Home > Blogs > Post Content
|
|
ONE OF THE MANY MYTHS ABOUT HEALTH CARE REFORM IS THAT REFUSAL TO BUY HEALTH INSURANCE WILL RESULT IN MASSIVE RESISTANCE, SEVERE FINANCIAL PENALTIES, EVEN JAIL. WRONG! By Timothy Noah, SLATE, March 11, 2010, The state of Virginia has a nutty new law prohibiting the federal government from compelling anyone in the commonwealth to purchase health insurance. Thirty-four other states are weighing similar laws nullifying health care reform's "individual mandate." Timothy S. Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee who favors passage of the bill, argues reassuringly in this essay on the New England Journal of Medicine's Web site that such challenges have no legal standing whatsoever. "We fought a war about that," Jost reminded me, "and the states lost." Jost is similarly reassuring about the constitutionality of the individual mandate itself. Like most legal scholars, he finds the argument in its favor "overwhelming" (though he concedes "it is hard to think of a direct precedent"). But Jost admits to some uncertainty about how easy it will be to enforce the individual mandate, citing two disquieting antecedents. The first is the "massive resistance" at the state level against 1954's Supreme Court school-desegregation decision (spearheaded, coincidentally, by a senator from Virginia). The second is California's defiance of 2005's Supreme Court ruling against the use of marijuana for medical purposes. As currently devised, the individual mandate, which would be phased in between 2014 and 2016, would impose a tax penalty on people who fail to acquire health insurance. Under the Obama proposal, it would be 2.5 percent of income or $695 (whichever is higher), with exemptions for people who either fall under the tax-filing threshold or who, if forced to purchase health insurance, would end up spending more than 8 percent of their annual income. The majority of those subject to the mandate would receive a government subsidy whose precise size is being worked out in House-Senate negotiations. The answer, then, to the question What happens to people who don't buy health insurance? is simple: They have to pay a $695 fine. But as Jost points out, that begs the question, What happens to people who don't pay the fine? Uh … nothing. Please turn to Page 336 of the Senate bill, whose language has been adopted in the Obama proposal: In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure. On that same page, it says the Health and Human Services secretary shall not file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty … or levy on any such property with respect to such failure. Huh. "Compliance," Jost concludes, will therefore be largely voluntary (although the IRS can still make a tax resister's life miserable, whether or not it can ultimately collect). The state [nullification] bills can thus be seen as invitations to civil disobedience that counsel state citizens to "violate the federal law, wave this statute in their face, and dare them to come after you." When the late Virginia Sen. Harry Byrd declared war on Brown v. Board of Ed., the result was a few years of defiance at the state level, a lot of newspaper columns and public statements that James J. Kilpatrick came to regret, and eventual capitulation. When the state of California maintained its medical marijuana program in defiance of federal law, the result was a lot of busts by the feds followed by a decision by Attorney General Eric Holder that he had better things to do than prosecute a lot of dopers with medical conditions. In both those instances, defiance led to legal battles and sometimes to prison sentences. Defying the individual mandate will probably lead to some court battles, too, but once the constitutional issues are settled (probably in the individual mandate's favor), there won't be much left to fight about. And apparently there won't be any threat of prison time or financial penalty. There will only be the threat of pissing off the IRS—and Republicans in Congress may be hyper-vigilant about policing any audits perceived to be retribution for noncompliance. On the other hand, health insurance is in many ways quite different from school integration and medical marijuana. To white segregationists, letting blacks into white schools was an intolerable reordering of society. To consumers of medical marijuana, giving this form of therapy up would be forgoing medication that eases the symptoms of disease. One was a dose of unpleasant medicine; the other a dose of, well, pleasant medicine. Health insurance is something altogether different. Almost nobody actively opposes the idea of being insured. Resistance to the individual mandate isn't about health insurance per se; it's about being told how to spend your money. And most of us got used to the idea long ago that the government needs to help itself to some of that money in order to make the society work. Another matter to consider is that in Massachusetts, the one state where an individual mandate has actually been tried, people aren't marching in the streets against it. "We have not seen a popular backlash," Jon Kingsdale, executive director of the Massachusetts Connector (the prototype for Obamacare's state exchanges), assured me by e-mail. "Only several thousand taxpayers followed through with a formal appeal of their tax penalty for 2007 or again for 2008. (The 2009 tax filings are still largely ahead of us.) A handful of appellants have tried to take this sort of case to court, but all have been … dismissed without the full case being argued before the court." In Massachusetts, the individual mandate has reduced the state's uninsured to 2.7 percent. Some of those folks are paying the fine, some are exempt based on income, and presumably some are neither paying the fine nor exempt; I couldn't tell you how many. With the Bay state's uninsured below 3 percent, it doesn't seem a particularly urgent question. If it rises above 5 percent, I'll get back to you.
