Is Healthcare a Right?

[mRx 16]

EOM

[Otto 83]

No more/less a 'right' than education...

[mawilson 2,133]

No more/less a 'right' than education...

Also not a right.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No more/less a 'right' than education...

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Matt - paying federal taxes is not slavery. It is part of being a citizen...

The Whiskey Rebellion of 1794 is little remembered today but its impact had profound effects on the future of the United States. Among them was a new relationship between the federal government and the states, dissension within the administration of George Washington which would lead to the demise of his popular Federalist party, and the birth of a new political party which lives on to this day. The Whiskey Rebellion also marked the first and only time that a president of the United States put on a military uniform to personally lead troops into battle.

Although the Whiskey Rebellion had broken out in 1794, it had been simmering for several years. Following the Revolutionary War, the federal government agreed to assume the war debt of the states in exchange for moving the nation's capital from Philadelphia south to a swampy mosquito ridden area on the Potomac which is today known as Washington, D.C..

In order to help pay these war debts, the Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, placed a 25% excise tax on all liquor sold in the United States. This tax was vehemently opposed by farmers in the western areas of all states south of New York because they relied upon producing whiskey for their livelihoods. This was because transporting grain, as liquor was much easier to transport than as grain.

This unpopular tax represented a large imposition of federal authority at the time. In fact, Thomas Jefferson resigned from his administration post as Secretary Of State, in part due to his protest against the whiskey tax. After Jefferson's departure, he went on to help form the Democratic-Republican Party which supported States rights against the power of the federal government. This was to lead to the demise of the Federalist party of Washington and Hamilton.

By 1794 the Whiskey Rebellion had broken out into the open. Tax collectors who were sent to western Pennsylvania were routinely threatened and tarred and feathered, making it impossible to collect the whiskey tax from that area. In June of that year, local officials ordered the arrest of the leaders of the whiskey tax resistors. However, all this did was incite the farmers of western Pennsylvania to more violence. A month later, in July, the commander of the local militia, James McFarlane was shot and killed by federal troops defending a besieged tax official named John Neville. This enraged the local anti-tax settlers who went on to burn down the buildings belonging to Neville as he was hustled to safety by the federal troops.

In reaction to this, President George Washington recruited a militia force in August, 1794 from the Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, and Virginia. This force was derisively nicknamed the "Watermelon Army" by the western Pennsylvania whiskey tax rebels.

When negotiations between federal commissioners and the rebels failed, Washington himself put on his Revolutionary War uniform again and personally led the army of over 12,000 troops into Western Pennsylvania. This force easily put down the Whiskey Rebellion because the farmers, faced with such a large force and notable commander, quickly dispersed. Most of the prisoners that Washington's army captured were later released due to lack of evidence. Two of the rebels were convicted of treason but were subsequently pardoned by Washington who perhaps did not want to leave bad feelings lingering from this greatest crises of his administration.

Although the Whiskey Rebellion did mark the supremacy of the federal government, it also made the citizens of the states wary of this power. The question of states rights versus the powers of the federal government was not to be fully resolved until after the Civil War.

http://www.essortment.com/all/whiskeyrebellio_rzjj.htm

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Just shows what I have always known: The ones with the most guns make all the rules.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

No more/less a 'right' than education...

So, it should be administered by state and local governments as well?

[peejay 327]

No, healthcare is not a right. Freedom of speech is a right. There is no fundamental right to government forcing your fellow citizens to pay for your impacted hemorhoid treatments just because you can't or don't want to pay.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

People do not have a constitutional right to health care.

That said, ensuring that we act collectively through our government to protect the vulnerable and ensure access to our least fortunate is the moral and ethical thing to do.

[mRx 16]

Matt - paying federal taxes is not slavery. It is part of being a citizen...

