Posts Tagged ‘Affordable Healthcare Act’

On the Eve of the Obamacare Decision

Posted by Troy on 27th June 2012 in Current Events, Political

You do not have the right to healthcare.  You do not have the right to a home.  You do not have the right to food.  You do not have the right to anything that you cannot afford.  If that sounds harsh and unfair, so be it, but it is true.  You only have the right to have the ability to buy these services and possessions.  All the things you have the right to are free: speech, thought, religion, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, to protect yourself, to equal treatment under the law, to a trial by jury, and the like.

To those people who like Obamacare because of the pre-existing conditions, they are going to charge you dearly for this insurance.  As such, you will not buy the insurance anyway and will pay the penalty.  You will then buy the insurance when you need treatment and will drop it as soon as you no longer need treatment, and this will cause insurance rates for everyone to jump, and then everyone will do exactly what you are doing, and then the insurance companies will go bankrupt, and then the real fun begins when the government steps in to save us.  Read 2084.

If you want to solve the issues with pre-existing conditions, how about this: If you buy insurance before age 25, the insurance companies cannot deny you coverage.  As long as you stay current with your premiums, they cannot kick you out.  We can even make a rule that they cannot charge people more than 125% of the average premium to prevent people from being priced out of the market.  We can even put more responsibility to the insured and state that these restrictions only apply if they remain non-smokers, do not use illegal drugs, and maintain a BMI under 30.  Hell, that would solve a lot of problems right there.

I am a fan of doing away with insurance altogether.  I think that insurance severs the link between the patient and the bill.  This leads to insane choices.  If you had to pony up $90,000 for a knee replacement, you might choose to buy a $50 cane instead–particularly if you are near the end of your life and would rather your kids have $90,000 more when you die.  This would lead to chaos for five to ten years, but this would end up solving most of our problems with “health care.”

May the whole thing be overturned.

Long Live the Constitution!

Severability Analogy

Posted by Troy on 4th April 2012 in Current Events, Political

I have said that the court should throw out the entire Affordable Healthcare Act if the individual mandate is found unconstitutional.  The reason I say this is that there is no severability clause in the law.  As such, the law must be struck down in its entirety as there is no way to say that individual sections would have passed on their own merit when Congress originally voted on Obamacare.  Here is an example:

Boy A wishes to trade his Tim Tebow trading card for Boy B’s Hank Aaron card and $5.  Boy A hands Boy B the trading card, and Boy B gives him $5.  Boy B explains that the Hank Aaron card belongs to his dad, and his father said that he had no authority to trade it.  Since half of Boy B’s obligation has been overruled, must Boy A bear the cost and accept $5 for the Tim Tebow card?  Of course not!

However, in addition to the first deal, the boys came to another agreement to trade a Hot Wheels Lamborghini for a Matchbox Hummer.  Even though the first deal got struck down, the second deal should still stand because these deals were separate.  The first deal has nothing to do with the second deal.

Why the Supreme Court Must Overturn the Entire Healthcare Act

Posted by Troy on 29th March 2012 in Current Events, Political

A lot of people are saying that the Supreme Court is wrong not to read the entire 2,70o page document and salvage what they can of the act.  Justice Ginsburg advocates that the Supreme Court should go through the bill and salvage what they can.  This may sound reasonable, but they must not do this for the same reason why we should not have a line-item veto.

The line-item veto sounded like a wonderful thing.  If a bill had one bad provision, the President could strike out that one line and send it back for approval.  The Supreme Court ruled that this was not Constitutional because it hurt the separation of powers.  In addition, this wrecked the lawmaking process.

Imagine a situation in which the Congress put together a bill.  To get some Representatives on board, they gave them some concessions.  The reluctant Congressman goes along with it due to the concessions.  The President strikes the measure that got the Congressman on board.  In the end, the law gets signed, and the Congressman gets the shaft.

That brings us to Obamacare.  Before it was actually brought before the Supreme Court, Obama said that if the mandate was unconstitutional, the whole thing would have to go.  This is why he did not put a severability clause in there to start with, even though his legal team begged him to do so.  The individual mandate is the funding mechanism.  Without it, the whole thing falls apart.  What would have been a disaster after five to fifteen years becomes a disaster in five to fifteen months.  Without a severability clause, Congress said that the bill is meant to be taking as a whole, and it should.  That bill was the result of months of negotiations, backroom deals, and payoffs.  If the Supreme Court start going through and saying this stays and this goes, then the bill becomes something else entirely.  The bill the Justices create by taking out the individual mandate and other provisions may not have gotten a single vote if such a bill had been presented before Congress.  The Supreme Court are judges, not legislators.  They should not try to write legislation on their own.  The only responsible thing, given the lack of a severability clause, is to kill the entire bill.  If Congress doesn’t like it, they can do one of two things.  They can either go back to the drawing board and try to write a Constitutional health care bill, or they can try to amend the Constitution.  Of course, the Left will never actually try to amend the Constitution.  They are a firm believer that it is easier to ask forgiveness than to ask permission.