Posted By: Richard Kigel
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 11:22AM
You can also
click
here to view all posts by this author...
|
 |
Rich, I guess I will be one of those civil disobeyers. And I don't get how this individual mandate is constitutional. What constitutional power does it derive from?
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 11:34AM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Thanks Steve:
As always, your observations are thoughtful, intelligent and respectful of differences, which opens the door to a real exchange of ideas. In other words--a conversation!!!
Here is the Constitutional basis for Mandated Health Care Insurance:
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, Section 8. Clause 1.
“The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.”
The bill requires every American to buy health insurance, including healthy people, and offers subsidies to help middle-income families. Insurance companies sought the mandate, saying it is the only way to keep premium costs from skyrocketing once they are not allowed to deny coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions, drop sick people or limit annual and lifetime coverage (all popular provisions of the health bill).
There is plenty of precedent for government imposed mandates. The government already requires people to buy car insurance, buckle seat belts and wear motorcycle helmets, not to mention make sure their children are educated.
Here in New York City the government mandates that smokers put away their cigarettes by prohibiting smoking in public places.
Mandated Health Insurance is the law in Massachusetts where only 2.7% of the citizens refused to purchase health insurance. The result is almost universal medical coverage. And the people in Massachusetts are not complaining.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 12:14PM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
Rich, a couple things. None of the following: Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises encompasses a mandate for a transaction between two private parties (i.e. the insurer, a company, and the insured, an individual). Mandates by States (e.g. the mandate to buy car insurance) are governed by state constitutions. So section 8 clause 1 of the U.S. constitution does not allow for such a Federal mandate. IMO.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 2:57PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
But if the Federal government were to impose a tax to provide health benefits to citizens, that would be constitutional.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 2:59PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Which in fact is already the case.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 3:00PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Dear Steve:
You are right in your view that it is not a settled issue.
The words of the Constitution can be intepreted in many ways. That is why we have the courts to make a final resolution. Even then, the Supreme Court may reverse itself years later.
Meanwhile, if the bill passes both Houses of Congress (as they nearly already have) it will become the law of the land and, yes, constitutional unless the Supreme Court determines otherwise.
An individual cannot decree that a law is unconstitutional based on his own belief. Only the Court can make that judgment.
Meanwhile, Factcheck.org, a non partisan website devoted to exploring the validity of public statements and policy, did an extensive study of the question.
Here are some of their findings:
IS HEALTH CARE REFORM CONSTITUTIONAL? Factcheck.org Examines the Question in Detail. October 2, 2009
Q: Are the health care overhaul proposals that are pending in the House and Senate constitutional?
A: Legal experts agree that requiring citizens to buy something is a novel concept that has not been tested in the courts.
The dispute hinges mainly on differing interpretations of the commerce clause of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.”
Writing about the Clinton administration’s proposed effort to overhaul health care, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel said in 1993 (with quotes from a 1940 Supreme Court decision):
Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel, 1993: “The American health care industry is one of the largest and fastest growing segments of the American economy, and it has the most direct and crucial impact on the lives of all Americans. Spiraling health care costs and inequities in the provision of health care services have an immediate and massive effect on the national economy and thus upon interstate commerce. As a result Congress unquestionably possesses the power "to deal directly and specifically" with health care in order to obtain "social, health [and] economic advantages" for the American people.”
