Obama Confident about Health Care law:

GeneV · 04-03-2012, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by JohnInIndy

If you look at this though it was only for seamen. If you didn't want to buy "health insurance" you could theoretically fina another profession. ObamaScare requires it for every one who is living here. Well, every one except his cronies that got a waiver. Only way to avoid paying for it in one fashion or another is not to live in the US. So we aren't comparing apples to apples with that story.

From a legal standpoint we are talking about the same issue. Being a seaman in 1790 did not qualify you for much else, and buying health insurance was more unusual and even less necessary. It was actually a bit more of a stretch during John Adams' time.

I would agree that from a political point of view it is different, but that is not what the Supreme Court is supposed to decide.

ElJamoquio · 04-03-2012, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by JohnInIndy

If you look at this though it was only for seamen. I

...which is most decidedly interstate commerce. It also applied to the person conducting the commerce (the ship owner) rather than the seamen; and it really sounds more like 'have a first aid kit on a ship' than health care to me.

the 1790 law, passed by that first Congress, which applied to any U.S. ship that was at least 150 tons or with a crew of at least 10. It required the master or commander to either have a supply of on-board medicines (with instructions) or provide "all such advice, medicine, or attendance of physicians, as any of the crew shall stand in need of in case of sickness" and do it "without any deduction from the wages of such sick seaman or mariner."

GeneV · 04-03-2012, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by stevewig

An interesting read:

Read more: Health care reform: Obama, the left take on Supreme Court - POLITICO.com

I'm not sure how good this move is for the President. It comes across as if he is practically daring them to rule against him.

GeneV · 04-03-2012, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

...which is most decidedly interstate commerce. It also applied to the person conducting the commerce (the ship owner) rather than the seamen.

And Health insurance is not decidedly interstate commerce? From United Health Care's web site:

Quote:

Our family of companies delivers innovative products and services to approximately 70 million Americans. UnitedHealthcare's nationwide network includes 676,287 physicians and health care professionals, 80,000 dentists and 5,190 hospitals. Our pharmaceutical management programs provide more affordable access to drugs for 13 million people.

UnitedHealthcare makes the health care experience better for everyone involved

ElJamoquio · 04-03-2012, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by GeneV

And Health insurance is not decidedly interstate commerce? From United Health Care's web site:

UnitedHealthcare makes the health care experience better for everyone involved

Is healthcare more "interstate" than marijuana in Gonzales v Raich? Yes.

Is healthcare, for me, interstate? No. My employer purchases healthcare in-state from a in-state supplier. Most (all?) healthcare plans seem to be divided by state.

If you actually want to *purchase* healthcare from your link above, the first thing you have to do is enter your zip code.

https://www.uhone.com/Quote/QuotePerson.aspx?LeadSourceName=UHC-website&GAIQ4

magkelly · 04-03-2012, 07:59 AM

Right now I'm so glad my folks have health care benefits I can't tell you. That I don't have them is going to kill me one of these days. I'm kind of stuck in that legal loophole of now having a serious chronic illness and being unable to get health care because I am not insured. The state I live in will only do so much. The Free Clinic won't touch anyone with anything more chronic than a head cold. Even if I got a solid job with health insurance tomorrow they still wouldn't cover me because it's considered pre-existing. I get what Obama was trying to do. He was trying to fix it so people like me can finally get some kind of health care. Problem is he went about it in such a way that it's going to cost the nation in a big way and impact business in such a way that it will only contradict what he was trying to do. Even if I wanted to I couldn't buy health insurance. There is no company for it in this country that will insure me knowing I am chronically ill to begin with. It's like life insurance. They're probably not going to insure you if you're a huge risk. Nothing Obama has done is going to change that. I think this plan of his sucks. It was done with good intentions, but it still sucks and it needs to be overturned in Congress, post haste.

Wheatfield · 04-03-2012, 08:32 AM

Is your insured health care portable? If you move to another state, do you start again with a new policy?

