legislation a law that mandates the people of this country?

It seems like you left out a word or two from that sentence. Not sure what to make of it.

[OL FU]

In North Carolina, you must have car insurance in order to own a car. That's a state law. Yes the car insurance companies are private, but it's a buyers market. This is considered a great law by all sides.

Just like the car insurance law, once the initial anger over it passes and people see how it's done in practice, they will react accordingly. In NC, the opposition shut up because of how popular it was once the law went from the pages to practice.

So if this turns out to grow popularity with the people, these lawsuits will die down. If the other way around, those who voted for it will have an uphill battle for re-election.

Three points,1) you don't have to own a car therefore you are not required to buy insurance.
2) It is the state of North Carolina and the state is not restricted with respect to such things by the constitution.
3) The requirement to buy insurance if you own a car is not for your protection but for the protection of the poor sum bitch that you run into. Now the feds will try to make a similar argument with mandating health insurance, but the argument is a little more convoluted than simply protecting others since it is about reducing health care cost while subsidizing the cost of people buying the insurance.

REgardless, number 1 and 2 are the main differences.

[native]

Please explain and give references to where in the Constitution of the United States is says that our government has the power to pass into legislation a law that mandates the people of this country?

It seems like you left out a word or two from that sentence. Not sure what to make of it.

Pretty damm clear to me. The country today is being run by an organized crime cabal - i.e., thieves willing to use extra-Constitutional and therefore illegitimate legislation to achieve their ends.

[native]

In North Carolina, you must have car insurance in order to own a car. That's a state law. Yes the car insurance companies are private, but it's a buyers market. This is considered a great law by all sides.

Just like the car insurance law, once the initial anger over it passes and people see how it's done in practice, they will react accordingly. In NC, the opposition shut up because of how popular it was once the law went from the pages to practice.

So if this turns out to grow popularity with the people, these lawsuits will die down. If the other way around, those who voted for it will have an uphill battle for re-election.

Three points,1) you don't have to own a car therefore you are not required to buy insurance.
2) It is the state of North Carolina and the state is not restricted with respect to such things by the constitution.
3) The requirement to buy insurance if you own a car is not for your protection but for the protection of the poor sum bitch that you run into. Now the feds will try to make a similar argument with mandating health insurance, but the argument is a little more convoluted than simply protecting others since it is about reducing health care cost while subsidizing the cost of people buying the insurance.

REgardless, number 1 and 2 are the main differences.

+1

[OL FU]

Dear Virginia,

Let South Carolina sue first. WE like like taking the first shots in what might be a losing battle. We will let your (attorney) generals command the battlefield and will probably let the new capital reside in your state. But please let us go first

[dbackjon]

Dear Virginia,

Let South Carolina sue first. WE like like taking the first shots in what might be a losing battle. We will let your (attorney) generals command the battlefield and will probably let the new capital reside in your state. But please let us go first

[blueballs]

The theory could be that Congress is really trying to protect the citizens in insurance market. Because insurers won't be able to deny coverage for pre-exisitng conditions, healthy people won't buy insurance (until after they got sick or hurt) and premiums would skyrocket for everyone else, who then would drop their insurance until they needed it That would likely lead to the whole insurance market collapsing.

...which is EXACTLY what Pelosi and her minions want because it leads right back to a single payer public system that they control. They use the excuse that the private entities couldn't control themselves and that they have to do it to make it viable... works perfect.

[OL FU]

Dear Virginia,

Let South Carolina sue first. WE like like taking the first shots in what might be a losing battle. We will let your (attorney) generals command the battlefield and will probably let the new capital reside in your state. But please let us go first

Thanks I thought we might need to lighten up a tad

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Universal Health Care - Single Payor is the cheapest, most effective route. Unfortunately, the right does not want this.

Why does the right oppose the cheapest, most effective solution?

You really are misreading this for a good deal of us out here Jon. I ain't what you could rightly term a republican but I do side with them when it comes to issues where the Federal Government is doing things that will give them more control over people's lives. This is not only likely here but almost a sure thing.

It's rooted in the exact same reason that I think you and Alex should have the same rights as everyone else if you want to get married. I am also tired of people willingly giving over power to the fucking Federal Government.

Good job to the Virginia AG and all those that follow his lead.

[native]

The theory could be that Congress is really trying to protect the citizens in insurance market. Because insurers won't be able to deny coverage for pre-exisitng conditions, healthy people won't buy insurance (until after they got sick or hurt) and premiums would skyrocket for everyone else, who then would drop their insurance until they needed it That would likely lead to the whole insurance market collapsing.