We may find out. There’s little doubt that if the health care legislation passes and requires citizens to buy health insurance, it will be challenged in court. The final pronouncement may well be up to the nine justices who preside in the chamber right across the street from the Capitol.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 3:27PM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
Hi Rich,
Well I don't know about the interstate commerce argument. Seems to be stretching it a bit. But I'd like to address another myth. Which is that the average citizen is incapable of comprehending the very clear language of the U.S. Constitution. It does in fact spell out clearly what are the powers of the Federal government. If our lawmakers, president and court want to try and muddle the issue, then it is up to We The People to get rid of their dumb asses.
Rich, not taking this out on you - always a pleasure.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 3:55PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Clark,
So what it comes down to is are we smart voters? BTW, I don't buy the argument that a tax penalty is the same thing as a tax. I believe you are on the right track - if the general welfare calls for a tax, then tax the citizens for healthcare, and give them healthcare. Does this require a 1000+ page bill. Damn!
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 4:10PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Clark:
As usual, your arguments as crystal clear and supported by reason and common sense. Medicare for all is the obvious solution, especially since it is a long established and successful institution.
The whole health care reform issue is so ridiculously complicated that it almost defies a solution.
And Steve, as far as the ability to comprehend "the very clear language of the U.S. Constitution"...well, if it was only that clear we would not have 230 years of decisions and reviews of decisions to read over. I think the founders wrote it to be purposely ambiguous. It rests on unchanging principles. The issue is trying to apply those principles to an infinite variety of situations.
We can agree that if the bill becomes law it will be tested. The Supreme Court can then punt (decline to hear the case), which in my layman's opinion is most likely--or it will hear the case and rule one way or another.
Clearly, you believe the legislation is not Constitutional based on the clear language of the Constutituion and I believe it is Constitutional based on the clear language of the Constitution.
Ahhh, aren't political debates interesting!!!
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 4:13PM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
I believe the mechanism put in place though was not to give leeway to interpret but actually to change provisions. For instance, to get rid of the 2nd amendment, it needs only to be repealed. To grant additional powers, we can add amendments. That is the proper way to do things.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 5:26PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Irma, speaking of fair and equal, California, who needs help desperately with their education system, did not succeed in the first round of Race to the Top. This is where my grandkids will be going to school. Now, a panel of 200 judges (5 for each of 40 states submitting) decides where 4.35 billion of U.S. taxpayer's money is going? And this is under our Federal constitution?
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 6:21PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Well Irma, you have helped me to a decision. In this next election I will vote for anyone BUT a Republican or a Democrat. If I lived in Texas I would make ONE exception.
Friday, March 12th 2010 at 8:05PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Irma, I didn't vote in 2008, but that was a mistake. I should have written in Ron Paul. That was my first thought, and I should have followed it. I intend to do everything I can this election in pursuit of what I believe is the #1 priority. And that is: THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM IS DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY AND HAS TO GO.
Saturday, March 13th 2010 at 11:46AM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Of course we now have Campaign For Liberty, thanks to Ron Paul. This is where I get my Ron Paul posts. It is time for me to start getting more involved with their strategy for the coming election.
Sunday, March 14th 2010 at 6:15AM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Steve:
Another intelligent, informed observation that generates new thinking—and forces me to examine my own views on the US Constitution.
I am no where hear a constitutional scholar. But, like everyone else, I have opinions and questions.
Here is one question.
You find both major political parties equally negligent in Constitutional fidelity. “Neither treats the Constitution with anything but contempt.”
My question is: where were all the Keepers of the Constitution from 2001-2008 when the Republicans dominated government and…
--**** Cheney claimed that the office of the Vice-President was not in the executive branch.
--The NSA instituted wide spread interception of the private communication of American citizens without probable cause.
--President Bush routinely issued “signing statements” explaining how the executive branch could disregard laws duly passed by both houses of Congress.
--The executive branch launched two wars without the constitutional authority of congress and funded it outside the budget.
I did not see one Tea Party protest during the eight years of the Bush Administration despite many questionable extra-constitutional and budgetary policies. Eight years. Not one complaint.
