Use this when they speak for the Founding Fathers.
"In July of 1798, Congress passed – and President John Adams signed - “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.” The law authorized the creation of a government operated marine hospital service and mandated that privately employed sailors be required to purchase health care insurance.
Keep in mind that the 5th Congress did not really need to struggle over the intentions of the drafters of the Constitutions in creating this Act as many of its members were the drafters of the Constitution.
And when the Bill came to the desk of President John Adams for signature, I think it’s safe to assume that the man in that chair had a pretty good grasp on what the framers had in mind."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/01/17/congress-passes-socialized-medicine-and-mandates-health-insurance-in-1798/
= new reply since forum marked as read
....whined that he wanted his country back.
hear ! hear !
But seriously, thanks for the post. That's great information.
My opinion is, however, that mandated purchases IS a crock. It may sound good today when liberals are getting everybody to buy health insurance, but it won't sound so good tomorrow when conservative governments are mandating everybody to buy GUNZ.
However, thankfully, that's NOT what the ACA is. Forcing citizens to buy something or pay a fine is not something I'm comfortable with. A simpler solution would be to charge everybody 2.5% of their income, and then use that money to provide them with health insurance. And then, just to be fair, allow them to OPT OUT of the program if they'd prefer to buy private insurance. Now take a look at the ACA. It says everybody is supposed to buy insurance, and if they don't they'll be charged a "fine" equal to 2.5% of their income. Sound familiar?
So, what's the difference between these two policies?
1. "Everybody will be charged a 2.5% TAX on their income, and the Govt. will use the money to buy them health insurance, unless they opt out of this program and buy their own insurance."
And,
2. "Everybody must buy their own insurance, or the govt. will charge them a 'fine' equal to 2.5% of their income."
What's the difference? Grover F--king Norquist, that's what.
The first policy makes perfect sense. The second policy is merely a convoluted, tortured, re-wording of the first policy. But Norquist and his puppet masters have made it impossible for politicians to propose common sense policies that involve the word "TAX." So, all Obama did was propose a common sense (albeit a conservative) healthcare policy that involved providing everybody in the country with healthcare via a modest tax with a choice to opt out and buy your own. However, extremist politics made it politically impossible to say this in plain english, so he had to translate the word TAX into the word MANDATE in order for EVEN HIS OWN PARTY to pass it. All Roberts did was translate it back into english, and then say "yes, of COURSE that's Constitutional."
I've been trying to get people to understand this, but you're much more succinct and eloquent than I! I might just have to post this comment on our FB page, with credit to you and if you don't mind, of course.
If the link (the hyperlink isn't) doesn't work, you could always come and visit at Facebook : Ayn Rand collected Social Security
Thanks!
