Everyone should not have to buy obamacare

Unfortunately, it is premised on several errors of fact. Obamacare does not "give" us free health care. A single-payer system would do that; that is not what is in place. What is presently called "Obamacare" is a series of regulations of the insurance industry that was already in place (regulations that were initially proposed by Conservative thinkers, no less), My opponent points out one of the biggest flaws in the constitutional argument against the proposal: "Well this new Obamacare is regulating commerce isn't it. " The idea that "ObamaCare forces religious institutions to provide services that violate their faith" is also a matter of factually inaccurate information. ". .. all "churches or any other type of house of worship are expressly exempted from the requirement that they offer health insurance to their employees that includes any provision for contraception. The issue under discussion involves whether"other"entities owned and operated by a church should be obligated to do so under the law. " [1] To try to claim that it violates religious freedom to require employers to provide basic care is to say that it violates religious freedom to have a minimum wage. Obamacare doesn't address churches themselves, but rather employers in the private sector, no matter their beliefs. Just as the federal minimum wage regulates the minimum wage, so too do the new rules for insurance cover regulation of employees. The idea that "Obama care is a service, like dental service or doctor service or lawn care for that matter" is flatly wrong. It is a series of regulations, geared primarily towards businesses. But it does also require the individual to purchase health insurance, or to pay a higher tax rate. However, this is no different than any other tax break/increase within the tax code. I question whether Pro would claim that the "Hybrid Vehicle Tax Credit" was unconstitutional? Technically, it meant a higher tax rate for those who did NOT purchase a hybrid vehicle during the period in which the credit was active (Jan. 1 2006 to Dec. 31 2010). [2] Pro claims "But even though I do not agree with those things or want Obamacare I still have to pay for it and that's wrong. " By that argument, anyone who disagrees with any aspect of government operations should be able to withhold taxes because they don't like it. Such an argument has never been accepted by the courts. My opponent says that, overall, Obamacare ". .. is wrong and unconstitutional and violates the freedom of everyone in this great country. " I draw my opponent's attention to the 16th amendment, which grants powers of taxation to the federal government to "provide for the . .. general Welfare of the United States". [3] I further draw my opponent's attention to Article III of the Constitution, which holds that "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;"to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;"to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;"to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;"to Controversies between two or more States;"between a State and Citizens of another State;"between Citizens of different States;"between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. "[4] As we should all be aware, the Supreme Court ruled Obamacare constitutional. [1] " . http://www.forbes.com... [2] -- . http://www.irs.gov... [3] - . http://en.wikipedia.org... [4] - . http://en.wikipedia.org...