The Obama administration has been in power barely a year, mostly dealing with issues and problems created by the bush administration. But, suddenly, in that year, the Constitution is being shredded?
Even if you think that both administrations were equal abusers, eight years of abuse does not equal one year.
Clearly, one administration’s violations have been far more egregious than the other.
Sunday, March 14th 2010 at 12:32PM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
Rich,
The Bush/Cheyney administration was an abomination.
I don't know much about the Tea Party, but I don't think I like them.
I was disappointed to find out (after I wrote the above post), that Campaign For Liberty's strategy is to attempt to reform the Republican party, rather than promote independent candidates. A BIG disappointment.
Ron Paul won the straw vote for President at the recent CPAC convention. But he shared the stage with the likes of Glenn Beck. I think Conservative is an equally disagreeable label as Liberal.
The sickness of this country is a Social disease, merely reflected in politics. The means of transmission of this disease is TV. As long as we continue to treat the political process like sitting down and watching the Superbowl, we are in deep ****.
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 7:19AM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Steve:
Glad to hear it. You are truly an Independent thinker!
There was an interesting piece in this Sunday's NY Times pointing out that regardless of their politics or voting tendenecies, one great service the TEa Party movement is performing is getting people to talk about the Constitution seriously.
I'll see if I can find it again and post it. You are probably the only person who might be insterested in it...besides me.
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 9:01AM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
Irma, I looked up Shah Rebellion and found things about India, Iran, etc. Can you give me a better idea what I'm looking for?
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 6:19PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Dear Lady Irma:
Is that what you are talking about?
Shays' Rebellion was an armed uprising in central and western Massachusetts (mainly Springfield) from 1786 to 1787. The rebellion is named after Daniel Shays, a veteran of the American Revolution who led the rebels, known as "Shaysites" or "Regulators". Most of Shays' compatriots were poor farmers angered by crushing debt and taxes. Failure to repay such debts often resulted in imprisonment in debtor's prisons or the claiming of property by the government.
Seeking debt relief through the issuance of paper currency and lower taxes, they attempted to prevent the courts from seizing property from indebted farmers by forcing the closure of courts in western Massachusetts. The participants in Shays' Rebellion believed they were acting in the spirit of the Revolution and modeled their tactics after the crowd activities of the 1760s and 1770s, using "liberty poles" and "liberty trees" to symbolize their cause.[1]
The rebellion started on August 29, 1786, and by January 1787, over 1000 Shaysites had been arrested. A militia that had been raised as a private army defeated an attack on the federal Springfield Armory by the main Shaysite force on February 3, 1787. There was a lack of an institutional response to the uprising, which energized calls to reevaluate the Articles of Confederation and gave strong impetus to the Philadelphia Convention which began in May 17, 1787. Shays' Rebellion produced fears that the Revolution’s democratic impulse had gotten out of hand.
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 8:59PM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
Irma, of course it occurred to me just as came back to the blog. I knew I didn't have the right spelling, just couldn't remember what it was. Thanks Rich.
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 9:17PM
Steve Williams
|
|
|
Dear Irma:
You are so right!!!
Tuesday, March 16th 2010 at 4:02PM
Richard Kigel
|
|
|
And Irma (AKA "Shorty") just for the record...I used to teach Critical Thinking to entry level college students at a Community College on 125th street in Harlem.
Tuesday, March 16th 2010 at 10:05PM
Richard Kigel
|
 |
If these men had done this and for this reason they would have beeen hung and not be making changes in our Constution...lol . (smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Rich, remember me always saying there is a European version or the history of those who conqure...our government owed these men and not the other way around...but you do have the spelling of the name correct. (smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Oh, my brother Rich how many slaves would the rebells have had for their debts to be paid off or attorneys to have them not even charged with TREASON FOR ATTACKING THE US GOVERNMENT???????? PLEASE...
"Due Process" Was about not bening able to take the property which was slaves in this law AND NOT EMINATE DOMAINE...not to argue, just common sense and why our history in America is now being more dedicated to UNLEARNING AMERICAN HISTORY THAN IN continuing TEACHING IT AS IT HAS BEEN...
