Search This Blog

Monday, October 4, 2010

Suit on Health Care Bill Appears Likely to Advance by Alexandra Poffenberger

Suit on Health Care Bill Appears Likely to Advance
Twenty out of fifty states are filing lawsuits against the federal government for their new health care bill. The federal judge in this case, Judge Roger Vinson of Federal District Court, said "at the close of a two-hour hearing that he leaned toward denying the federal government's motion to dismiss the lawsuit." If the dismiss was approved, then it would clearly support that the states do not have the right to challenge the laws that federal government makes. However, now the whole situation is being taken into court and becoming a debate.
The federal government claims that the states do not have the right to sue because they have no been hurt by the new health law by any way. After this was stated, two individuals and the National Federation of Independent Business joined this lawsuit. Therefore, this statement would be proven wrong.
Commercial "activity" can be regulated by Congress. One question debated in this article is whether or not choosing not to have health care is considered commercial activity or not. Judge Vinson argues, "You're trying to turn this word upside down and say activity is really equivalent to inactivity." However, different judges throughout the states hold different view points on this subject.
The Commerce Clause in Article I of the Constitution allows Congress to "regulate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce." The states then argue that insurance goes above and beyond what the clause has ever been able to do before, and the federal government is trying to stretch it further than it's ever been used to argue against.
The article then goes on to talk about how the issue is mainly stating how you must pay for your health care. The states continue to state that health care is not a commercial product, it is more of a service than anything. The states also argue that this issue is expanding the shared state and federal power. The federal will begin to pay for the health care but later on this will become some of the states responsibility to pay for.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The entire news article demonstrates various examples on how Federalism is being tied into the issue on health care. The states are declaring that the issue in general is unconstitutional. Reason being, Article I says Congress can regulate interstate commerce, but once again, the states argue in which health care is not a commercial product, it is more of a service. The main example would be the demonstration on how state power is going to become more restricted once the federal government hands over the ten percent of health care payments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The states should be able to sue the federal government for one main reason. It is the states power the federal government planes on restricting. The so called "shared" power is being tightened and not equalized.

No comments:

Post a Comment