Commerce Clause & Health Care

The Commerce Clause was merely placed in our geological formation to ensure that states couldnt establish laws or regulations that would hinder with trade and scotch calling, in result gave relation the power to regulate Commerce with irrelevant Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. To me, the Commerce Clause was once legitimate in the sense that the economic activity was mainly trade based and to block the intense rivalry among states, social intercourse needed to demand the power to accountant interstate commerce to render remainders.When creating and establishing the Commerce Clause I accept it could conduct been thought through and further more(prenominal) written in a more distinct and detailed way to accommodate the issues we stimulate had. Because it wasnt stated, U. S. Supreme Court ruled Congress to control intrastate commerce as long as the commerce signififannytly affects commerce involving more than one state, resulting from Gibbo ns v. Ogden. Sometimes I wonder if its realistic to trust Congress depart originate to the point of controlling every chance of our feel, until something standardized the affordable C be travel comes into consideration and keeps me questioning, what will be next.The regimens argue is, under the Commerce Clause that Congress has the power to mandate the Affordable Care Act. Their philosophy is that Congress arsehole demand people to buy health policy, and if they refuse, so it would be touch on interstate commerce weakening the Acts other developments. Their ratiocination is that there are individuals who currently do non have medical insurance that are making a remarkable amount of visits to the doctor. In result, leaving hospitals reaching come out of the closet to insurance companies to recover what they didnt get paid for treating the non-insured.Consequently, insurance companies will start raising premiums high and higher which will penalize those who already ha ve insurance and those who reach out for insurance where premiums have raised to a point that it is unaffordable for the average citizen, then the problem will get worse. The melodic line against the Affordable Care Act is that it violates the Commerce clause regarding the fact that Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce and intrastate commerce as long as the conflict in commerce is among more than one state.Some states, like Virginia, have passed or are in consideration of declaring a law that the Affordable Care Act cant be enforced in their States. In the article on the Reuters website it says, State legislators in Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Oregon, Texas, and Wyoming have introduced bills that establish penalties, including oks and jail time, for any agent seeking to enforce the healthcare law within their states borders. Congress has the power to do most of which they see capable of doing and if they can prove a good enough argument to the Supreme Court that inactivity affects interstate commerce then I think no matter what the States arguments are going to be shut out down. Regarding evaluate, the Government argues that if their power under the commerce clause doesnt advocate the mandate, then they will implement the power of Congress to tax. The mandate was Congresss solution to those who decided they werent going to get health insurance, preventing cost shifting.Cost shifting was their answer as to why they can force the individual mandate and its because the failure to purchase insurance has a substantial and deleterious effect on interstate commerce. The Government believes that health care at some point in life is unavoidable, whether its an emergency or through insurance, thats why they have created the individual mandate penalty to refrain from premiums rising. The main argument against the mandated tax is that when lobbying for the bill, President Obama stated that there would not be a freshly tax involved with the individ ual mandate requiring coverage.But the penalty will be collected through tax filings and the Federal Government says that the fine is in their power to levy. From the Reuters article it says, States say the U. S. Government does not have the authority to charge the fine and point to the discrepancy amidst Obamas statements and the U. S. Governments arguments. Government regulation in line of work is everywhere, from advertising, employment and labor, privacy, environmental, and safety and health issues.The ultimate reason there are so many regulations is so that consumers are protected and it helps businesses to thrive at the same time. What is so interesting about the law is that we have a firm foundation, but the law will always be ever-changing because with time there will come a new mise en scene with no precedent that will cause a controversy like the Affordable Care Act itself. I just hope it doesnt get to the point that the Government abuses its powers given to them by th e framers who created our Constitution to settle down conflict, not create it.