Thursday, October 22, 2009

A Constitutional View of HR 3200

Constitutional Lawyer critiques Health Care Reform (HR 3200)

by Michael Connelly of Carrollton, Texas, retired Constitutional Lawyer, having read the entire health care bill (HR3200), has some comments, not about the bill, but about the effects on our Constitution. It's a broader picture than just health care reform.


Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, Constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface.

In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead, it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures.

You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the "Health Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out of the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though.

The 9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress, I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly

Retired Attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor

Carrollton, Texas


Mark Pressley said...

This is the scariest stuff yet, it is big goverment that has me afriad and this bill is exactly what they need.

When will everyone wake up?

I am going to post this also and pass it on.

Good Job.

Michelle Rosalyn Matthews said...

Oh my gawsh! Thank you for posting this! I need to post this and pass it on as well!

hometown guy said...

hmmm... while generally i find your site pretty well-informed and intelligent, this posting is pretty much just the repetition of a hoax. the guy is not even a real law professor.
while i'm typically on the other side of the issues from you and most of your readers, i still have a high opinion of your site and i think re-posting stuff like this just takes away from the strength of some of your other arguments.

point by point refutation can be found here (i know it's a liberal site, just verify the source material for yourself before making any judgments):

FairTaxMan said...

Hey hometown guy!

I'm sure that most readers of this post will acknowledge that media matters is about as balanced in their "political" ideology as a seesaw with a baby on one side and an elephant on the other.

If media matters has a "point-by-point" refutation of Michael Connelly's article, then how do you explain Bob Beckel, during an on-air discussion with Mark Levin on his radio show November 23rd 2009, stating that he had talked to a "liberal" constitutional lawyer who told him that he could find NO AUTHORITY in the Constitution giving Washington the right to force this healthcare bill on to the backs of the American people? Bob isn't your typical "poster child" for the conservative right is he? Why then would he make such a statement - unless it is TRUE? The lawyer told Beckel that this revelation made him very nervous about what Obama/Reed/Pelosi are attempting to do to the American people.

As for your media matters rebuttal - I, and other reasonable, thoughtful individuals, don't trust what media matters says any further than we can spit!

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Google Analytics Alternative