Hate to remind that to GOP as to why we now do have a Black president or more demands for truth and morality in this country than ever before now...these people really mean it when they say they want this contry to GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE IT GETS DISTROYED...BY WHAT, THE TRUTH?!?(smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
My brother Steve, I will pass on to you something my mom passed on to me about mistakes...if it involved $$$, she would say, " GOOD, that was an expensive lesson"!...if it was like you just said, she would say, "A mistake is not a mistake if you have learned something from it". (smile)
So, my brother your penance for not voting (and doing exactly what "I" and so many others did when we wrote in R.P.'s name. lol) is that you work on the poll this year / volunteer some of your time to get the best candidate on "any political party" elected. (smile)
THIS SHOULD GO FOR ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS...YES WE MUST...YES WE CAN...
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
MY BROTHER COW YOU ARE SUCH A BLESSING TO OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM...IT IS TOO BAD TAHT MORE OF OUR SCHOOLS DON'T DO AS YOU DO...THEACH CRITICIAL THINKING...I GOT MY SPELLING FROM YOU AND YOU (we all) GOT TO LOOK AT THE SHEY REBELLION FROM ANOTHER view point . (smile)
To tell you the turth if I had not learned this about "Due Process" as directly related to "PROPERTY" back then meant one's "SLAVES"...BECAUSE AT THE TIME OF THESE REBEL'S FARM BUYING WOULD HAVE HAD NO DEEDS OR THEY WOULD HAVE HAD GOTTEN LAND GRANTS FROM THE KING OF ENGLAND ANY WAY. (smile)
Thanks for this blog, Rich as they are good for our country and good for mankind...YES WE CAN...
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
S-H-A-Y. (smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Hell, by now you should know I can not spell a lick and as i mostly go from memory on a lot of things learned in school about our history...I could be spelling this rebells name al wrong, but not the history of the U.S.A. (smile)
Clark as a rule usually correct my spellings on matters like this, now hopefully Rich as a teacher can help with this spelling of his name(smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Those who fought in the Revolution war here in America wee promised payment (you know much like we were promised those 40 acreas and a mule- lol) any, way my brother, they received no payments for their service...they rebelled and were going to take the payments in taking the slaves of those wealthy politicians/ our FOUNDING FATHERS ....thus the protect the few from the many is not about religious politicians beter known to us as the Founding Fathers. (smile)
This kead to teh only thing in teh Constitution that refers to us the slaves...WE KNOW IT BETTER AS DUE PROCESS... if you like I will look this up in the Constution for you, O.K.??? (smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
There is another thing about our constitution that 'brainwashing' helps promote...our not using our every day common sense. examples,
Please read about the history of the Shah Rebellion...this will help better explain how the American Constitution was actually TO PROTECT THE FEW (WITH FAME AND FORTURN / THE WHITE MALE, NO RELATIONS TO RELIGION) FROM THE MANY "THE POOR"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OUR CONSTUTUTION IS A LIVING THING THAT IS NOW BEING (as it always has been being ) CHANGED TO PROTECT THE "MANY" FROM THE "FEW"...
so my brother Steve all one has to do is study the changes in our Constitution to be better able to understand our Constitution. (smiles)
1. Females being treated more like humans with the mentality to be able to vote, get equal pay for equal work.
2. the rights to attend the schools of our choosings.
3. the rights not to fight in war.
4. the rights not to be hung (mental, physical abuses ) for voting, getting a job promotion / just being a female in the male world ETC. (SMILE)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Steve, RICH what about any thing in Ron Pauls' speech before CPAC WOULD OUR OWN PRESIDENT DISAGREE WITH??????????????????????...
