Health Care Vs. Republicans

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/22/health.care.lawsuit/index.html?hpt=T1

As the historical health care reform bill or also known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is being passed through congress, several state attorney general’s are preparing to sue the bill. The states include Florida, Alabama, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, and Washington. All the states are also known to be more Republican and the attorney generals in all the above states are Republican. Is this just fervor of “emotion” towards the bill or a plan assault by the Republicans to scrap the bill? The attorney general of Florida, Bill McCollum, described that they are filing the lawsuits against the bill out of rule of law, not politics.

The piece of legislation that was approved by the Senate, and also passed on March 21, 2010 by the House of Representatives with a vote of 219-212 which was faced with heavy resistance by Republicans. All the Republicans voted “nay” on the vote for passing the bill and some blue dog Democrats followed. The bill needed 216 votes to be passed, and even after passing, the Republicans wanted “motion to recommit” in which will restart the entire process. Luckily the Democrats gain 220 votes to stop the recommitting process and were able to pass the bill. This marked the bill was ready to be signed by Obama on March 23, 2010, two days after the historic accomplishment. Once the piece of legislation is signed, the state attorney general’s in the above states will begin filing lawsuits against the bill. This basically means that the states are going to sue the bill because of the provision of people purchasing health insurance. More specifically, the bill specified that people have to buy health insurance and force state governments to spend on health care services. It is believed by the attorney general that it is unconstitutional to tax and give penalty to people on their health. It is also true that the United States Constitution does not give the government the power to regulate people’s health in a way.

In my opinion, I find that it is true that the constitution did not give the power to the government to regulate people’s health. I find it that the Democrats are pushing a piece of legislation that is unpopular to gain some popularity to the Democrats. It also reaffirms Obama’s promise in delivering some sort of heath care bill and won’t be laminated as a lame duck President. I believe that the health care system needs to be improved, but not in a drastic change. The bill is considered to be a drastic change since now I am required by law to buy health insurance or I may get a penalty. The Republican attorney general also argued that the bill forces the states to spend money on the new health reform bill, and it is deemed unconstitutional by the 10^th Amendment. The 10^th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This means that the states could argue that the federal government is pushing the states to spend money they don’t have and would harm the states.

I believe that the ten states will reach the Supreme Court for the final verdict on the health care bill. The bill will most likely be on the hands of the Supreme Court Judges and will determine the fate, even though it was passed in Congress. In my opinion, I believe that the bill will pass in the Supreme Court since so far it’s only been Republican complaints on it. Most of the Republicans fight against the bill because of the national debt and the deficit we are incurring in the United States. The health care bill will add to the deficit by $940 billion. The Democrats on the other hand argue that the health care bill will reduce the deficit in the next 10 years by $143 billion projected by CBO. Most likely the health care bill will raise taxes and increase the premiums in health care plans. I believe that the bill has the potential to reduce the deficit. Overall, I believe that the bill will be considered constitutional if the Supreme Court judges use loose interpretation of the Constitution to compare it to the bill.