Print Page | Close Window

Can Congress Legislate Health Care?

Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Outside World
Forum Name: News, Info and Happenings outside Middletown
Forum Description: It might be happening outside Middletown, but it affects us here at home.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1664
Printed Date: Mar 28 2024 at 1:50pm


Topic: Can Congress Legislate Health Care?
Posted By: wasteful
Subject: Can Congress Legislate Health Care?
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 7:50am

U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8

Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, glossary.html#IMPOST - Imposts and glossary.html#EXCISE - Excises , to pay the Debts and provide for the common constmiss.html - Defence and general glossary.html#WELFARE - Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, glossary.html#IMPOST - Imposts and glossary.html#EXCISE - Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and glossary.html#POSTROAD - Post Roads ;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant glossary.html#MARQUE - Letters of Marque and glossary.html#REPRISAL - Reprisal , and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.




Replies:
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 8:56am
Top line- " Congress shall have power to ...... provide for the common defense and general welfare of the U.S." - General welfare- Health care of the nation, perhaps??? How about the line- " to raise and support Armies, but no appropriation of that money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years"- ???? Some of this stuff is for a different time/circumstance for this country and appears to be "dated".


Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:00am
Vet that is the Constitution of the United States that you are claiming is dated and for a different time/circumstance.
 

The first clause of Article I, Section 8, reads, "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." This clause, called the General Welfare Clause or the Spending Power Clause, does not grant Congress the power to legislate for the general welfare of the country; that is a power reserved to the states through the http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Tenth+Amendment - Tenth Amendment . Rather, it merely allows Congress to spend federal money for the general welfare. The principle underlying this distinction—the limitation of federal power—eventually inspired the only important disagreement over the meaning of the clause.

According to http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/James+Madison - James Madison , the clause authorized Congress to spend money, but only to carry out the powers and duties specifically enumerated in the subsequent clauses of Article I, Section 8, and elsewhere in the Constitution, not to meet the seemingly infinite needs of the general welfare. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Alexander+Hamilton - Alexander Hamilton maintained that the clause granted Congress the power to spend without limitation for the general welfare of the nation. The winner of this debate was not declared for 150 years.



Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:17am
I am aware of that. Just as there are small town, city, and state "constitution" items that are still on the books as law/rules/procedures/agendas/roadmaps/call it what you will, some, merely through time, are not adaptable to the modern times as to original meanings at the time of their writing and are periodically reviewed. I am suggesting that either by content or the way the duties of Congress are written, SOME are out of sync with the times AS THEY ARE WRITTEN and as society has changed. In other words- sometimes the politicians of this nation, in this day and age, don't follow this document as was intended or the concept of this document is interpreted to twist the meaning to fit the situation of the moment. C'mon- don't tell me that you're naive enough to think that politicians in Washington are so pious that they live by this, do you? They skew things, including laws, to gain advantage to get what they want.


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:36am
Originally posted by wasteful wasteful wrote:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Alexander+Hamilton - Alexander Hamilton maintained that the clause granted Congress the power to spend without limitation...
If Hamilton would have survived the duel, he would probably be a Middletown City Councilman today!!!
LOL LOL


-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012


Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:48am
No Vet what I am saying is does congress actually have the Legal authority under the Constitution to Pass A Health Care Bill which  mandates mandatory health care for Not only U.S. Citizens but also illegal aliens.  I also am not naive as to the ways that Congress stretches their powers in anyway they see fit.  The Judicial and Exectuive branches do likewise.
 
To mondify the Constitution would require 3/4's (38) of the states to ratify a new amendment to the Consititution a feat which is not done to often.  The last time this was done was in 1992.


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 11:31am
Looks like from your info. above that the Congress doesn't have the authority to legistate general welfare. However, in your first post, in the first paragraph, it makes a statement about the Congress having authority concerning the legislation of the general welfare. Confusing. Don't like it at all that this Healthcare bill also includes illegal aliens. Not right. What part of illegal don't the politicians understand. Illegal should also mean no rights/benefits enjoyed by LEGAL citizens until legal status is acquired. Healthcare system is overloaded as it is with our aging population. Don't need to invite others to the party.

Constitution modification?- Doesn't look like an impossible task especially since we are talking about wording changes rather than a total removal on most items. You say it was done in 1992? Can be done again, right? What else would these 's be doing in Congress?


Posted By: Hermes
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 11:50am
Regardless of what the constitution says I think we are waving our "freedom of choice" by accepting this health care "crap". Socialism is not a part of the constitution and in this health care bill thats exactly what you have and the only reason for it and offering it to illegal's is the NATIONAL ID.
 
"YOUR PAPERS PLEASE" Ouch


-------------
No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !!


Posted By: gemneye70
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:33pm
I think there is a lot more involved than just saying this is socialism...more people declare bankruptcy due to mediacl bills than any other reason...same ole scare tactics left over from the Bush era...My daughter was in the hosiptal for the first 4 months of her life.  My wife and I met people who sold their homes just to pay bills so their kids could get care to save their lives...I don't think a single payer system is necessarily yhe answer, but that isn't what most in Congress are asking for...something needs to be done though...it's easy to say don't change anything when you are in a desperate situation...god has blessed you...what about those that need help? that's not your problem is it?


Posted By: gemneye70
Date Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:35pm
BTW...for you that claim to be strict constitutionalists...it doesn't say anything about an Air Force, just navy and army, but noone is saying anything about that.



Print Page | Close Window