"i" AM ONE THAT IS SO THE THE LEFT, "i" DOUBT IF THERE IS ANY ROOM LEFT FOR ME TO MOVE FARTHER TO THE LEFT AND "I" AGREED WITH EVERY THING RON PAUL SAID THAT THE FOUNDATION THAT THIS ORGANIZATION IS BEING BUILD ON A FOUNDATION THAT : WAS, IS, AND WILL BE A STRIKE MAJOR, MAJOR AGAINST THIS COUNTRY AS A MORAL AND LEGAL INTINTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Rich and Steve isn't it just great that we the public and the voters and taxpayers are at long last asking these kinds of questions among our selves like were have never done before, because this is what we were led to believe this was what our elected officals were doing in our name because this is what our votes intrusted them all to do for us on "main street" and why we pay our taxes for them to take care of this country's business 'fair and square'.....
YES WE CAN...AND IT DOES FELL SO GOOD AND SECURE FOR OUR NATIONAL SECURITY AND WELFARE. (smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Rich, "I" also have a few questions :
1. Where were 'we' when our jobs were going to China and bringing us back threats to our selves and especially with toys WITH LEAD in them...lead like this is BANNED IN AMERICA?!?
2. Where were when the out of contol gas prices was caussing school colsures in Ca. years ago ?!?
3. Where were we when during the last campaign Hillary said she had not even read the papers sending us to invade Iraq...and when we were winnig in Afganastian because Iraq was our experts in fighting a war in those mountians and we had no expertees in doing so ...but, then Bush knowing this put a STOP TO THIS WITH HIS AXIS OF EVIL?????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?
4. wHERE WERE WE WHEN DURING THE LAST CAMPAING RON PAUL TALKED ABOUT AN EMPIRE ALWAYS FALLS WHEN IT CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO SUPPORT ITS EMPIRE...AND , AMERICA KEPT ON SPENDING LIKE THEY DID NOT EVEN HAVE GOLD TO BACK ITS MONIES BEING BORROWED FROM CHINA...WHERE WERE WE WHEN BUSH JUST STOPPED PAYING ANY DEBT, BUT STILL GIVING TAX BREAKS TO THE RICH???????????????????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(i AM NOT SMILING AT ANY OF OUR TRYIING TO KEEP THIS DISTRUCTIVE BRAINWASHING GOING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Now my brother Steve, repeat after me, "I will not vote for anyone all ready N-O-T in Congress...but not to worry, because the way things are going the majority of them will be in court for the crimes and the lies and out and out fraud on this health care bill cover-ups as they'all' (?) have done all they could to prevent this bill becoming law and blaming the Republicans not their lobby monies bribes for it...
This is going to be a priceless race to 2012...you know like the criminals who swore to be faithful in them committing the" perfect" crimes and this is until they rush to be the one to get the best deal by turning in the one higher up , more experienced than they are?!? (smile)
I DO BELIEVE THIS IS IN OUR FUTURE here on main street America...AND Steve, I AM SO LOOKING FORWARDS TO IT. (SMILE)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Oh, no my brother, you don't get away with leaving us all with this mess that was created by more than just the past year of elctions (smile) Plus, if you don't vote you have no say in any thing the government does, rememember the rules?!?lol
I do expect that this is going to be thefirst time we get a good look at what we can expect after these next peoples going into our Congress will be getting for main street and not only getting benifits from or for wall street!!!! examples,
As I want more of those out there with the nerves and no fear of speaking the truth like Ron Paul... and I fully expect to get it this election time as never before, example,if Cindy Sheene runs agains Pelosi as promised, there will be questions of Pelosi about does she really believe that A-L-L of the public fell for her sell out to the insurance companys under trying to blame the Senate for no "Public Option"???????
IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE ONLY REASON PELOSI WAS ON THE RACHAEL MADDOW PROGRAM THE OTHER NIGHT WAS TO TRY AND GET THOSE LIKE ME WHO HAVE 100% TRUST IN MADDOW, TO begin to DOUBT RACHAEL...WELL, WHERE "I" AM CONCERNED "I" TOOK A CLOSER LOOK AT THE BEHAVIOR OF PELOSI AFTER THIS LITTLE GAME PELOSI TRIED TO PULL ON RACHAEL. (smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Well, my brother Steve, lets hope your grand son will still be having a school to go to next fall, because I know that this state is not going to be able to pay back all of those $$ millions that has been "borrowed" from the educational system over the years now pay back any of taht monies borrowed to support the private prison building in this state at the expence of our public schools...
not to mention those schools closed because teh bus' could not affrod those high gas prices way back when...but, even if they tried t reopen those schools closed back then this broke state could not be able to do so until they can replace all of the copper taken out of those schools and any and every thing else taht cluld be stolen to buy drugs / foods. (I am not smiling)
ND, THIS ALSO FITS INTO THIS TOPIC OF myths over reality and truths in this country all put under the false assumptions of blame health care reform, ect...
