During all the townhall meetings and such with respect to this claimed "reform" of health care in America which is being promoted by the Obama Administration, it has truly astounded me and many other Americans that the key issues with respect to this legislation have not at all been addressed.

And that is the "legality" of any such legislation under our current form of government as encompassed by the U.S. Constitution.

Just how many aspects of this plan would not hold muster under the light of Constitutional provision?  Fundamentally, almost all of them.

Starting with the fact that it is not within Congress or the Presidents enumerated powers of office to "mandate" that Americans must buy or "purchase" health care coverage at all.  Their job is to to ensure freedom, not to take freedom away, in determining just what Americans choose to spend the money that is the result of the fruits of their own labors.

The 16th Amendment and income tax itself violated that "intent" and those provisions (since the 9th Amendment superceded the 16th, thus requiring the 'consent of the governed' for any such legislation), and now the Cap & Trade tax that was recently sped through Congress (while even shutting down the Energy Committee website to remove the right of petition) another.

"Globally" taxing Americans now for the "greater good" of the planet was not something the founders would approve of in the slightest.  Especially without the American people's express (rather than implied) consent using simply polls and media propaganda for the basis of this ludicrous legislation.

Within the stimulus bill were sums that were included to hand over to Bill Gates and the telecom industry in order to facilitate also a federally funded database containing all Americans most privileged and personal information - their health care records.  Definitely a violation of the privacy "search and seizure" provisions of our Constitution, and fundamental Bill of Rights violation.

Who wants a federal lackey in Washingto to know whether or not you have ever contracted an STD or had an abortion?  Or are HIV positive?  Or underwent cancer treatment but have been determined to now be cancer free?  Or saw a counselor during a traumatic life event or loss for a mental health tuneup?

Think of what a political tool and weapon this can be, in addition to such a fundamental privacy violation.  Or how those records could then be subpoenaed by lawyers in civil suits without privacy protections unrelated to the case, or eventually by employers in order to deny employment based on physical health even though the position and the health concern would have absolutly nothing to do with your ability to carryout the needed job functions.

Think how many more court actions and judges for those courts at taxpayer expense are going to be needed for all the legal challenges when this information is misued, or there is a security breach by some governmental employee that makes that movie on stolen identity a nightmare come true?

There is no inherent right for the government to overstep its Constitutional authority, but it appears that in the last decade that is all the government has actually done.  Overstep its Constitutional authority time and time again.   And then been negligent in doing its true duties in others.  Such as truly securing our borders.

So much so to the point now where Americans are truly becoming outraged at these townhall meetings, but the socialists and fascists still haven't gotten the message and are now through DHS attempting to marginalize make the American people and victims of this governmental abuse those to "watch."

How dare they.  Isn't it the American people who are paying their salaries, and were to be representatives of them with respect to their duties and those concerned citizens outrage maybe justifialble due to the Constitutional violations and Washington's demonstrated arrogance now time and time again?

The spins continue.  Just today there was an article again on the internet attempting to "explain" the Myths and Facts of Health Care Reform.

Of course, using "myths" again to obscure the true "facts."  That Congress and the President are outside Constitutional authority in even wading in these waters.  Especially during this current economic meltdown that has left many jobless and homeless - and will now be facing increased energy costs due to the last Constitutional abridgement if they can still hang onto their homes.

While they continue to feed the bankers and insurers that are primarily responsible for this economic meltdown, rather than protecting the people and citizens from such abuse.

Rather, the true "reform" would be to back up and reinstitute our Constitution, and instead use those telecom monies in order to set up a national complaint system for abusive insurers that deny coverage, or doctors who are overbilling and abusing the system.  And then stripping those insurers or doctors of their licenses to do business for criminal fraud. 

Reinstituting again the "common law" on punitive damage awards (not compensatory) so that ethical doctors can stay in practice.  Why do you think our infant mortality rate is now less than Cuba's?  All those obstetricians that had to leave practice in the 80's due to the removal of those caps might just hold a clue.

Co-ops are what insurance companies actually were to begin with.  What is also needed is forbidding those commercial corporations that exist on public sums from investing in high risk investments with those premiums, such as what occurred with AIG. 

Not profiting off their criminal activities yet again with this legislation.  And also the terms of the policies which are sold, and coverages which are now standardized and information shared within the industry without citizen recourse also as to what is included in that industry pool.

Obamacare once again shows that Mr. Obama's representations during this last election cycle shows that not only was his campaign rhetoric a bunch of hogwash with respect to the war, protecting the middle class, and Joe the Plumber, but even his actual credentials.

A Constitutional lawyer actually is a little familiar with the Constitution.

Which Mr. Obama clearly is not.

Nor is the 111th Congress that is even giving credence to this legislation in its current form.

For Any And All American Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/02/geithner.economy/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

For any and all Conservative Constitutional Constructionists:

Buried in the news due to the brouhaha and continuing sensationalism in reporting which has occurred due to the shooting earlier this week at the Holocaust Museum and the liberal spins on the story now being expanded and repeated without much "hard" evidence and proof on the motivations and actions of this 89 year old apparently demented man and World War II enlistee (who knew enough about computers to have and maintain his own website at 89?), there have been several other stories not as widely covered.

