commerce clause covers our THOUGHTS???

[Deleted]

Man-- these people are getting really desperate!
www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/02/24/obamacare-ruling-commerce-clause-covers-mental-activity/
Obamacare Ruling: Commerce Clause Covers Mental Activity
Published February 24, 2011
.....In ruling in favor of the constitutionality of the individual mandate, U.S. district court judge Gladys Kessler of Washington, D.C. displayed the science fiction abilities of D.C. regulators when she wrote:
“As previous Commerce Clause cases have all involved physical activity, as opposed to mental activity, i.e. decision-making, there is little judicial guidance on whether the latter falls within Congress’s power. See Thomas More Law Ctr., 720 F.Supp.2d at 893 (describing the “activity/inactivity distinction” as an issue of first impression). However, this Court finds the distinction, which Plaintiffs rely on heavily, to be of little significance...It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance is not 'acting,' especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice. Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.”
The judge is saying this: “Anytime you make a choice not to act you are 'acting.'" ...


more.............

[Deleted]

Regulating and taxing the act of non-action through thought as action??? My brain can't wrap around that one.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...nice...

[Deleted]

Crazy sheet-- they make it up as they go along....

[pappyjohn99]

I need more ammo.

[billisonboard]

I have serious reservations about the ruling and will ponder that part of it farther, but I disagree with the title and OP on what the ruling is. I work with student leaders. We talk about bullying. Sometimes one will say something along the lines of, "Well, I didn't do anything, it was the other kids doing the bullying." I will tell them that by their inaction they are "doing" some significant. The judge is making the same argument in regards to the inaction of not buying health care they are"doing" something. Like I said, I am not comfortable with that ruling. But that is what she ruled, nothing about "thoughts".

[Deleted]

I don't know, bill. Making a choice is a thought process.

[billisonboard]

Feb 26, 2011 13:01:23 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

I don't know, bill. Making a choice is a thought process.

Not for some people.

But it isn't the thought process that is at issue. It is the action or inaction that she talks about in the ruling.

Here is why I question the ruling. Say. I own a hotdog stand. If I open a branch hotdog stand in a neighboring state, I would be engaged in interstate commerce. If I do not open a branch stand, would I still be engaged in interstate commerce because I didn't open it?

[Deleted]

I agree with that, bill, but I also think she said that the inaction of a decision to get healthcare is an act of commerce. If a thought precedes an action, and she is saying an inaction is, in fact, covered by the commerce clause, isn't she basically saying that the inaction of our thought not to get insurance is action covered by the commerce clause? Yes-- it is really stupid.

[mmhmm]

It seems to me that once a decision is made, the period of thought leading up to the making of that decision is over. The person has thought it through and has come to a conclusion. Once a conclusion is reached, with any decision, the time for action has come. In this case the action in question would be making a choice. Make is an action verb. One makes a cake. One makes a child behave. Neither will get done just thinking about it. Therefore, as I see it, once you go from thinking about it to making it happen, action is, indeed, involved ... whether you decide to do something, or not do it, you have acted upon your choice.

[handyman2]

This reminds me of a comment by person reviewing a legal decision some years ago. he said( I don't want to meet the person that wrote the opinion, I want to meet the person that understands it) unquote.