Virginia’s lawsuit arguing that the federal government’s health-care reform is unconstitutional will move forward.
On Aug. 2, U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson ruled against a motion filed by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, in which Sebelius asked Hudson to dismiss the suit.
“While this case raises a host of complex constitutional issues, all seem to distill to the single question of whether or not Congress has the power to regulate – and tax – a citizen’s decision not to participate in interstate commerce,” Hudson wrote in the 32-page opinion.
“Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any circuit court of appeals has squarely addressed this issue.”
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli filed the lawsuit in March, shortly after President Barack Obama signed health-care reform into law.
In the suit, Cuccinelli claims the law violates the Ninth and 10th Amendments of the Constitution.
The Ninth Amendment protects the rights not explicitly specified elsewhere in the Constitution, and the 10th Amendment states that the federal government has no authority beyond the powers granted to it under the Constitution.
Democrats throughout Virginia criticized the lawsuit as soon as Cuccinelli filed it.
“Instead of tackling important issues that Virginians are dealing with everyday, like helping citizens who are facing home foreclosure or being exploited by predatory lending, our attorney general has spent his first three months in office promoting his radical agenda,” Dave Mills, executive director of the Democratic Party of Virginia, said in a statement.
Cuccinelli claims the federal law violates Virginia’s Health Care Freedom Act, a bill that was signed into law by Gov. Bob McDonnell the day after Obama signed the federal health-care bill.
“This lawsuit is not about health care, it’s about our freedom and about standing up and calling on the federal government to follow the ultimate law of the land – the Constitution,” Cuccinelli said.“The government cannot draft an unwilling citizen into commerce just so it can regulate him under the Commerce Clause.”
A summary judgment hearing is set for 9 a.m. Oct. 18 to decide whether or not federal health-care reform is unconstitutional.
I am working there for a week and its also a community health centre. I don’t know what to wear, i tried calling the HR manager, but couldnt reach him. Any suggestions?Keratosis
The constitution says what it says, and put simply the federal government does not have the right to mandate health care. The constant argument about “the poor children” and the working class not being able to afford health care sounds nice and heartfelt but none of that changes the fact that the feds are overreaching their power and if “We the People” don’t put a stop to it soon we will lose our freedom and liberty forever. This law begs the question if they can do this what cant they do and the answer quite simply is nothing. This isn’t about what’s socially right or wrong, it is about the rule of law.
Chuck, I feel to correct you if I may. The “government” is us, the taxpayers. WE have been paying way too much precisely because our government representatives have been sticking their nose into system. There is already 30%+ fraud in Medicaid/Medicare. We can solve this mess by eliminating mandates, lawsuit/tort reform, allow insurers to sell across state lines, etc.
R,
You are confused and wrong on so many issues that it will be difficult to correct all of your mistakes, but I will give it a shot.
1) Our grandchildren are hopelessly in debt before Obama came along. They were hopeless in debt before Clinton came along as well. You are seriously confused if you believe that a budget surplus means a reduction in the national debt. It does not. All it means is that Clinton didn’t get this country into as much debt as congress would have allowed him to do. The last time the national debt was reduced was The Great Depression.
2) The government has been spending on healthcare issues for decades, and doing it very poorly. The way it was done in the past was never effective and never made sense. Obama care will not catch or solve any problems and will actually reduce the number of doctors and hospitals that were previously able to absorb the uncompensated expenses that Medicare /Medicaid patients. The poor and the elderly will be unable to get services they can currently get because there will not be anyone who will be financially able to treat them. Doctors were already eliminating Medicare /Medicaid patients before Obamacare, BHO made the problem worse and absolutely no one is benefitting.
Dear “r”: This is not reform, but rationing and cost shifting. Please look to Mass to see what’s happening there. ER rates have increased and so have waiting times. This legislation will not work, and sadly, we’ll ALL have less.
Come on Chuck. I didn’t threaten anyone. I just proposed what you say you want. I agree with you. I think you should be able to opt out. But insurance rates are based on how much the risk is spread. You can’t sit on the sidelines until you get sick and then jump into the risk pool and expect the insurance company to cover you at the lower rate.
Now this article was about whether the mandate is a good idea. But if you want to discuss the deficit, I’m sorry to say that you are right about it being a problem. But your grandchildren were hopelessly in debt way before Obama came along. Granted he is the President. But it is not fair to blame the debt on him alone. Except for Clinton’s last three years in office, when we ran a budget surplus, we have run deficits under every president since Reagan. In fact, these severe deficits started with Reagan. That was a long time ago. Are you just noticing the problem now?
My last point is that you seem to be ignoring that we are spending huge sums on healthcare already. But we are doing it very inefficiently. We let people go without insurance and wait for them to get really sick at which time they show up at the emergency room. When they can’t pay, the rest of us wind up footing the bill. What we really can’t afford is to let the current situation continue. This plan may not change what we are spending, but it seems to make more sense to have people insured so we catch problems early and treatment is less expensive.
Dear “r”, Keep in mind this is NOT health CARE reform. They didn’t address lawsuit/tort reform, elimination of costly mandates, selling insurance across states lines just to name a few. It was only about who’s going to pay for what we have now. There are no free market reforms that would reduce costs, just look to consumer electronics. Therefore, your statement can’t be applied.
r,
Your grandkids will NEVER escape the debt related to your care under Obamacare. Your “threat” is as worthless as a promise of “Change” from BHO.
I say fine have all the freedom you want. Remove the mandate that everyone purchase coverage. But if you opt out and don’t purchase insurance, you can’t opt in for 3 years unless you pay the unsubsidized “market” rate for coverage, assuming you can buy it at all. And if you don’t have insurance and show up at the emergency room, you (or your estate) can NEVER escape the debt related to your care.
Sam, instead of throwing bombs, how about debating the substance?
I see Missouri just voted nearly 3-1 to be able to opt out.
Will the admin sue them as they have AZ?
It seems more and more that voting (by the peons that cough up the money for the fed to play with) means nothing to the fed.
Stay tuned!
And keep voting, whether the government recognizes it or not!
This is about our freedom and liberty. Under the Constitution, the government does not have the power to force us to buy a product, no matter the cause or reason. Fixing health care is a noble and just cause, but not at the price of our freedom.
Cuccinelli is a fool, and Hudson a boob appointed by “W”. This Virginia cabal of legal “idgits” may think they’re going to derail the health care act, but in the end they will lose their legal arguments and all Virginians will foot the bill for their actions.
Thank God we have Cuccinelli as our AG. If Virginia loses this suit, it’s the death of Federalism and the Government can tell us to do whatever they want. This isn’t partisan, it’s about saving our LIBERTY!
It makes me angry that I am charged more for services so providers can serve those who chose not to have insurance and who don’t have enough money to pay their full share.
Updated: Thirteen-year-old pedestrian hit crossing Route 7 near Dulles Town Center
UPDATE: Missing Leesburg man drowns in drainage pond
Leesburg high schools switch things around
Loudoun inmate dies after suffering massive stroke in prison
Two Loudoun County residents involved in $1.5 million mortgage scheme