Parallax · 04-03-2012, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Is healthcare, for me, interstate? No. My employer purchases healthcare in-state from a in-state supplier.

If that supplier does business in other states as well, or does business with the Federal Government, it is interstate commerce. If you are traveling in another state and get ill or injured, will your insurance pay part of the bill? That's interstate commerce.

GeneV · 04-03-2012, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Is healthcare more "interstate" than marijuana in Gonzales v Raich? Yes.

Is healthcare, for me, interstate? No. My employer purchases healthcare in-state from a in-state supplier. Most (all?) healthcare plans seem to be divided by state.

If you actually want to *purchase* healthcare from your link above, the first thing you have to do is enter your zip code.

https://www.uhone.com/Quote/QuotePerson.aspx?LeadSourceName=UHC-website&GAIQ4

Your insurer may be in state, but the market involves a lot of players across state lines. You may never travel past your block, but your road may still be an integral part of interstate commerce.

The point for Federal jurisdiction is whether it substantially affects interstate commerce. It is hard to see how it doesn't. In quite a few states, just two national concerns, United Healthcare and Blue Cross control most of the market. In NC, those two control 81% and in Fla., they control 65%. Not to mention, as Jim noted, all the suppliers, pharmaceuticals, and the effect on employers across the country. Our international trade is affected by our system which puts wildly greater costs than other countries on the books of our businesses.Healthcare Costs and U.S. Competitiveness - Council on Foreign Relations Industries Hurt Most by Soaring Health Costs - Rick Newman (usnews.com)

les3547 · 04-03-2012, 09:15 AM

Originally posted by magkelly

I get what Obama was trying to do. He was trying to fix it so people like me can finally get some kind of health care. Problem is he went about it in such a way that it's going to cost the nation in a big way and impact business in such a way that it will only contradict what he was trying to do. Even if I wanted to I couldn't buy health insurance. There is no company for it in this country that will insure me knowing I am chronically ill to begin with. It's like life insurance. They're probably not going to insure you if you're a huge risk. Nothing Obama has done is going to change that. I think this plan of his sucks. It was done with good intentions, but it still sucks and it needs to be overturned in Congress, post haste.

I don't understand blaming the President for the state of things. A President has very limited powers, he needs congress and apparently the Supreme Court to agree. The health care bill wasn't the single payer plan Obama wanted. It was the only plan that could get through congress at the time. It seems like you are saying if he couldn't get the ideal, he shouldn't try to get us anything.

Parallax · 04-03-2012, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by les3547

I don't understand blaming the President for the state of things.

Well, unless it's Bush, right?

les3547 · 04-03-2012, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

Well, unless it's Bush, right?

I will rephrase, I don't understand blaming the President for what's not under his control. Invading Iraq, for example, could have been prevented by President Bush.

Parallax · 04-03-2012, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by les3547

I will rephrase, I don't understand blaming the President for what's not under his control.

Well, unless it's Bush, right?

ElJamoquio · 04-03-2012, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by GeneV

Your insurer may be in state, but the market involves a lot of players across state lines. You may never travel past your block, but your road may still be an integral part of interstate commerce.

Which makes it kind of odd that interstates are really under state prerogative. I agree.

Originally posted by GeneV

Your insurer may be in state, but the market involves a lot of players across state lines .

So during the great depression, the Federal Government tried a power grab. FDR said that farmers growing their own crops was interstate commerce. It was ruled unconstitutional (at least until FDR tried to overrun the supreme court).

If our federal taxes and government wasn't so onerous, we'd have socialized healthcare in California by now.

les3547 · 04-03-2012, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

Well, unless it's Bush, right?

I don't believe you can accuse me of that, and I am not responsible for what others do.