...which is EXACTLY what Pelosi and her minions want because it leads right back to a single payer public system that they control. They use the excuse that the private entities couldn't control themselves and that they have to do it to make it viable... works perfect.

+100! DING! DING! DING!

[SuperHornet]

Here's the difference:

The car insurance mando provision is a STATE requirement based on the PRIVILEGE of owning/driving a car. By the same rationale, the FEDERAL government is forcing $$ on us for the PRIVILEGE of BREATHING. This is a violation of States' Rights, and many attorneys general are suing about that. It is also individually unfair, especially in an environment where folk can't afford it, anyway.

One other thing nobody's gotten through their thick skulls: there is a drop-dead date three years from now. That is, the feds will quit paying for this in three years and force states (already losing $$ due to decreasing tax revenues) to foot the bill. Does General Secretary Obama actually expect states to WILLINGLY go bankrupt to ease his humongous ego?!?

[HI54UNI]

The theory could be that Congress is really trying to protect the citizens in insurance market. Because insurers won't be able to deny coverage for pre-exisitng conditions, healthy people won't buy insurance (until after they got sick or hurt) and premiums would skyrocket for everyone else, who then would drop their insurance until they needed it That would likely lead to the whole insurance market collapsing.

...which is EXACTLY what Pelosi and her minions want because it leads right back to a single payer public system that they control. They use the excuse that the private entities couldn't control themselves and that they have to do it to make it viable... works perfect.

Plus a business can pay a $2000 per employee penalty if they don't provide health insurance. Let's see, $2000 per employee or $8,000-15,000 for healthcare. I think I would pay the penalty and let the government take care of them.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Good luck with that waste of money

Please explain and give references to where in the Constitution of the United States is says that our government has the power to pass into legislation a law that mandates the people of this country?


I wont hold my breath waiting.

Still not holding my breath....................................................................

[ToTheLeft]

Universal Health Care - Single Payor is the cheapest, most effective route. Unfortunately, the right does not want this.

Why does the right oppose the cheapest, most effective solution?

You really are misreading this for a good deal of us out here Jon. I ain't what you could rightly term a republican but I do side with them when it comes to issues where the Federal Government is doing things that will give them more control over people's lives. This is not only likely here but almost a sure thing.

It's rooted in the exact same reason that I think you and Alex should have the same rights as everyone else if you want to get married. I am also tired of people willingly giving over power to the fucking Federal Government.

Good job to the Virginia AG and all those that follow his lead.

This was the point of my earlier topic I started.

You want FREEDOM. Isn't that why liberal is the word used for those on the left? Why would you put something you're free to do, in the hands of the government, who will only corrupt it? If you want to marry, adopt with, smoke, drink, abort, and say whatever/whoever/wherever you want, then HOW could stand for a system that robs you of your freedoms?

[SuperHornet]

FYI, per Yahoo!, there are now THIRTEEN states who have rightly sued the feds over this miscarriage of justice.

[JMU DJ]

Pretty damm clear to me. The country today is being run by an organized crime cabal - i.e., thieves willing to use extra-Constitutional and therefore illegitimate legislation to achieve their ends.

Hmmm, I've heard this somewhere before....

[Skjellyfetti]

I thought Conks were against frivolous lawsuits?

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Its not frivolous and you know that.

[ASUMountaineer]

Good luck with that waste of money

That's funny.

[ASUMountaineer]

There's really no words to describe the ignorance/naivety of highly indoctrinated donks.

I'd rather waste money fighting terrible, unconstitutional legislation, than waste money on trying to "fix" healthcare by involving the government, which as well all know, is famous for it's fiscal responsibility.

If the insurance industry wasn't a crooked game none of this would be necessary.

So, that explains why the insurance companies will now be guaranteed (through coercion of citizens) 35 million new perpetual clients. Interesting logic there...

[Skjellyfetti]

So, that explains why the insurance companies will now be guaranteed (through coercion of citizens) 35 million new perpetual clients. Interesting logic there...

Not really. Most of those 35 million won't be going to the health insurance companies. They'll be going to the non-profit co-ops.

[ASUMountaineer]

So, that explains why the insurance companies will now be guaranteed (through coercion of citizens) 35 million new perpetual clients. Interesting logic there...

Not really. Most of those 35 million won't be going to the health insurance companies. They'll be going to the non-profit co-ops.

These non-profits will underwrite the policies? So, the non-profits will be providing the coverage? I'll believe when I see it. The insurance industry is just as propped up by the government now as banks and car companies...actually more. People aren't required to buy their products.