One of which is the recent announcement by the United States Chamber of Commerce that they have decided to undertake a mission at the tune of over 10 million dollars in order to "educate" the public on the economic benefits of  "capitalism and free markets," over what many are labeling Mr. Obama's socialistic moves this past several months in taking over and bailing out several of our major private industries.  Such as the banks and auto manufacturers, and redistributing the wealth according to Congress and the Executive Office's priorities for global policy reasons most of all.  Global socialism, in other words.

The problem that I have with that is first the question of just where, in this struggling economy with industries across the spectrum pleading poverty, the Chamber is getting this 10 million in order to undertake their "education focus and program.  Since this declaration of intent falls within the parameters of "education" and a major focus of the stimulus sums were earmarked for "educational purposes," could the U.S. Chamber now be one of those recipients of stimulus monies, another payback by both the Democrats and Republicans to their big business supporters for their 2008 election coffers?

Doesn't this simply mean that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a social welfare recipient itself now of the U.S. taxpayers?  And their agenda merely is more propaganda for their member corporate interests, i.e., convincing the public their their lobbying efforts have the American citizens and consumers in mind with their "free market" theories.

Since the U.S. Chamber does not support any "buy American" clauses in most of the Congressional legislation that has come out of the Hill for literally decades, and is a big supporter of "free trade" global agreements, open borders and global tourism is one of their primary focuses especially between the United States, Canada and Mexico, is not their idea of "free market" and "capitalism," simply "global corporate socialism," under the much rumored North American Union banner of one world government under U.N. dictates, rather than America's own Constitution.

"Corporatism" is entirely different than "free market" capitalism, an economic theory that the founders found actually compromised U.S. industry and labor.  The United States Chamber of Commerce is similar in agenda to the East India Tea Company which existed prior to America's Revolutionary War in its public/private partnership with the sovereign, and dominating and monopolizing European imports and exports and the marketplace. 

A "monopoly," as it were, squeezing out the independent, small business entrepreneurs, and compromising U.S. domestic production and labor in the process.  While getting "tax breaks" and "privileges and immunities" at the colonists expense for inferior products and unfair trade practices.

The U.S. Chamber may be "U.S. owned," but its agenda is clearly globally, not domestically, focused for its member corporations in supporting and promoting many U.S. interests which have moved offshore, or employment of foreigners at the cost of American labor in order to increase profits and production and skirt around U.S. minimum wage and labor laws for these multi-national corporations, while promoting and supporting a "hands off" policy with respect to regulation of executive level pay.  Although corporations, by their very nature, are the "property" of the disinterested shareholders once those corporations go public. 

In my opinion the entire argument with respect to executive pay levels and government involvement could be cured by recognizing these U.S. corporations for what they are.  Property.  And as "public" corporations, owned by the shareholders who should have final and absolute authority with respect to compensation levels for their top level management with the caveat that all such matters as public corporations be determined by "one vote per ownership" no matter how many shares are held by an individual or corporate investor, or based on a 2/3rds majority vote in order to protect those minority shareholders from majority "block" voting.

This isn't baseball cards we are dealing with here, it is multi-billion dollar corporations, and yet our Congress and government have now even given "corporate person-hoods" privileges and immunities far greater than the American people and citizens individually. 

Governmental protection, and now the American people are enforced shareholders in these major corporations, again without any voice in the huge "socialization" of these debts, which are now being sold piecemeal to foreign and global interests primarily, and giving foreign governments and industries more and more influence in the American political process, again, over and above the lawful American citizens in addition to their jobs and homes.

But with this announcement of the new nationwide "Campaign for Free Enterprise," and its education branch funded with over 10 million in stimulus monies, is it not the epitome of hypocrisy to fund a purported "free market and free enterprise" campaign with sums gained through public welfare and "socialism" at its core?

It seems that returning to our Constitution and intended form of government, if Congress was actually performing the functions for which it was lawfully charged to do, would guarantee that the larger would not snuff out the weaker in this "global corporatism" the American people are now subjected to on each and every level. 

It appears the "Campaign for Free Enterprise," is simply another "job creation," and stimulus of the Bush/Obama administrations and our treasonous federal legislators for big business and global corporate interests which is now being funded by the American taxpayers - with "freedom" and "liberty" which formerly were "principles," and Constitutional directives now only to have morphed into an industry all its own and simply another government funded new job stimulus and "industry" for the Fortune 500's additional financial gain most of all, and it appears selected "freedom and liberty" focused citizens organizations and groups.  Since those also have sprung up in abundance since the Bush years, and now "freedom" and "liberty" are being used as industries all their own in trinkets, ad revenues for websites, and fees and costs for traveling to and from freedom and liberty based paid speaker "seminars."

The "free market" capitalist corporatists version of the opposing social corporatists "global warming" scam.

