A Virginia federal judge just ruled the clause in the Insurance Company Enrichment Act requiring
peasants citizens of the United States to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional:
Judge Henry E. Hudson ruled Monday for the state’s claim that the requirement for people to purchase health care exceeds the power of Congress under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause or under the General Welfare Clause.
“It is not the effect on individuals that is presently at issue — it is the authority of Congress to compel anyone to purchase health insurance,” wrote Hudson, who was appointed to the federal bench in 2002 by President George W. Bush.
I’m glad somebody understands the fact that the federal government doesn’t have the power to put a gun to your head and make you purchase something. What’s interesting are the reactions from my liberal friends. Many are citing Social Security and Medicare as validation for the clause in the Insurance Company Enrichment Act. I don’t quite understand how using two unconstitutional programs as justification for another unconstitutional program really works.
Does that means it’s OK if I break into their home and steal their television if I’ve already broken in and stolen their computer and stereo? Two wrongs usually don’t make a case for doing yet another wrong.
I am also at a complete loss as to how somebody can justify government theft. Each of the programs mentioned in this post give the government the authority to use their monopoly on force to coerce you into buying into something. It’s interesting that these same people are against anybody besides the government stealing from them, but once it is the government that theft is deemed OK. There has to be come major cognitive dissidence to believe that.
Either way I hope this ruling actually amounts to something since the Republicans already “compromised” with the Democrats and agreed to fund the Insurance Company Enrichment Act until September (you guys really only want to hold those seats for a short while huh?).