04-03-2012, 09:53 AM	#44
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by GeneV Your insurer may be in state, but the market involves a lot of players across state lines. You may never travel past your block, but your road may still be an integral part of interstate commerce. Which makes it kind of odd that interstates are really under state prerogative. I agree. Originally posted by GeneV Your insurer may be in state, but the market involves a lot of players across state lines . So during the great depression, the Federal Government tried a power grab. FDR said that farmers growing their own crops was interstate commerce. It was ruled unconstitutional (at least until FDR tried to overrun the supreme court). If our federal taxes and government wasn't so onerous, we'd have socialized healthcare in California by now. Last edited by ElJamoquio; 04-03-2012 at 10:14 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Let's not forget about health care	jeffkrol	General Talk	32	11-04-2010 01:41 PM
Another Fiasco With Health Care	Artesian	General Talk	16	10-10-2010 09:35 AM
Koch Industries and health care	jeffkrol	General Talk	10	09-03-2010 03:21 PM
Obama's health care law will increase the nation's health care costs	Artesian	General Talk	187	05-20-2010 10:18 AM
Health Care's rosy future...	GingeM	General Talk	19	05-19-2010 10:09 AM

04-03-2012, 07:35 AM	#31
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by JohnInIndy If you look at this though it was only for seamen. If you didn't want to buy "health insurance" you could theoretically fina another profession. ObamaScare requires it for every one who is living here. Well, every one except his cronies that got a waiver. Only way to avoid paying for it in one fashion or another is not to live in the US. So we aren't comparing apples to apples with that story. From a legal standpoint we are talking about the same issue. Being a seaman in 1790 did not qualify you for much else, and buying health insurance was more unusual and even less necessary. It was actually a bit more of a stretch during John Adams' time. I would agree that from a political point of view it is different, but that is not what the Supreme Court is supposed to decide.

04-03-2012, 07:35 AM	#32
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by JohnInIndy If you look at this though it was only for seamen. I ...which is most decidedly interstate commerce. It also applied to the person conducting the commerce (the ship owner) rather than the seamen; and it really sounds more like 'have a first aid kit on a ship' than health care to me. the 1790 law, passed by that first Congress, which applied to any U.S. ship that was at least 150 tons or with a crew of at least 10. It required the master or commander to either have a supply of on-board medicines (with instructions) or provide "all such advice, medicine, or attendance of physicians, as any of the crew shall stand in need of in case of sickness" and do it "without any deduction from the wages of such sick seaman or mariner."

04-03-2012, 07:36 AM	#33
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by stevewig An interesting read: Read more: Health care reform: Obama, the left take on Supreme Court - POLITICO.com I'm not sure how good this move is for the President. It comes across as if he is practically daring them to rule against him.

04-03-2012, 07:39 AM	#34
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by ElJamoquio ...which is most decidedly interstate commerce. It also applied to the person conducting the commerce (the ship owner) rather than the seamen. And Health insurance is not decidedly interstate commerce? From United Health Care's web site: Quote: Our family of companies delivers innovative products and services to approximately 70 million Americans. UnitedHealthcare's nationwide network includes 676,287 physicians and health care professionals, 80,000 dentists and 5,190 hospitals. Our pharmaceutical management programs provide more affordable access to drugs for 13 million people. UnitedHealthcare makes the health care experience better for everyone involved

04-03-2012, 07:47 AM	#35
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by GeneV And Health insurance is not decidedly interstate commerce? From United Health Care's web site: UnitedHealthcare makes the health care experience better for everyone involved Is healthcare more "interstate" than marijuana in Gonzales v Raich? Yes. Is healthcare, for me, interstate? No. My employer purchases healthcare in-state from a in-state supplier. Most (all?) healthcare plans seem to be divided by state. If you actually want to purchase healthcare from your link above, the first thing you have to do is enter your zip code. https://www.uhone.com/Quote/QuotePerson.aspx?LeadSourceName=UHC-website&GAIQ4

