Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)

    Nullify Obamacare – South Carolina Could Set National Trend if Senate Passes H3101

    Nullify Obamacare – South Carolina Could Set National Trend if Senate Passes H3101

    Posted By Joshua Cook on Dec 10, 2013 in 10th Amendment, Articles, News, Politics, US News | 13 Comments

    A bill being fast-tracked by the South Carolina Senate would nullify Obamacare, and it’s likely that this bill will open the flood gates for other states dissatisfied with the Affordable Care Act.
    The bill, entitled “South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act” (H.3101), was voted on and passed by a 65-34 vote in the state House of Representatives last April. Now, it moves on to the Republican-controlled state Senate with a priority flag and could quickly be signed into law by South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley.
    According to the Daily Caller, state Sen. Tom Davis, the bill’s sponsor who recently wrapped up study committee hearings for the bill in Columbia, Charleston and other cities, says that the proposed legislation renders the Affordable Care Act void or inoperable through a handful of provisions.
    The bill’s main component prohibits agencies, officers and employees of the state of South Carolina from implementing any provisions of the Affordable Care Act, leaving implementation of the national health-care law entirely in the hands of a federal government that lacks the resources or personnel to carry out the programs it mandates, reported the Daily Caller.
    The basis of the bill is an anti-commandeering doctrine, meaning that the federal government can’t force the states to carry out federal laws.
    “Congress can pass laws, but it cannot compel the states to utilize either their treasury or personnel to implement those federal laws,” explained state Sen. Davis.
    Davis said that South Carolina is considering two additional provisions to the bill. One would outlaw Medicaid expansion and the other would suspend the licenses of insurers who receive Affordable Care Act subsidies.
    Jesse Graston, one of the grassroots activists who helped Rep. Bill Chumley get H.3101 passed this year, said, “I’m working with legislators from Tennessee and Oklahoma on their bills, and it is very likely they will be able to pass their bills right after we push ours through. Simple non-compliance by our state, as well as other states, to enforce Obamacare, will kill it. The feds cannot do Obamacare by themselves…”
    I asked Mike Maharrey from the Tenth Amendment Center, about state senator Tom Davis’ bill.
    Cook: ”Is the anti-commandeering doctrine found in Davis’ bill a form of nullification?”
    Maharrey: “Anti-commandeering is simply the legal doctrine holding that the feds cannot force the states to enforce or implement their acts or programs. Non-cooperation is one tactic to nullify an act, or as Madison put it “refusal to cooperate with officers of the union.”
    “Nullification is an end result – making an unconstitutional act inoperable within the state. So yes – non-cooperation, which happens to have legal sanction under the anti-commandeering doctrine, is a path to nullification.”
    “Think of it this way – if a state passes a law criminalizing federal agents, and nothing happens, is that nullification? On the other hand, if a state passes a law stopping enforcement of federal acts, and those federal acts stay on the books, but stop being enforced – is that nullification?”
    “Call it what you want, we’ll consider it nullified.”

    Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Google Plus.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Gutsy state gets serious to choke life out of Obamacare

    As millions of Americans sweat bullets about the health disaster created by the president, there's finally a ray of hope.

    One famously defiant U.S. state is determined to just say Nobamacare!

    S. Carolina aims to nullify Obamacare

    Legislation would prevent implementation, sue to protect state residents

    Published: 5 hours ago
    Bob Unruh

    South Carolina lawmakers have a proposal in their legislative pipeline that would nullify the federal Obamacare law.

    Observers say the state likely will be the first in the nation to exempt citizens and businesses from participation in Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

    Critics already have declared the bill is racist and argue that federal law trumps state law. They charged that state lawmakers can’t opt out of the law because they don’t like President Obama.

    The South Carolina bill prohibits state agencies and officers from implementing any portion of the federal mandate, outlaws state insurance exchanges and directs the state attorney general to sue over selective enforcement of the Affordable Health Care Act.

    Supporters of the bill contend it aligns with a Founding Father’s solution for states confronted by an unwarranted federal law.

    From James Madison come the instructions:

    “Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular states, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the state; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any state, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large state, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining states happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”

    House Bill 3101, called the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act, already has passed the House 65-34 and soon heads to the Senate.