Recently on one of the major networks it was reported that the State of California is facing a massive budget deficit, with the citizens of California screaming.

It appears Governor Schwartzenegger's solution to the catastrophy, one which again has a great deal to do with the past and current administration's governmental excesses from all reports, is now to request that the citizens of the United States bail out California much like the AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailouts (and it appears, the Big Three auto manufacturers).

California, the home of such programs as "Californication," "Beverly Hills 90210," "The OC" and the like, is hardly an innocent victim in their predicament, but a state who has built it's own reputation on fantasy and excess.

Apparently, it is those hard working Midwesterners and farmers that those in the Golden State now wish to come to their rescue, in addition to the out of work steel and auto workers, and those now homeless due to many of the practices of a number of banks who make their home also in the Golden State.

My former home state, Arizona, is now full of the refugees from California who essentially have destroyed that state with their excesses, and are working on destroying my former home in leaps and bounds with their liberal agendas.

Governor Schwartenegger, here are some suggestions for restoring economic viability in California:

1. Reduce all governmental salaries by at least 25%, in recognition that you, and all public employees of that state, also have blue ribbon health, dental, and pension plans that a good 2/3's of the private sector employees in California do not have (with the exception of Beverly Hills, Hollywood, and Nobb Hill).

Place freezes on additonal new hires until the size of government in the state can actually bear relevance to need, i.e., since the cities and local governments are state actors of the State of California, both legally and by judicial interpretation, just maybe your bicameral legislature could be parred down to a unicameral one such as Nebraska has, which is actually more in accordance with the federal Constitution, since there are only three "legal" entities within it - the federal government, the states, and the people.

And Senators rarely represent the municipalites solely in state government, but usually also large corporate interests just as the House members now do although elected through supposedly "democratic" local elections. Although those candidates merely are representatives of political party and corporate interests, by and large, and many of which funded by out of district slush money.

The U.S. Senators were actually provided to represent "the states" with the U.S. House then representing the people. The 17th Amendment somehow changled all that and is why we now have Senators courted by foreign governments and corporate lobbyists, since if elected by the state legislatures as originally provided, they were accountable to the states themselves.

>Such a change in California government would result in shorter legislative sessions, less bureaucracy, and less costs to the taxpayers with greater accessibility, and would also be a great idea for the other 48 states which have yet to recognize this "double whammy, double bureaucracy" excess. What a concept!

2. Institute gaming and gambling just like the State of Arizona and so many other states across the nation have rather recently done, and then in conjunction with the new social drinking taxes, have officers wait outside the casinos to pick up the low level DUIs after the casinos have plied them with alcohol. Either they lose the money in the casinos to the state, or just in the event they win or truly do not excessively imbibe, they lose it in the DUI fines and fees after leaving.

Then put them in the privatized county court system, so that the state, counties and cities can at least get their share of the federal pork pie for those expenses and incarcerations by the head factored according to arrests and convictions made by juries now which are becoming increasing comprised of many state or municipal employees to insure those conviction rates stay high and those dollars continue to flow in, or been removed entirely so that the city or county judge can act as the state revenue agent instead.

Oh, and also install statewide those speeding cameras so that you can gain another several billions on those progressive fines and fees for speeding violations based upon those fallible machines. That should bring in billions!!!

Alas, though I see that the State Supreme Court is going to "review" the legality this week of Proposition 8, which passed recently under a citizen's initiative restricting marriages to two sex couples.

Overturn that "people determined" decision due to budgetary needs, and of course you can look forward to all those licenses fees, and the "for profit" court costs and fees for all those divorces sometime in the future. Not to mention all those added taxes that will be necessary in order to provide those courts for at least some of those divorces if only 1/3 of them end up in the courts eventually.

And also those future campaign contributions from the California Bar Association Domestic Relations Division due to the gold mine such an action would engender for their corporate interests in state permission and licensures of personal relationships, rather than simple recordations of these oral or written personal contracts.

Nor does this take into consideration the effect and costs of those wildfires of yours due to the aging 60's hippie environmentalists and their offspring, nor the "global warming" scam supported by Hollywood in order to now tax the air we breathe.

I don't think Californians should be screaming, but the rest of the nation.

Last week Barack Obama called leaders of the insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies and labor organizations for a pow-wow regarding one of his fundamental quests as stated during his campaign: health care reform.

Although these three industries are not in any way directly tied to patient care and delivery, it appears Mr. Obama is playing diplomat with this issue and appeaser with these industry leeches in order that they don't lose a piece of their pie under any anticipated governmental program.

Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, would not sit well with the private insurance carriers who would stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.

The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.

Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.

The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.

Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.

What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.

Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?

What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.

In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.

I look for this scenario to go one of two ways:

(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.

Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.

(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.

(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).

The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.

And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Who's on first?"

Another take:

http://www.getbetterhealth.com/tag/galen-institute

Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.

Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.

For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."

I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.

Maybe what we need to do here is step back a moment and look at the legal and "long view."

What a novel idea.