A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Europe
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 01:22 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Tis Odonovan, Himself
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 105
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.



Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states
immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare
mandates.



Washington Post

UPDATED: Cuccinelli to file suit 'as soon as the ink is dry' on health-
care signature

A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said Sunday
evening that he has already prepared his court filings challenging the
constitutionality of the health-care reform measure that just now
passed the House.

According to spokesman Brian Gottstein, Cuccinelli will file suit on
behalf of the Commonwealth in the Eastern District of Virginia "as
soon as the ink is dry" on President Obama's signature on the bill.

Cuccinelli, who has filed suit against the EPA challenging the
agency's regulation of greenhouse gases, has been the most vocal of
several Republican attorneys general who have promised to sue over
health care. Just over a week ago, Virginia became the first state in
the country to pass a state law making it illegal for the government
to require an individual to purchase health insurance, a key element
of the bill.

UPDATE 11:35 p.m.: Why file so quickly? Gottstein: "It's more cost
efficient to start the process of challenging the bill as soon as
possible. There are significant costs in implementing the health care
law, so if it is going to be found unconstitutional, then we can save
taxpayer money and trouble by making that determination sooner rather
than later."

By Rosalind Helderman | March 21, 2010; 8:18 PM ET

New York Times Headline:

Legal and Political Fights Loom for Democrats
By JEFF ZELENY and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: March 21, 201

Excerpt:

"...The politics of health care are fragile — and far from certain —
in the eight-month midterm campaign that will determine which party
will control Congress next year. But both sides steeled for a fight to
extend well beyond November, involving state legislative battles,
court challenges and, ultimately, the next presidential race...."
  #2  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 01:24 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
GLOBALIST
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

On Mar 22, 7:22*am, "Tis Odonovan, Himself" wrote:
Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states
immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare
mandates.

Washington Post

UPDATED: Cuccinelli to file suit 'as soon as the ink is dry' on health-
care signature

A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said Sunday
evening that he has already prepared his court filings challenging the
constitutionality of the health-care reform measure that just now
passed the House.

According to spokesman Brian Gottstein, Cuccinelli will file suit on
behalf of the Commonwealth in the Eastern District of Virginia "as
soon as the ink is dry" on President Obama's signature on the bill.

Cuccinelli, who has filed suit against the EPA challenging the
agency's regulation of greenhouse gases, has been the most vocal of
several Republican attorneys general who have promised to sue over
health care. Just over a week ago, Virginia became the first state in
the country to pass a state law making it illegal for the government
to require an individual to purchase health insurance, a key element
of the bill.

UPDATE 11:35 p.m.: Why file so quickly? Gottstein: "It's more cost
efficient to start the process of challenging the bill as soon as
possible. There are significant costs in implementing the health care
law, so if it is going to be found unconstitutional, then we can save
taxpayer money and trouble by making that determination sooner rather
than later."

By Rosalind Helderman *| *March 21, 2010; 8:18 PM ET

New York Times Headline:

Legal and Political Fights Loom for Democrats
By JEFF ZELENY and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: March 21, 201

Excerpt:

"...The politics of health care are fragile — and far from certain —
in the eight-month midterm campaign that will determine which party
will control Congress next year. But both sides steeled for a fight to
extend well beyond November, involving state legislative battles,
court challenges and, ultimately, the next presidential race...."


As the whole nation watched the bill being passed, they are going to
sue who? Explain who they are going to sue?
  #3  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 02:13 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Mitchell Holman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

"Tis Odonovan, Himself" wrote in news:d24e4fb6-0829-
:



Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states
immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare
mandates.



From the same people who whine about "fivilous lawsuits", too......









  #4  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 02:36 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Earl Evleth[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,417
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

On 22/03/10 14:13, in article
, "Mitchell Holman"
wrote:

Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states
immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare
mandates.



From the same people who whine about "fivilous lawsuits", too......



With a reactionary court anything can happens. Anybody who hands
over campaign financing to big money is reliable to do similar
things in other areas.

  #5  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 04:25 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
GlennR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 113
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

Obama has a Yankee regiment, composed of African Americans, ready to march
to Richmond,burn
it to the ground and hang all those confederate traitors,men,women,children,
and babies


they were warned in 1865



"Tis Odonovan, Himself" wrote in message
...


Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states
immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare
mandates.



Washington Post

UPDATED: Cuccinelli to file suit 'as soon as the ink is dry' on health-
care signature

A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said Sunday
evening that he has already prepared his court filings challenging the
constitutionality of the health-care reform measure that just now
passed the House.

According to spokesman Brian Gottstein, Cuccinelli will file suit on
behalf of the Commonwealth in the Eastern District of Virginia "as
soon as the ink is dry" on President Obama's signature on the bill.

