Just three points.
First, there's a difference between good universal health
care and the slapdash collection of political compromises passed at the last
minute by a lameduck congress.
As speaker Pelosi famously said, "We have
to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."
Second, the
Constitution is the legal framework of the US. I seems to me when you have to
squint and use legal doubletalk to justify what you want to do rather
than what you know you should do, it indicates an ethical
shortcoming.
Third, there's no Constitutional issue with the
States implementing Universal Health Care, we have it in Massachusetts.
If someone doesn't like it, they can move to New Hampshire or Maine, it's called
freedom.
If Universal Health Care is so great, why aren't other states
implementing it? The are no, none, zero Constitutional issues with any State
implementing Universal Health Care.
Seriously, I thought at least
California would implement some form of Universal Health Care for its
citizens. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|