Virginia says HELL NO to Federal Healthcare

The 1st state to enforce 10th Amendment in regards to health care!

GO VIRGINIA!

Now I just have to make sure Wisconsin does the same.

10th Amendment-

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.

Anyone out there that disagrees with this, please show me in the Constitution, where it states that health care is a right.

Just for fun-The Bill of No Rights!

Sources.



Update on Virginia Health Care Freedom Act

SB417, Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act, IS A WIN!!!
link here to this bill-HB 10 Individual health insuranced coverage; resident of State not required to obtain, etc., policy.

The bill-Virginia Health Care Freedom Act
Since this is such a small bill, I am going to post the whole thing.

10100949D
1 HOUSE BILL NO. 10
2 Offered January 13, 2010
3 Prefiled December 7, 2009
4 A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 38.2-302.1, relating to a person's
5 participation in a health care system or plan; Virginia Health Care Freedom Act.
6 ––––––––––
Patrons––Marshall, R.G., O'Bannon, Athey, Carrico, Cole, Cox, J.A., Cox, M.K., Edmunds, Garrett,
Gear, Gilbert, Greason, Howell, W.J., Johnson, Jones, Landes, Lingamfelter, Miller, J.H., Morgan,
Nixon, Oder, Pogge, Tata and Wright; Senators: Martin and Stuart
7 ––––––––––
8 Referred to Committee on Commerce and Labor
9 ––––––––––
10 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
11 1. That the Code of Virginia is amended by adding a section numbered 38.2-302.1 as follows:
12 § 38.2-302.1. Virginia Health Care Freedom Act.
13No law shall restrict a person's natural right and power of contract to secure the blessings of liberty
14 to choose private health care systems or private plans. No law shall interfere with the right of a person
15 or entity to pay for lawful medical services to preserve life or health, nor shall any law impose a
16 penalty, tax, fee, or fine, of any type, to decline or to contract for health care coverage or to participate
17 in any particular health care system or plan, except as required by a court where an individual or entity
18 is a named party in a judicial dispute. Nothing herein shall be construed to expand, limit or otherwise
19 modify any determination of law regarding what constitutes lawful medical services within the
20 Commonwealth.

So, I would like to say that it seems that the Virginia State Legislature agrees with me that the HEALTH CARE takeover is un Constitutional. Now, anyone that does not think so, give me a link to one of your sources saying it is Constitutional. Otherwise, Shhhhh. Now you could do a search for what Pelosi said when asked if it was Constitutional. I do not know if she gave an answer though!




[edit on 3/12/2010 by endisnighe]

Yes,she gave an answer! It was "Are you serious?" as though someone would have the audacity to question whather or not they follow their oaths to uphold said document!

Congratulations to Virginia,and good luck to you there in Wisconsin!

Did you hear the democrats are talking of bundling the health care bill with the total takeover of student loans too?

www.politicsdaily.com...

reply to post by On the Edge


Well, I am sure there are things in this bill that are so buried in it, they might just as well add something else.

This will not pass, even if it does, states that actually care about the country will tell the Fed, "Hell no" just like Virginia has.

According to your article, one Dem has said they may back off of that. Why? Just put everything into this monstrosity.

Thanks for the comment and info.

Right now, the Senate is considering passage of a dangerous hate crimes bill. Sen. Harry Reid, in a dishonest manuever, has attached this bill as an amendment to S. 1390, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. Believing that Senators will not vote AGAINST funding the Defense of the Nation, Sen. Reid knows that they will be voting to destroy the 1st Amendment instead.

.
www.rightsidenews.com...

Of course,that was from July,and they passed it.

Hard to tell what they'll get away with. If they do...that's a whole other can of worms.

The Civil War was started in this exact fashion. The fed overstepping, and the states not going along with it.

This all has the potential to get nasty very quickly.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


Like the feds overstepping and trying to stop slavery. The bastards!

The rest of the modern world has seen that state-run healthcare saves everyone time and money, and creates a better-functioning society where hard-working, decent people are not made homeless due to medical bills. But anyway, I'm sure all those against it think it's communism or some other word they don't understand.

reply to post by davesidious


You do know that slavery had nothing to do with the civil war don't you?

You could do a few links to verify your point that is what caused it.

I could give you many historians that point out that it had to do with the differing population densities of the states and the south not getting equivalent representation leading to unfair laws.

Now, of course you could supply me with historians that said it had to do with both slavery and states rights.

BUT you will not find a historian believe that slavery was the only reason.

If you can, please find one for me, I would like to contact them. It would be a funny conversation.

