Show Down: The Supreme Court and the Affordable Care Act

The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments concerning the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.


The worst thing that could happen would be for the justices to rule in favor of forcing American citizens to purchase health care based on the interstate commerce portion of the Constitution, as is the case in the 2,700 page, one trillion dollar piece of legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

That commerce clause has been utilized by politicians in an ever-widening sphere to regulate virtually anything.

It does not take an expert in constitutional law to know, without doubt, that forcing citizens to purchase health care with interstate commerce as the vehicle to do so is not only just plain wrong, it is illegal.

If this health care law is not repealed, the end result is that Capitol Hill, those citizens who are bound by oath to serve America’s best interests, have, simply stated, stripped away another right of freedom from Main Street USA.

The freedom to make independent decisions.

Any person should question why, if this legislation is such a good universal solution to health care, members of Congress are exempt from taking part. That our esteemed officials have so elected to distance themselves from something that is supposed to be so very good for everybody makes one wonder why they would do such.

That they can do this, as well as mandate retirement ages for the private sector but not themselves, among other inequities, is just another reason there should be a 28th Amendment:

Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.

On another health care related note, it is interesting that White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer stated that a positive aspect of the bill is that insurance companies “have to spend more of your premiums on health care instead of advertising and bonuses,” yet Congress and the White House allow drug companies to saturate the media with myriad ads promoting drugs that can cause “suicidal thoughts or actions” and “sudden unexpected death.”

And, it is a certainty that politicians accept all manner of financial support for their campaigns from insurance companies, executives and employees.

Such is hypocrisy in politics.

Let us hope the Supreme Court is able to rise above politics in their decision regarding the atrocious Affordable Care Act.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Congress Must Work To Get Paid

At least here, in these good ole United States, no one can say that taxpayers do not get all of their money’s worth from those men and women who have been elected to serve the people.

Editor’s note: the lowest Congressional salary is approximately $174,000 per year, plus a couple of offices with staff, lots of expenses, world travel, long vacations (even when there is urgent business at hand), wonderful health insurance (not part of the national healthcare reform plan passed in 2010) and an outstanding pension plan. (Just sayin’…)

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Though Promised, There Is NO Transparency

While campaigning for the Oval Office, President Obama made this promise to all of Main Street USA:

“When there is a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what’s in it before I sign it, so that you know what your government’s doing.”

Any bets on whether or not the massive pork and earmark-filled healthcare reform bill will even make it to the WH website, let alone be on it for five full days prior to his signature?

Within the first two months of his presidency, of 11 major bills that the president signed, only six of them (55%) made it online for review prior to his signing them and none of them (0%) were posted a full five days.

And it has not gotten any better.

With the number of votes that had to be purchased to push this legislation through the House it is this taxpayer’s opinion that most of us will not see the full bill for quite some time, if ever.

As has been stated, the Congressional Special Interest Group (the buying of Senate and House votes through legislation earmarks especially for them) is much more dangerous than any single SIG in existence.

This bill proves it.

The government will now be responsible for over 50% of our gross domestic product.

Certain civil rights, such as the right to choose if one wants healthcare coverage or not, are gone.

That all members of Main Street USA must pay for walking parks in some town in a state many have never even visited is not what this country should be doing.

Ad infinitum.

At a time when unemployment is over 10% nationwide, when state officials are unable to raise enough funds to cover bare necessities of what government should be doing, when city municipalities are not able to honor bonds issued and where our own federal government has been “borrowing” from the social security trust fund (to the tune of over three trillion dollars), our elected representatives should be focused on making effective financial cuts, not spending yet another trillion dollars we do not have.

Our Founding Fathers may have had it right placing “In God We Trust” everywhere.

Because politicians continue to prove they cannot be trusted.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

National Health Insurance, Really?

I know this is going to be a touchy subject for some but I hope that people will read and digest what is being said in this blog.

Medical insurance is available to all of us, at a cost. Unfortunately for many people the cost is more than they can afford, whether it is offered via their employer or purchased from an insurance company directly.

Insurance companies, as do all businesses, exist to provide a service and make a profit. If the cost of doing business exceeds the revenue received for their service an entity will fold. Insurance companies cover a huge amount of our collective medical expenses.

Let’s look at why medical service is costing Americans so much today. A lot of the problem can be summed up in one word…lawsuits.

There have been too many juries award what I believe are excessive awards to defendants. This ranges from malpractice to wrongful death and all things in between and from side to side.

In a fairly recent letter to President Obama on this subject I stated that instead of nationalizing health insurance one should first look at how costs could be lowered and, thus, make premiums more available to all Americans. (Once again, I am sure that one of his aides failed to deliver my words of wisdom.)

What if legislation was introduced to limit punitive awards? What would the effect be on the cost of insurance? I believe that we would find that it would be less.

I do feel that if a family loses the breadwinner (or main breadwinner) wrongfully that there should be some recompense. However, if the person lost to loved ones earned $40,000 a year and had ten good years of work left there is no logical reason to award tens or scores of millions.

I know these millions are supposed to repay people for pain, suffering, and the like. The real problem is that money DOES NOT make that pain and suffering go away.

Yes, the family should receive something but the monetary award should not be totally influenced by attorneys who should have been actors earning academy awards for their performances.

I can hear the screams now but I can assure you I have been there.

When I was 20 away at college I lost my father in an accident involving a train where evidence clearly showed the railroad company was in the wrong. My mother, on the advice of a wimpy attorney, settled out of court for a grand total of $50,000. My dad was 51. He had recently gotten back to very good health and could easily have worked to age 65. I strongly believe that my mother should have received a much greater sum than she did but not tens of millions, regardless of how easily it was to prove the railroad company in the wrong.

All that said, when insurance companies have to pay hundreds of millions for claims and lawsuits they end up raising the premiums we pay for coverage.

When doctors have to pay astronomically high premiums for malpractice insurance, just in case, the costs of medical services increase.

Thus, my argument in favor of placing a cap on punitive awards. Let’s do something effective to lower insurance costs.

And, by the way, the health care bill being proposed will cost somewhere between One and Two Trillion Dollars to fund.

People, where does that money come from?

Heaven? I don’t think so.

Ultimately, it will come primarily from the middle class, Main Street USA.

Whether that trillion-plus dollars is repaid in the form of increased income taxes or raising one or more of the dozens of other taxes we all pay, make no mistake, in the end, the piper must be paid.

Please think this over.

We, Main Street USA, have been mortgaged to the hilt already. The deficit in our national budget that has been incurred in our names is staggering.

Insurance costs can be brought under control and, thus, premiums should lower, making affordable plans available to us all.

We DO NOT need nationalized health insurance.

We DO NEED people willing to find solutions to problems that really are solutions and not something that merely puts it off to another day (or another administration).

Over for now,

Main Street One