Does ObamaCare flagrantly violate the U.S. Constitution?
Well, the 20 states that will stand against ObamaCare think so. In addition, the bill is facing legal resistance from other forces, including the National Federation of Independent Business — an association specializing in lobbying for small businesses.
Do these entities have a right to fight against a ratified law? Clearly, there is a large disconnect between what Congress is willing to blindly push — legislation pilfered by lobbying fleas — and what the states and the people of America need. Healthcare is a necessity, but is hasty legislation our best option?
Currently, the national government is arrogantly dismissive of the states' arguments, claiming they don’t have solid ground to stand on; but the 20, and growing, states are adamantly opposed. This is becoming a national rallying cry against ObamaCare’s burden to the state governments and their people. Quietly, little notice has been given to the fact that Obama's healthcare legislation passage has become the clarion call and sustenance of the Tea Party and the growing resentment of government over-reach in our lives.
This elicits a harsh reminder of the many failed FDR New Deal programs implemented that were later ruled unconstitutional.
So far, states are asserting the argument that forcing everyone in the state to obtain health insurance or they will be fined is a blatant violation of our Constitution.
I believe they have a point. President Obama made the argument that this clause in the bill is similar to auto insurance in some states. However, to have a car is a privilege in America. If everyone were forced to have auto insurance because they might get behind a car at some point, then people would vehemently fight against it.
Should this clause be taken out of ObamaCare?