And your condescending pseudo intellectual argument will be falling on deaf ears here my boy. We don't need no stinking health care. We don't need no nanny state here.

We can take care of ourselves. Does the EU have a health care system? Well? No.

The states that want health care have health care. You want health care, move to Massachusetts. Stay the FRELL out of my pocket.

And if you think the modern world is so great, why don't you move to where ever you believe it is so great.

No, because it is all about me with people like you. It is really beginning to sound like arguing with children. Others have it. Blaming homelessness on health care now are we. For your damn info, I have been broke and bankrupt in my life. So what.

Pick yourself up. If not, FAIL. It is not our responsibility to be your safety net.

Leave me and my labor alone.

Endisnighe;

I have agreed with a couple of your
posts in the past, but your last one
irritated so much I could not do
anything until I responded.

I find it funny and hypocritical that
you just accused the poster above
you as being condescending, when
what you wrote was not only that
(which most of yours are anyway),
but arrogant and ignorant.

You believe that no one goes home
less in this country due to health
costs? That belief shows your lack
of understanding or your lack of
maturity. It also shows that you do
NOT have a medical issue that cost
thousands of dollars a month to treat.

When people talk about this, they
are not talking about a broken toe
or sprained ankle. They are referring
to cancer and other conditions which
kill when not treated for as short as
a week.

I know some people try and be nice
when they say things such as "I
would not wish this on my worst enemy"
I DO. I want you to live 1 week in
my condition, not just the pain; but
couple that with the secondary conditions
brought on by the primary one like
heart disease.

But wait ! Insurance won't cover the
second because you have the first
condition. The first condition was not
even your fault because some drunk
driver clipped you twenty years ago.

People like me are not asking for a
handout, I just do not believe I should
be punished even more than I am now.
I also want people like you who have
absolutely no idea what socialism is to
learn. I also want you to live a week
iny shoes and then tell me to my face
how weak and pathetic I am. I can damn
well guarantee youwill be begging for
help within two hours and probably
begging for one ofthose imaginary "death
panels" to help you along in a couple of days.

" Nobody goes homeless in this country
because of medical costs" In your world.

add in
trying to pay for it

reply to post by endisnighe


Slavery is a moot point.

The US is nothing like the EU. Virtually all European countries have national healthcare systems, and they spend LESS per person than the US, and for, on average, better care. It's cheaper for the country, and cheaper for the citizens.

But don't let that stop you. I guess you want more people receiving worse care, and being bankrupted in the process, while you pay for it with increased taxes. Sounds wonderful! USA! USA! USA!

As a Virginian I can say hell yes! Hopefully some of my emails were really heard by my congressmen.

I wonder though, a lot of Virginians are government or government contractor employees, could they have been a big reason we are enforcing the 10th? I'm sure a lot of people from VA are just fine with there health insurance as is.

I don't understand why people don't want National health care. The only reasons i can think of is middle to upper class do not want to be paying for the treatment of poor people, AND that people think somehow their "rights" are going to be taken away.

What are the true downsides to giving poor people free health care? I know for a fact, one of the reasons my mother died was because she did NOT have health care and was not visiting the doctor because she couldn't afford it. She was battling tax problems and going to the doctor was out of the question because she had no money. If there was some kind of health care in place maybe my mother would be alive. My cousin has told me their are "cheap" health plans available but that is not the point.

I live in Virginia and don't know what they are doing, this is scaring me. What is our government doing! What else is Obama doing! He is pushing this health care and pushing more wars, if the health bill fails and it's just the wars WTF is going on, it's BUSH #2!!!!!!!

This was being discussed in another thread on here.

This is basically political posturing. Because everyone knows that the federal government can't enforce a mandate....directly. But they can legally and will enforce it indirectly. For healthcare it is quite simple from my point of view...adhere to the mandate or your medicare funding is cut off.

The logic behind it...if you aren't going to participate in mandating healthcare for all your residents...you residents are going to be unhealthier and will use more funds in medicare compared to other states. So instead of being a drain on the system...you are cut off if you don't adhere to the mandate. I could make arguments to cut off other federal funding to Virgina based off of not abiding to the mandate...but medicare would be enough. Virginia wouldn't be able to go without this funding.


So all this is, is a bluff by Virginia law makers to show the voters..."see...we are doing something"...knowing that it will never go into practice. But it will get a few of you riled up enough to go out and vote for the politicians that passed this useless bill. Just more politics to get votes.

And im sorry, but our current proposed system is not making healthcare a "right". Rather its forcing everyone to pay for something that they then may not have the money to cover the deductable to use. That is what happened in rhode island when they passed this legislation 2 years ago, and now less people go to the doctor than before.

