Comments on: Pawlenty might invoke the 10th Amendment to stop health care reform

By: CD Humphreys

CD Humphreys — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:58:54 +0000

Brilliant… Do what ever it takes to Vote NO on this Health Care BIll. We work hard for the right to have what we feel we need. We do not like to be threatened with fines and imprisionment for not choing what the government thinks is best for us.
This is not the way to help those in need of health care. This only helps creates the socialistic system destroying the American way of life. Stop this.

By: Ancient History? State and local governments lobby D.C. for money

Ancient History? State and local governments lobby D.C. for money — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:36:28 +0000

[...] this is the basis for various sovreignty amendments, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty’s rejection of the health care bill, and Texas Governor Rick Perry’s opposition to the [...]

By: Sam Reid

Sam Reid — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 05:02:07 +0000

Sam

Last time I checked, social security checks go mostly to folks who who actually paid for them. So how does accepting your own money nullify your right to protest the involuntary transfer of one’s own money to someone else in a completely different government scheme?

By: Dave

Dave — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:39:52 +0000

Well, except for “I find it interesting how States Rights are only invoked by the Right when it reinforces their position.”

By: Dave

Dave — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:37:39 +0000

Sounds like the most reasonable thing I’ve read so far on this page, Steve.

By: Steve H

Steve H — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 00:46:08 +0000

Okay, enough, enough. I HEREBY DECREE (hey, if you can wear a tinfoil hat and make silly pronouncements, so can I) that “government health care” may ONLY be protested by those who are not receiving any Medicare, VA, or congressional health benefits. Anyone in these categories who wishes to protest the notion of government health care must publicly reject these benefits for him- or herself.

Whaddaya think?

(And “socialism!” may only be raised as a cry of alarm by those who are not receiving any Social Security benefits, and who have signed an ironclad agreement never to accept any.)

By: Pawlenty Keeps Missing the Point on Health Care | Hindsight - From Minnesota 2020

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:11:18 +0000

[...] what is surely a pander to a rigid, ideologically conservative base, Governor Tim Pawlenty suggested invoking “states rights” to exempt Minnesota from President Obama’s bold health care initiative. Constitutional debate [...]

By: Vernon

Vernon — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:06:46 +0000

Uh, couple more points.

1) Ridding the marketplace of the artificial regulations that forbid interstate competition in the insurance markets is hardly an argument against federalism. Sheesh.

2) Calling for a Constitutional amendment is, similarly, not against federalism. It’s a suggestion that the ordinary, original, mechanisms be brought to bear on the question. Not terribly likely that the original federalists would have provided such a mechanism had they believed it to be inconsistent with federalism.

It would be terribly helpful to the national debate over such issues if people were not totally ignorant of the nation’s laws.

Or, in the alternative, we could restore federalism so that it doesn’t matter so much that the citizens are ignorant, because the various levels of government would be addressed to questions proper for their respective levels. For instance, in such a scheme, the federal government WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SOMETHING LIKE HEALTHCARE.

By: Vernon

Vernon — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:53:26 +0000

The general welfare clause is not license for the federal government to do anything it wishes; specifically, it cannot be read as abrogating federalism, specifically the 10th amendment. In fact, arguably, the 10th amendment puts some SIGNIFICANT restraints on the clause. Only someone ignorant of the Constitution and the law would suggest otherwise. Which is to say, someone “educated” in America, as perverse as that situation may be.

I would love to see a massive, 10th amendment-focused backlash against this nonsense. Let’s lay things out on the table and really have a look at how substantially the left has thrown out the Constitution, starting with FDR. It’ll be a great foundation for the coming secession movements, which by the way, are COMPLETELY justified.

By: jnleareth

jnleareth — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:59:57 +0000

I find it interesting how States Rights are only invoked by the Right when it reinforces their position. Wasn’t it just a week or so ago that Bachmann was saying we should “erase state lines” and allow people to buy insurance from any company in the country to bypass state laws? Or how they want a Federal law to nullify laws that States passed regarding same sex marriage.