Long Live the Constitution!

Obamacare – Day 2 – The commerce clause

Posted by Troy on 27th March 2012 in Current Events, Political

Originally, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution was intended to ensure smooth operation of trade between the States and foreign countries.  About twelve years ago, the Supreme Court heard a case about an old lady in Washington who was busted for growing marijuana.  The thing is, she had a prescription for it.  As such, it was legal for her to have marijuana.  The Feds couldn’t figure out what to do, so they prosecuted her under the Commerce Clause.  Their case was that she was supposed to smoke medical grade pot, not just stuff she grew.  Medical grade pot is grown in Texas.  As such, she is interfering with interstate commerce.  In the dissenting opinion, one Justice said, “If we rule this way, we give unlimited power to the Federal government because what doesn’t affect interstate commerce if you take it out to the nth degree?”

I grow rosemary.  How is that any different?

Now they say they can require you to own health insurance because most people will use some sort of medical treatment, and it is unfair that the young and healthy don’t buy insurance.  As such, only the old and sick buy insurance, and this raises cost.  So, rather than identify that insurance is the problem, we are going to force everyone to buy a product.   What’s really amazing is how stupid the young people are that they can be convinced to demand to be forced to buy a product.

As I laid out in 2084, their plan is designed to fail.  Inevitably, the only solution that is based upon a common pool will be to initiate Death Panels that do an actuarial analysis of the value of the patient’s life.  The reason that medical costs are so high is as follows:  In World War II, employers came up with the idea of health insurance so that they could get around compensation limitations that were in place as part of the rationing program.  As more people got on insurance, doctors were able to charge more for their services.  As doctors charged more for their services, more people felt the need to get insurance out of fear of not being able to afford medical care.  As more people got insurance, doctors were able to charge more.  As the market for insurance got saturated (everyone who could and would buy insurance had already done so), insurance companies had to raise their rates to cover the increased charges by the medical profession.  After that, it’s a spiral.  It’s all simple, self-interested, human behavior that an eighth grader can figure out.  We see the same thing happening with dental work, and we are about to see it play out with pet insurance too.

As I discussed yesterday, the Health Care Act is not covered by the powers of taxation.  It also isn’t covered by the Commerce Clause.  There is no way that the Founding Fathers would have given the government the power to deem that possible future economic transactions are to have occurred currently and demand action on a citizen.  Under this same thought process, Congress could declare that you are probably going to buy stuff and charge you the present value of all National Sales Taxes for the next twenty years at the current date.  Why not?  Under their logic, it is the same thing.

You want to fix medical costs?  Get rid of insurance completely.  There will be about five years of chaos.  After that, prices will regulate.  Third party payment systems are always doomed to failure in any market because it breaks the link between the consumer and the supplier.  Without this link, goods and services will not be priced correctly.  If you put out a product “for free,” people will take it just to take it.  This is one reason why I always sell my books instead of just give them away.  I figure if they’re not willing to pay for the book, they will just take it and not read it.

If you think the prices and supply of healthcare is bad now, just wait until it’s “free.”

Long Live the Constitution!

Obamacare goes to court

Posted by Troy on 26th March 2012 in Current Events

Today was stage one of the Obamacare argument.  Basically, the government’s point today was that no one was harmed by the “tax” yet, so it cannot be challenged in court.

Judge Alito pointed out that today they were arguing that it was a tax.  Tomorrow, however, they are arguing that it is not a tax.  The importance of this definition is significant.  Before Obamacare was passed, it was important to the government that it  was not called a tax.  At the time, it was important that  it wasn’t a tax so that the people at large wouldn’t pitch a fit.  After it was passed, it was important that it was called a tax because there is no way that the law is Constitutional otherwise.

Throughout the entire 2,000 page tome that is Obamacare, there is no place where the penalty for not purchasing insurance is called a tax.  It is always called a penalty.  The only reason why it is in the Internal Revenue Code at all has to deal with the collection of the penalty.  However, all this is beside the point.  There are only two types of “direct” taxes which are available under the Constitution.  The first tax is not to be paid by individuals themselves but is levied against the states on the basis of their proportionate share of the population.  The other is the income tax.  The entire reason why we had to pass the Sixteenth Amendment was so they could do another direct tax based on individual income.  The proposed “tax” would be an odd direct tax based upon whether or not a specific product had been purchased.  In fact, there is no example in history of a tax for NOT doing something.

Needless to say, the idea that Obamacare is a tax fell flat on its face.  Tomorrow, they start to hear debates on the individual mandate.  As a lover of the Constitution and of America, I pray that Obamacare is shot down.  If we say that Congress can tell us we have to buy something just because we are alive, they will have unlimited power.

Long Live the Constitution!