People should have a right to the basic necessities as that is stabilizing to society. The government, however, has NO RIGHT to force people to buy the garbage product of insurance companies who do everything they can to give as little care as possible.

You with your mind already made up, probably will not open this link so I have posted it in it's entirety here. It is an argument that the Constitution seeks to "promote the general welfare" of Americans and this naturally means our health. If there were an outbreak of H1N1 or another contagious disease you would not want to depend on only those with health care to recieve innoculations -this would endanger the entire country. Though slightly less severe the decline in American health is an epidemic of National proportions and sure to run our country into the ground. Unfortunately -I think this is your goal and so I will not talk you down off your ledge. But other people need to see there is another side to your argument. www.sdnn.com...

Arthur Salm: Health care – It’s in the Constitution By Arthur Salm, SDNN Monday, August 24, 2009 “I think health care is a privilege. I wouldn’t call it a right.” – Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) Arthur Salm is an SDNN columnist. Slavery used to be cool, and that was even before cool was cool. In fact, slavery was beyond cool — it was something people didn’t think about one way or the other, because there was no “other.” San Diego: sdnn-opinion35 Just a few hundred years ago, just about everywhere, slavery was an accepted part of life, like families and work and the sun coming up in the morning and the Padres trading away franchise players. Not even slaves were anti-slavery: Any of them fortunate enough to be freed, and then to become prosperous, would just naturally get himself a slave or two or ten. That was the way people were. That was the way people thought. Two hundred years ago, nearly half a century after this country’s founding, education was for the relatively few children whose families could afford to send them to private schools — which were the only schools. It certainly wasn’t the government’s business to educate its citizens. That was the way we were. That was the way Americans thought. Today, the acceptance of slavery is all but unimaginable. Literally: unimaginable. So radically have our values shifted that it’s all but impossible to empathize with a slaveholder, to put one’s self into his mindframe and say, “All right, I see that. I may not agree with it, but I can kind of understand where he’s coming from.” It’s beyond our ken. Likewise the notion that we bear no responsibility, as a society, to educate our children. Self interest plays a part, of course — a modern technological civilization requires an educated citizenry — but it goes further and deeper than that. We now agree that spending public treasure on sending kids to school is a moral imperative. Every child, we are convinced — we know — deserves an education. So our values change, and change (from our point of view, at least) for the better. A lot of things people stood by and fought for, or, more telling, didn’t think about but simply accepted as given, are now alien concepts, consigned to the “Omigod-people-used-to-be-so-cruel” corner of history’s overflowing dustbin. One of the values now undergoing transition involves health care. Sen. Jim DeMint (R – South Carolina), quoted above, maintains that it’s a privilege. That is to say, no one deserves it; it has to be earned, or, more likely, bestowed upon you because your family has the means to do so. Or, if you’re lucky enough to ping on the radar of a (privately run) charity, maybe an occasional checkup and some prescription-drug handouts will come your way. See related from Arthur Salm: Health care in Canada — they’re not dying by the millions | Insurance companies terrified by the public option | Let’s make HMOs disappear People in every other western industrial nation don’t see it like that. They have decided that all their citizens deserve health care; it has become, in their view, a right. It didn’t used to be, but it is now. Values, remember, change. We Americans haven’t come that far yet, but we’re en route — and we even have the backing of the Founders on this one. The language is there, and has always been there, but it is coming to mean something different, something more, something better. Take this from the Preamble to the Constitution (my italics): ” … establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare … And this, from the Declaration of Independence (again, my italics): “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” In this day and in this age, the government’s — that is to say, our — charge to promote the general welfare, coupled with every man’s (and woman’s; another value change) right simply to live, more than implies a right to health care – it demands a right to health care. Throw in the pursuit of happiness as a kicker — can’t be happy if you’re sick as a dog, or dead as one — and it’s something we shouldn’t even be talking or thinking about; it’s something we should know. I deserve good health care, you deserve it, your kids deserve it, people you don’t know and never will know deserve it. Everyone deserves it. That means good care, real care, not a last-minute, desperate trip to the ER. Brian Johnston, chief of emergency services at White Memorial Medical Center in Los Angeles, wrote in the L.A. Times last Saturday about what he sees there: ” … a 47-year-old laborer, with untreated high blood pressure, dying from a cerebral hemorrhage. A woman in her 40s complaining of feeling ‘lousy,’ unaware that her blood pressure is extremely high and that her kidneys are destroyed. An elderly widow is brought in severely dehydrated and comatose, with a blood sugar level over 800. Medi-Cal had switched her over to a ’share of cost’ program, which forced her to choose between paying her rent or taking her medicine. She’d chosen to pay the rent.” Senator DeMint and others opposing universal national health care may be okay with what happened to these people. Health care, they believe, is a privilege; it’s not available to everyone; that’s just the way it goes. But the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution, as read and understood through modern sensibilities, say otherwise. Those ER patients’ rights as Americans were violated. Our rights are being violated. May we soon hold these truths to be self-evident.