Cuccinelli, who has filed suit against the EPA challenging the
agency's regulation of greenhouse gases, has been the most vocal of
several Republican attorneys general who have promised to sue over
health care. Just over a week ago, Virginia became the first state in
the country to pass a state law making it illegal for the government
to require an individual to purchase health insurance, a key element
of the bill.

UPDATE 11:35 p.m.: Why file so quickly? Gottstein: "It's more cost
efficient to start the process of challenging the bill as soon as
possible. There are significant costs in implementing the health care
law, so if it is going to be found unconstitutional, then we can save
taxpayer money and trouble by making that determination sooner rather
than later."

By Rosalind Helderman | March 21, 2010; 8:18 PM ET

New York Times Headline:

Legal and Political Fights Loom for Democrats
By JEFF ZELENY and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: March 21, 201

Excerpt:

"...The politics of health care are fragile — and far from certain —
in the eight-month midterm campaign that will determine which party
will control Congress next year. But both sides steeled for a fight to
extend well beyond November, involving state legislative battles,
court challenges and, ultimately, the next presidential race...."


  #6  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 04:45 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Jigsaw1695
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 55
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

On Mar 22, 7:22*am, "Tis Odonovan, Himself" wrote:
Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states
immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare
mandates.

Washington Post

UPDATED: Cuccinelli to file suit 'as soon as the ink is dry' on health-
care signature

A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said Sunday
evening that he has already prepared his court filings challenging the
constitutionality of the health-care reform measure that just now
passed the House.

According to spokesman Brian Gottstein, Cuccinelli will file suit on
behalf of the Commonwealth in the Eastern District of Virginia "as
soon as the ink is dry" on President Obama's signature on the bill.

Cuccinelli, who has filed suit against the EPA challenging the
agency's regulation of greenhouse gases, has been the most vocal of
several Republican attorneys general who have promised to sue over
health care. Just over a week ago, Virginia became the first state in
the country to pass a state law making it illegal for the government
to require an individual to purchase health insurance, a key element
of the bill.

UPDATE 11:35 p.m.: Why file so quickly? Gottstein: "It's more cost
efficient to start the process of challenging the bill as soon as
possible. There are significant costs in implementing the health care
law, so if it is going to be found unconstitutional, then we can save
taxpayer money and trouble by making that determination sooner rather
than later."

By Rosalind Helderman *| *March 21, 2010; 8:18 PM ET

New York Times Headline:

Legal and Political Fights Loom for Democrats
By JEFF ZELENY and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: March 21, 201

Excerpt:

"...The politics of health care are fragile — and far from certain —
in the eight-month midterm campaign that will determine which party
will control Congress next year. But both sides steeled for a fight to
extend well beyond November, involving state legislative battles,
court challenges and, ultimately, the next presidential race...."


Theya re not suing anyone you idiot. They are challanging the legality
of the bill. Undoubtdely, this one will go all the up to SCOTUS.

Jigsaw
  #7  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 05:05 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Earl Evleth[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,417
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

On 22/03/10 16:45, in article
,
"Jigsaw1695" wrote:



Two Supreme Court rulings affirmed the constitutionality of the Social
Security Act.

Steward Machine Company v. Davis, 301 U.S, 548[22] (1937) held, in a
5*4 decision, that, given the exigencies of the Great Depression, "[It] is
too late today for the argument to be heard with tolerance that in a crisis
so extreme the use of the moneys of the nation to relieve the unemployed and
their dependents is a use for any purpose narrower than the promotion of the
general welfare". The arguments opposed to the Social Security Act
(articulated by justices Butler, McReynolds, and Sutherland in their
opinions) were that the social security act went beyond the powers that were
granted to the federal government in the Constitution. They argued that, by
imposing a tax on employers that could be avoided only by contributing to a
state unemployment-compensation fund, the federal government was essentially
forcing each state to establish an unemployment-compensation fund that would
meet its criteria, and that the federal government had no power to enact
such a program.

Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), decided on the same day as
Steward, upheld the program because "The proceeds of both [employee and
employer] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes
generally, and are not earmarked in any way". That is, the Social Security
Tax was constitutional as a mere exercise of Congress's general taxation
powers.

  #8  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 07:20 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Tis Odonovan, Himself
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 105
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.



.. On Mar 22, 12:05*pm, Earl Evleth wrote:


Two Supreme Court rulings affirmed the constitutionality of the Social
Security Act.


Consistent with when the Federal Income Tax became constitutionally
legal earlier but only through constitutional amendment. These
unconstitutional healthcare mandates the Obamaoids are trying to jam
through are very different.


