Welcome Guest

Sign In | Register

States have the constitutional authority to interfere in

Posted on: February 27, 2017 at 09:33:45 CT

DHighlander NWMSU

Posts:

51159

Member For:

16.87 yrs

Level:

User

M.O.B. Votes:

0

most individual issues. Local governments are much more in tune with the will of the voters that is why these types of issues were originally left to the states.

If California wants a single payer system then they have the power to make it happen. Bully for them.

Obamacare was unconstitutional, despite what the SC ruled, but if each of the fifty states implemented the exact same plan it would be totally within the bounds of the constitution.

Just like abortion the fed has jumped in and screwed up health care. It is now a federal issue and will always be screwed.

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

MESSAGE THREAD

#Calexit: Cal considering single payer with Obamacare - MUTGR MU - 2/27 09:15:17

Then we build the wall ....nm - tigertix MU - 2/27 09:24:26

Just like states SHOULD have done in the 1st place! - Spanky KU - 2/27 09:18:38

HC is an individual issue. (nm) - ummmm MU - 2/27 09:24:53

In theory, it should be an individual issue. In reality, it - Spanky KU - 2/27 09:50:52

It's reality, not theory - pickle MU

- 2/27 09:55:49

in reality it is an individual issue that government inserts - MizzouAstro MU

- 2/27 09:55:18

In reality, it is still an individual issue. - ummmm MU - 2/27 09:53:32

The reality is, it is a Federal issue usurped from states - Spanky KU - 2/27 10:41:00

If we were to accept your position, then nothing would be - ummmm MU - 2/27 10:43:27

States have the constitutional authority to interfere in - DHighlander KC - 2/27 09:33:45

Obamacare was not unconstitutional - pickle MU

- 2/27 09:57:14

So the commerce clause applies even when I do not choose to - DHighlander KC - 2/27 10:00:08

Yes, it applies even if you do not choose to buy a service. - pickle MU

- 2/27 10:07:25

It has been ruled constitutional, that does not make it so. - DHighlander KC - 2/27 10:23:28

First of all, it's constitutional based on the Constitution - pickle MU

- 2/27 11:20:52

So you are claim that my refusal to not buy a product is - DHighlander KC - 2/27 11:28:04

I don't by DirectTV - pickle MU

- 2/27 11:37:05

So congress can require that you subscribe? Commerce - DHighlander KC - 2/27 11:40:11

Yes, of course they can. They are regulating commerce - pickle MU

- 2/27 11:44:29

Pickle was being facetious, you know. (nm) - ummmm MU - 2/27 11:36:12

First of all, it was 3/5ths. Second of all, the Constitution - ummmm MU - 2/27 10:39:45

3/5th my mistake. But your other 'facts' were incorrect. - DHighlander KC - 2/27 11:20:39

You made a completely inaccurate comment, and you are now - ummmm MU - 2/27 11:25:33

Obvious typo since the sentence right before identified the - DHighlander KC - 2/27 11:38:15

Just say: - ummmm MU - 2/27 11:52:54

the 3/5 clause is so misinterpreted anyway. you realize it - blake1771 KC - 2/27 11:19:37

You should be directing these posts at DH. (nm) - ummmm MU - 2/27 11:25:49

Yes, it was a political compromise but one that actually - DHighlander KC - 2/27 11:24:36

these guys are "originalists" and imo, spend a lot of time - 90Tiger MU - 2/27 11:44:22

Constitutionally speaking, original intent is all that - ummmm MU - 2/27 11:56:55

Exactly (nm) - pickle MU

- 2/27 12:23:06

I wasn't talking about the Constitutional framework - ummmm MU - 2/27 09:46:31

So are food, shelter, clothing and employment. But states - DHighlander KC - 2/27 09:52:32

Under the framework of the Constitution, sure. (nm) - ummmm MU - 2/27 09:54:04

©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy About Tigerboard