Read more: www.sdnn.com...




[edit on 12-3-2010 by rusethorcain]

reply to post by BeastMaster2012


The ridiculous thing is what the rich don't pay by supporting poorer people's health care they more than pay by a crippled economy when people go bankrupt through paying medical bills. It's greed of the most short-sighted nature.

reply to post by endisnighe


I don't trust the American Medical Association on anything.

Although there are some very good and honest physicians with integrity most of them are there to pay for their schooling and then get out on the golf courses. Our medical profession is not a business model designed to keep people healthy but the reverse. Shove pills down their throats and see what happens.

If you keep people ill and suffering, they will always need medical attention. This is called job security.

Any organization that came into being by eliminating any and all their competition by burning them at the stake is suspect forever after in my mind.

I think the 2 serpents representing DNA are actually Illuminati symbolism and this is an organization, a cabal, too powerful for words or respect.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by BeastMaster2012

 

The ridiculous thing is what the rich don't pay by supporting poorer people's health care they more than pay by a crippled economy when people go bankrupt through paying medical bills. It's greed of the most short-sighted nature.

Exactly! If the health care debate were framed properly as a money saver for the wealthy and entitled, by reducing their premiums we would not even be in this shamefully self indulgent, greedy, despicable and isolationist discussion over whether or not certain people have rights to reasonably priced health care.

With the logic I see maintained in some of these posts it would be OK for doctors and insurance companies to set their own rates for services, (like maybe $1000 for a tetanus shot) and if 3/4 of Americans were shut out and unable to afford it...Tough luck.

I have from the beginning maintained that federal and government employees -anyone fighting against this bill - should surrender their own Federal Employees Health Care Benefits IMMEDIATELY!

I pay for politicians, fighting against my health care - to have health care.
I pay roughly a third of my income back to the Federal government which afford programs like The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program for them.

Why am I forced to (with my taxes) BUY HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS FOR RICH WASHINGTON POLITICIANS and their families, while I am doing without health care myself?

And then they have the unmitigated gall to turn around and say to the American people..Our health care is fine! The best in the world! We wouldn't change a thing!

This is like a slave forced to pick fruit out of the fields and forbidden to eat any of it because it all goes to the master.

I am sorry but I just cannot let this go by without commenting.
This is BS.... plain and simple.

It is the biggest crime being perpetuated on vulnerable Americans exposed to every chemical and toxin known to man in our food and in our crops, not to protect these Americans once you have made them sick.

They want to do the opposite in fact and go backward...they want to make sure that if you are a victim of these charlatans you do not get compensation for your injuries. They want to place a cap on what your life is actually worth. Your life is worth 250G and not a penny more. What good news. We are worth almost as much as a house.







[edit on 12-3-2010 by rusethorcain]

Nothing in the Constitution authorizes public funds to be spent on healthcare, or any other form of "social assistance".

In fact, even the man nicknamed the "Father of the Constitution" had this to say:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - James Madison criticizing an attempt to grant public monies for charitable means, 1794 "

reply to post by endisnighe

Leave me and my labor alone.

This is certainly easier said than done.

No man is an island - no matter how much we desire to be isolated, sealed off from the rest of the population... there they are.

We could just kill the sick people...oh yeah, we are already doing that by pricing them out of care.

Originally posted by brainwrek
Nothing in the Constitution authorizes public funds to be spent on healthcare, or any other form of "social assistance".

In fact, even the man nicknamed the "Father of the Constitution" had this to say:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - James Madison criticizing an attempt to grant public monies for charitable means, 1794 "

Really Brainwreck?
Then I would like my tax dollars back.

The tax dollars I have paid in Federal taxes so politicians in Washington can avail themselves and enjoy "the best health care system in the world"

Why should I pay for the Federal Employees Health Benefits program when I cannot afford to buy health care for myself????

What part of this equation don't you get?

This is just a little too benevolent of me and the rest of the tax payers footing the bill for them and their families. And now you point out it is against the Constitution! !!???

Who can I sue?




[edit on 12-3-2010 by rusethorcain]