".. Prior to 1913, it was a fact that the Federal government could not
tax us the way it now does. The Founding Fathers (in their wisdom)
provided in Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution that if the
Federal government was to levy a direct tax (like an income tax) on
its citizens, the amount of the tax would have to be the same citizen
by citizen. In other words, the Founding Fathers were saying that all
of us, as U.S. citizens, have the same constitutional rights and
obligations. If the government is to extract an obligation from us in
the form of a tax, that tax should also be equal in amount.
Therefore, the U.S. Constitution, as originally written, did not
authorize the Federal government to tax us on variable factors such as
our income.

We literally had to amend the Constitution to permit the Federal
government to income tax us as they now do. In 1913, more than two-
thirds of the States and Congress voted into law the Sixteenth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Sixteenth Amendment
authorizes the Federal government to tax "income from any source
derived." In light of the incredibly broad breath of the Sixteenth
Amendment (that we were stupid enough as a people to authorize), it is
hard to give any credence to tax protester groups who claim the income
tax is unconstitutional.

Incidentally, a fascinating footnote to this discussion is the fact
that the promoters of the Sixteenth Amendment got it through the state
ratification process with the following "class envy" pitch: the
Federal income tax will only tax the extremely rich and not the middle-
class. As always happens, this "nail the rich guys" angle has
backfired on the common man and woman with the result that the
original 1913 income tax has grown from 9 to over 7,000 pages of
statutory law and has significantly gotten into the back pockets of a
majority of Americans...."

source:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/81d4zEvleths


Of course if you recall the Dred Scott decision some of the dictators
in black robes calling themeselves Supreme Court Justices will
sometimes "interpret" the law to conform to a political agenda or
"interpret" law in anyway in order to preserve the "unity" or
"stability" of the country.

  #9  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 08:18 PM posted to alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,rec.travel.europe,soc.retirement
Go Fig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual statesimmediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

On Mar 22, 9:05*am, Earl Evleth wrote:
On 22/03/10 16:45, in article
,

"Jigsaw1695" wrote:

Two Supreme Court rulings affirmed the constitutionality of the Social
Security Act.

* * * Steward Machine Company v. Davis, 301 U.S, 548[22] (1937) held, in a
5*4 decision, that, given the exigencies of the Great Depression, "[It] is
too late today for the argument to be heard with tolerance that in a crisis
so extreme the use of the moneys of the nation to relieve the unemployed and
their dependents is a use for any purpose narrower than the promotion of the
general welfare". The arguments opposed to the Social Security Act
(articulated by justices Butler, McReynolds, and Sutherland in their
opinions) were that the social security act went beyond the powers that were
granted to the federal government in the Constitution. They argued that, by
imposing a tax on employers that could be avoided only by contributing to a
state unemployment-compensation fund, the federal government was essentially
forcing each state to establish an unemployment-compensation fund that would
meet its criteria, and that the federal government had no power to enact
such a program.

* * * Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), decided on the same day as
Steward, upheld the program because "The proceeds of both [employee and
employer] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes
generally, and are not earmarked in any way". That is, the Social Security
Tax was constitutional as a mere exercise of Congress's general taxation
powers.


You clearly don't understand the merits of the various challenges.

This challenge is not like Social Security... it is not a tax. Rather,
the federal government is requiring you to purchase a good or service
from a third party. Additionally, the Constitution requires that both
houses of Congress act on the bill in the same manner... that is not
the case here the voting procedure was different.

Instead of getting legitimate reform, we will now have a bill that
will be tied up in the courts for years and years.

But what is most shocking, that in the more than 2000 pages of this
bill... it doesn't even spell out the benefit... it defines three
levels of insurance... but those will be defined later by some
"panel". That is shameful.

jay
Mon Mar 22, 2010



  #10  
Old March 22nd, 2010, 08:57 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
pltrgyst[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states immediately prepares court challenge to legality of ObamaCare mandates.

Virginia among several dozen possible other individual states...

There would be precisely four dozen plus one "possible other individual states."
I have no idea how many non-individual states might act.

UPDATED: Cuccinelli to file suit 'as soon as the ink is dry' on health-
care signature ...


Cuccinelli himself has stated that he expects the suit to be symbolic, and to
produce no useful results.

-- Larry (in VA)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
An interesting contrarian view to the long term politicalconsequences to the passing of ObamaCare O'Donovan, PJ, Himself Europe 0 March 22nd, 2010 12:40 PM
Cumshot Movies Girl Got Dozen Of Cumshots [email protected] Travel - anything else not covered 0 April 25th, 2008 10:41 PM
Virginia Beach Hostels, Cheap Virginia Beach Hostels, Reserve a Hostel in Virginia Beach, VA Hostels, USA Hostels, CraigslistHostels.org World's Best Hostels & Cheap Accommodations Worldwide, Online Booking Europe 0 May 5th, 2007 02:42 AM
Question on Alaska Cruise Legality [email protected] Cruises 6 March 3rd, 2007 11:59 PM
Florida tornadoes wreck three dozen homes Earl Evleth Europe 8 December 28th, 2006 08:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.