04-03-2012, 07:59 AM	#36
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	Right now I'm so glad my folks have health care benefits I can't tell you. That I don't have them is going to kill me one of these days. I'm kind of stuck in that legal loophole of now having a serious chronic illness and being unable to get health care because I am not insured. The state I live in will only do so much. The Free Clinic won't touch anyone with anything more chronic than a head cold. Even if I got a solid job with health insurance tomorrow they still wouldn't cover me because it's considered pre-existing. I get what Obama was trying to do. He was trying to fix it so people like me can finally get some kind of health care. Problem is he went about it in such a way that it's going to cost the nation in a big way and impact business in such a way that it will only contradict what he was trying to do. Even if I wanted to I couldn't buy health insurance. There is no company for it in this country that will insure me knowing I am chronically ill to begin with. It's like life insurance. They're probably not going to insure you if you're a huge risk. Nothing Obama has done is going to change that. I think this plan of his sucks. It was done with good intentions, but it still sucks and it needs to be overturned in Congress, post haste.

04-03-2012, 08:32 AM	#37
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Is your insured health care portable? If you move to another state, do you start again with a new policy?

04-03-2012, 08:38 AM	#38
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Is healthcare, for me, interstate? No. My employer purchases healthcare in-state from a in-state supplier. If that supplier does business in other states as well, or does business with the Federal Government, it is interstate commerce. If you are traveling in another state and get ill or injured, will your insurance pay part of the bill? That's interstate commerce.

04-03-2012, 09:06 AM	#39
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Is healthcare more "interstate" than marijuana in Gonzales v Raich? Yes. Is healthcare, for me, interstate? No. My employer purchases healthcare in-state from a in-state supplier. Most (all?) healthcare plans seem to be divided by state. If you actually want to purchase healthcare from your link above, the first thing you have to do is enter your zip code. https://www.uhone.com/Quote/QuotePerson.aspx?LeadSourceName=UHC-website&GAIQ4 Your insurer may be in state, but the market involves a lot of players across state lines. You may never travel past your block, but your road may still be an integral part of interstate commerce. The point for Federal jurisdiction is whether it substantially affects interstate commerce. It is hard to see how it doesn't. In quite a few states, just two national concerns, United Healthcare and Blue Cross control most of the market. In NC, those two control 81% and in Fla., they control 65%. Not to mention, as Jim noted, all the suppliers, pharmaceuticals, and the effect on employers across the country. Our international trade is affected by our system which puts wildly greater costs than other countries on the books of our businesses.Healthcare Costs and U.S. Competitiveness - Council on Foreign Relations Industries Hurt Most by Soaring Health Costs - Rick Newman (usnews.com)

04-03-2012, 09:15 AM	#40
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by magkelly I get what Obama was trying to do. He was trying to fix it so people like me can finally get some kind of health care. Problem is he went about it in such a way that it's going to cost the nation in a big way and impact business in such a way that it will only contradict what he was trying to do. Even if I wanted to I couldn't buy health insurance. There is no company for it in this country that will insure me knowing I am chronically ill to begin with. It's like life insurance. They're probably not going to insure you if you're a huge risk. Nothing Obama has done is going to change that. I think this plan of his sucks. It was done with good intentions, but it still sucks and it needs to be overturned in Congress, post haste. I don't understand blaming the President for the state of things. A President has very limited powers, he needs congress and apparently the Supreme Court to agree. The health care bill wasn't the single payer plan Obama wanted. It was the only plan that could get through congress at the time. It seems like you are saying if he couldn't get the ideal, he shouldn't try to get us anything.

04-03-2012, 09:20 AM	#41
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by les3547 I don't understand blaming the President for the state of things. Well, unless it's Bush, right?

04-03-2012, 09:38 AM	#42
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by Parallax Well, unless it's Bush, right? I will rephrase, I don't understand blaming the President for what's not under his control. Invading Iraq, for example, could have been prevented by President Bush.

04-03-2012, 09:39 AM	#43
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by les3547 I will rephrase, I don't understand blaming the President for what's not under his control. Well, unless it's Bush, right?

04-03-2012, 10:10 AM	#45
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by Parallax Well, unless it's Bush, right? I don't believe you can accuse me of that, and I am not responsible for what others do.