    The bill’s chief sponsor, state Sen. Tom Davis, said there are several components which “in my judgment are legal, effective and within the state’s power to do.”

    First, it prohibits agencies, officers and employees of the state from incorporating Obamacare requirements. Only federal officials could implement each of the myriad functions of the program in the state.

    Davis explained that case law establishes Washington cannot force states to enforce federal laws.

    Administration officials, he pointed out, acknowledged that limitation when they set up a federal exchange because so many states refused to establish their own.

    Get “Taking America Back,” Joseph Farah’s manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

    Other provisions outlaw state exchanges, issue tax deductions for those penalized and direct the attorney general to pursue certain lawsuits.

    The South Carolina Senate has a GOP majority so the plan is expected to pass and then be signed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley, who opposes Obamacare.

    Michael Maharrey, a spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates for states rights, told WND there’s a similar plan under development already in Oklahoma.

    The center’s analysis of Madison’s writing outlines what it believes is the proper course for states.

    The organization points out that “unwarrantable” literally means “unjustifiable.”

    “Madison was clearly talking about federal acts with no constitutional justification. … But notice something interesting, Madison implies that state governments can even resist a ‘warrantable’ or justifiable federal act. So what does Madison suggest states do when the feds overstep their authority? Oppose it!”

    The nullification idea already has been applied to issues ranging from gun regulation, driver’s license requirements and most recently, marijuana laws. The federal government folded when Colorado and Washington state made marijuana legal, despite a ban by the federal government.

    The center’s model legislation for accomplishing nullification includes a rejection of the federal law, a specific act implementing the nullification and legal challenges as needed.

    The idea had been promoted in a movie, “Nullification: The Rightful Remedy,” which notes Thomas Jefferson was among the early Americans who acknowledged the strategy.

    “His draft of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 first introduced the word ‘nullification’ into American political life, and follow-up resolutions in 1799 employed Jefferson’s formulation that ‘nullification … is the rightful remedy’ when the federal government reaches beyond its constitutional powers,” it explains. “In the Virginia Resolutions of 1798, James Madison said the states were ‘duty bound to resist’ when the federal government violated the Constitution.”

    The foundation for the idea is that states predate the union, and the Declaration of Independence speaks of “free and independent states” with “power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.”

    Thus, the union does not own the states but represents and protects them and their actions.

    WND has reported previously on nullification, including when a poll said 29 percent of registered voters believe an “armed revolution” may be needed in America to restore liberties. A second poll said Americans already have figured out a solution – reject federal laws that are unconstitutional.

    A Washington Times editorial at the time said supporters of nullification “see it as a necessary and effective tool to protect states and citizens from the every-growing power of the federal government.”

    Even in left-leaning California, the state Senate has joined dozens of other states in approving legislation designed to prevent the president from executing the indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act.

    Fox News reported that in Missouri, a proposal declares all federal gun regulations unenforceable.

    Missouri state Rep. Doug Funderburk said: “We have the authority to enforce these laws. We are trying to position us so that we in this state can have safer neighborhoods.”

    A commentary by the non-profit tea party group FreedomWorks noted the federal government “only has about 30 enumerated powers delegated to it in the Constitution.”

    According to the Tenth Amendment, any issue not found in the U.S. Constitution should be left up to individual states to decide.

    Now, FreedomWorks said, the United States has “gone grossly astray,” with the federal government “involved in nearly every aspect of our daily lives from what foods we put into our bodies to what we’re allowed to watch on television.”

    FreedomWorks said the attitude was expressed by Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., when he said, “The federal government can do most anything in this country.”

    The earlier poll on armed revolution was by Fairleigh Dickinson University. It said that among Republicans, 44 percent think armed revolution soon might be needed.

    On the general question of “nullification,” 44 percent believe states should have the right to block any federal laws they disagree with on legal grounds. Thirty-six percent disagree and 20 percent are undecided, the pollsters said.

    Weighing in on the subject, WND columnist Walter Williams argued that “moral people” can’t rely only on courts to determine what is right and wrong.

    “Suppose Congress enacted a law – and the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional – requiring American families to attend church services at least three times a month,” he wrote. “Should we obey such a law?