"Taking a portion of one's earning" is quintessentially "taking a portion of one's labor", considering all wealth is ultimately derived from some form of labor. If you define slavery as: compulsory labor by threat of violence or force, then taxation can be considered slavery by proxy. Now, I know this is a very politically-incorrect way to look at it. Taxation, is more euphemistically defined as you wrote: part of being an American.

I'm not arguing for taxation, nor against it--but merely calling it what it is.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Matt - paying federal taxes is not slavery. It is part of being a citizen...

"Taking a portion of one's earning" is quintessentially "taking a portion of one's labor", considering all wealth is ultimately derived from some form of labor. If you define slavery as: compulsory labor by threat of violence or force, then taxation can be considered slavery by proxy. Now, I know this is a very politically-incorrect way to look at it. Taxation, is more euphemistically defined as you wrote: part of being an American.

I'm not arguing for taxation, nor against it--but merely calling it what it is.

"The power to tax involves the power to destroy."

McCulloch v. Maryland

The same fundemental court ruling that asserted for the first time the sumpremacy of Federal law over the State's rights of self-determination, deciminated the tenth amendment, and lays the groundwork for the Fedral takeover of the healthcare delivery system:

The Court invoked the Necessary and Proper Clause in the Constitution, which allowed the Federal government to pass laws not expressly provided for in the Constitution's list of express powers as long as those laws are in useful furtherance of the express powers.

The question becomes, which one of the express powers does this further? Remember, the Preamble is a statement of purpose, not the body of the Document, and therefore, not statute.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The question becomes, which one of the express powers does this further? Remember, the Preamble is a statement of purpose, not the body of the Document, and therefore, not statute.

Yet the Preamble is used as the reason why the Feds can tax its citizens for military expenditures. There just needs to be consistency in logic - if the Preamble defines the need for a national defense (which I believe it does), then it also defines the need for the Feds to promote the General Welfare.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Matt - paying federal taxes is not slavery. It is part of being a citizen...

"Taking a portion of one's earning" is quintessentially "taking a portion of one's labor", considering all wealth is ultimately derived from some form of labor. If you define slavery as: compulsory labor by threat of violence or force, then taxation can be considered slavery by proxy. Now, I know this is a very politically-incorrect way to look at it. Taxation, is more euphemistically defined as you wrote: part of being an American.

I'm not arguing for taxation, nor against it--but merely calling it what it is.

That's flawed logic even when applying Libertarian standards such as social contracts. Our citizenship is a social contract and we enter that contract freely. Although one may argue that being born into citizenship isn't a free choice, once a citizen reaches adulthood, they can freely give that citizenship up. When the Constitution was drafted and the states became a nation of citizens, it formed a contract with all its citizens - to embrace this newly formed government and abide by its laws or reject citizenship. Certainly, a citizen can disagree with certain laws and procedures, but there is a legal process by way of democracy that allows a citizen to change those laws or procedures within the confines of the Constitution.

[mRx 16]

The question becomes, which one of the express powers does this further? Remember, the Preamble is a statement of purpose, not the body of the Document, and therefore, not statute.

Yet the Preamble is used as the reason why the Feds can tax its citizens for military expenditures. There just needs to be consistency in logic - if the Preamble defines the need for a national defense (which I believe it does), then it also defines the need for the Feds to promote the General Welfare.

The Constitution will be the death of us. With such broad authorizations of power, there is no way to go except totalitarian.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The question becomes, which one of the express powers does this further? Remember, the Preamble is a statement of purpose, not the body of the Document, and therefore, not statute.

Yet the Preamble is used as the reason why the Feds can tax its citizens for military expenditures. There just needs to be consistency in logic - if the Preamble defines the need for a national defense (which I believe it does), then it also defines the need for the Feds to promote the General Welfare.

The Constitution will be the death of us. With such broad authorizations of power, there is no way to go except totalitarian.

It's worked for over 200 years. Look how difficult it is to pass legislation? I think our system of government works pretty well so long as the checks and balances that are built within the system remain intact.