PDA

View Full Version : " ‘Pursuit of Happiness’ Language, Authorize Congress to Force People to Buy Insura



megimoo
01-19-2011, 08:39 PM
Rep. John Lewis Says Declaration's ‘Pursuit of Happiness’ Language and 14th Amendment Authorize Congress to Force People to Buy Health Insurance

"Another Liberal Constitutional Scholar" Video:

Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) said on Tuesday that the government should require individuals to buy health insurance and cited the Preamble to the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence’s “pursuit of happiness” language and the 14th Amendment as the sources of Congress’ authority to enact such a mandate.

“I think people should be required to get health insurance. We require people to get insurance for their automobile state by state but the federal government has an obligation to encourage by law, moral persuasion, to get people to get health insurance,” Lewis told CNSNews.com on Tuesday after a House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing in opposition to Republican efforts to repeal the health-care law enacted last year.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-john-lewis-pursuit-happiness-and-14t

NJCardFan
01-19-2011, 09:46 PM
Lewis needs to consult a dictionary because to pursue is up to the individual. See, I have the skill of reading comprehension and the last time I looked, pursuing something is not synonymous with ramming it down my throat.

m00
01-19-2011, 11:47 PM
Changing what words mean is a timeless tactic of politicians. Which is why the founders wrote the Constitution in incredibly plan and specific language. Didn't seem to help a whole lot, in the end.

lacarnut
01-20-2011, 12:35 AM
Lewis is full of shit as a Christmas turkey. If you don't drive, the government does not force you to buy a license or insurance. In the case of health care, you are being forced to buy a product which is unconstitutional.

PoliCon
01-20-2011, 01:38 AM
Homeland security can come after me if they like - but if the courts uphold this law and it's not repealed before it kicks in . . . . time to call enough enough and remember that "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

malloc
01-20-2011, 05:28 AM
Someone should tell this idiot that the Declaration of Independence is not law. It was a letter to King George, telling him we weren't his subjects anymore and giving him the reasons for parting ways with England. The Declaration of Independence cannot be cited as a source of an enumerated power. He should have learned this in grade school. Only Article I Section 8 of the Constitution and the Amendments grant powers to the Congress, the

The 5th Amendment prohibits the Federal government from depriving someone of life, liberty or property without due process. So I could make a 5th Amendment argument against forcing me to part with my property, my money, without due process.



Generally, due process guarantees the following:

Right to a fair and public trial conducted in a competent manner

What, are they going to try all 150 million or so taxpayers?
Right to be present at the trial
Right to an impartial jury
Right to be heard in one's own defense

Laws must be written so that a reasonable person can understand what is criminal behavior

Yeah, the Obamacare package is so complicated even congresscritters, and it's authors don't quite understand it. Furthermore, since this is a tax scheme, I could bring in the 10,000 page tax code, and make a case with that.

Taxes and property may only be taken for public purposes

Forcing me to pay into a private insurance company is not a tax, but forced consumerism, and it is not for a public purpose, but for a private company.

Owners of taken property must be fairly compensated

If I'm a healthy young adult who doesn't need to use the services of the insurance company I'm forced to pay into, and therefore my premiums are used to subsidize the unhealthy or elderly's care, then I am not being fairly compensated unless my premiums are paid back to me.