Wake Up America...THIS IS NOT EVEN ABOUT SKIN COLOR...
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Has anyone ever just let this Virginia law go with something like this...
Virginia is a state within the United States of America which is a "Democracy"( not a ditator ship government: local, state or federal) therefore we have a First Amendment and a Civil Rights act bill and on top of this all of these Constitutional laws along with ALL CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY MUST BE TREATED equally MAKES THIS LAW IN VIRGINIA A LAW THAT IS ABOVE THE FEDERAL LAWS?!? (smile)
does anyone have to pay or in other words are they in any way "required" to PAY A DOCTOR'S OR A HOISPITAL BILL in that state of Virginia????????????????????????????looooooooooooool
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
Now, "I" chant (pray) that more of us not just only ask ourselves if we now look at those who represent our state in a new light?!? ...
But, if we have done so then lets join in and help our president bring control of our government back out of the hands of the BEST CONGRESS ThaT LOBBY MONEY CAN BUY AND PUT IT BACK INTO THE HANDS OF, SAY THOSE LIKE US WHO ARE WILLING TO HELP TAKE OUR GOVERNMENT BACK, BECAUSE EACH AND EVERY VOTER IS IN FACT THE U.S. GOVERNMEnt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(smile)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
|
|
NOW IF NONE OF WHAT "I" JUST SAID DOES NOT FIT YOU ON A PERSOANL LEVEL THEN LETS STOP LIMITING OUR SELVES TO THESE SAME PEOPLE (OR MOST OF) THEM WERE REPRESENTING US EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US AS : OUR CHILDREN DIED IN THESE 9 YRS. OF WARS, WHILE OUR JOBS WERE SENT OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND LEAD AND ILL FIT FOODS WAS RETURNED TO US IN EXCHANGE FOR OUR MIDDLE-CLASS JOBS BEING OUT SOURCED. THE MIDDLE-CLASS ARE THE ONES WHO ACTUALLY PAY TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...
AS OUR SCHOOLS BEGAN CLOSING AND OUR POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS GOT CUT DOWN BECAUSE OF THE PRICE OF GAS...AND NOW ARE CLOSING , PERIOD!!!!!!!!!...
AS OUR COUNTRY WENT BANKRUPT WITH WARS, GAS PRICE FIXING, BANKS PULLING A PANZY SCHEME ON US THE PUBLIC...
AND, GUESS WHAT THIS ALL HAPPENIED AS WE WATCH OUR TV AS WE STILL ARE TELLING US EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR THAT IS IF WE STILL HAVE A HOME TO WATCH A TV...
WHY SHOULD WE BE UP SET FOR OUR CONGRESS DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THINGS THAT HAS GOTTEN THEM VOTED BY US RIGHT BACK INTO OFFICE, GENERATION AFTER GENERATIONS...OR ARE WE ALL TRYING TO CONVINCE OUR SELVES THAT IT DID NOT TAKE THIS COUNTRY YEARS AND YEARS TO GET IN THE SHAPE IT IS IN RIGHT NOW?????????
AND UNTIL WE PUT OUR OWN NAMES IN THAT COMPLAINT BOX WHERE WE NOW PUT CONGRESS' NAME IN THEN NOTING WILL EVER CHANGE...BECAUSE THAT EXPRESSION ABOUT, "IF IT WORKS WHY CHANGE IT " IS TSO, SO VERY, VERY TRUE AND PROVEN !!!("I" am not smiling)**************************$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ I-T !!!!!!!!!!!
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
|
Blogs Home
|
|
|