    Suppose Congress, acting under the Constitution’s commerce clause, enacted a law requiring motorists to get eight hours of sleep before driving on interstate highways. Its justification might be that drowsy motorists risk highway accidents, and accidents affect interstate commerce. Suppose you were a jury member during the 1850s and a free person were on trial for assisting a runaway slave, in clear violation of the Fugitive Slave Act.

    Would you vote to convict and punish?

    “A moral person would find each one of those laws either morally repugnant or to be a clear violation of our Constitution. You say, ‘Williams, you’re wrong this time.

    In 1859, in Ableman v. Booth, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 constitutional.’ That court decision, as well as some others in our past, makes my case. Moral people can’t rely solely on the courts to establish what’s right or wrong. Slavery is immoral; therefore, any laws that support slavery are also immoral. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, ‘to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions (is) a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.’”
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    WND Related Stories

    Doctor: Obama forcing me to close practice
    'If you like your medicine, you can't keep it'
    Obamacare alternative gets fresh life
    Obamacare: You can't choose hospital, either
    Tech guru: Stay away from Obamacare website
    Boy with cancer now bringing people to God
    Nobamacare: Famous university raises stakes
    Physician plots escape from 'Obamacare noose'
    New Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
    Family of boy with cancer astounded by support
    Delayed! Answers to Obamacare-fix D-Day questions
    Americans rally around young Obamacare victim
    Boy with cancer loses coverage after Obamacare launch
    Obama: Fight with family at Thanksgiving
    Supremes to review 'work of Satan' in Obamacare
    Obamacare built on yet another lie
    Obamacare 'deconstructed' in 17 minutes or less
    If you like your climate, you can keep it
    Now Obamacare is 'seeing dead people'
    Obama agent foresees 'health-care apocalypse'
    Dough! Obamacare monster hits pizza prices
    Rand Paul goes nuclear on 'big bully' Reid
    Democrat: Pull the plug on Obamacare website!
    Sebelius asked to explain $2B in Obamacare loans
    Obamacare marketers: 'Perceptions more important than facts'
    Koch Bros. use Obamacare as weapon to beat Dems
    'Criminal investigation' of Obamacare sought
    Whoa! Now Whoopi whacks Obamacare
    Bill Clinton in '93: 'Americans can keep their plans'
    Obamacare: Stay single, or else ...
    Media Matters funded Obamacare deceit
    Will this court case shatter Obamacare?
    Proof of Obamacare's intentional deception
    39 Democrats rebuke Obama on insurance fix
    Obama now scrambling to fix his 'fix'
    Chavez-linked group crafted 'keep your health plan'
    Obama in retreat over failed Obamacare
    Forget fixes! Obamacare 'must be repealed'
    Churches enlisted as 'trusted partners' to sell Obamacare
    Obamascared: And the scrubbing begins
    Appeals court blasts Obamacare as 'unsound'
    'Creator' of escaping spotlight
    'Ho'-bamacare? Now Obama targeting hussies
    Memo: 'Limitless' security risks for
    Obama creating even more uninsured
    Pathetic: Obamacare sign-ups only 3% of target
    GOP Obamacare option just 'shifts blame'
    Why Obamacare horror is just beginning
    Obama finally fixing health care � in Kenya
    Ex-Marxist calls out Obama as 'communist'
    Country-music stars mock Obamacare in song
    Sen. Lee: No regrets on Obamacare showdown
    Obamacare price hikes biggest in these states
    'Unacceptable': Democrat unloads on Sebelius
    'Obama has rebranded himself as a liar, forever'
    How do you like this medicine, Obamacare?
    Famous comic flays Obama as lying 'maniac'
    States prepare to crack down on Obamacare 'navigators'
    Obamacare success? 6 enrollees 1st day
    Obama administration 'doing the work of Satan'
    Shocking Obama videos reveal real goal
    Look who Sebelius just threw under the bus ...
    Democrat aide does about-face on Obamacare most expensive website ever
    White House admits Obamacare kills policies
    NBC crowns new 'laughingstock of America'
    Congressman: Obamacare 'must be scrapped'
    Hannity puts his money where his mouth is ...
    Democrats 'wholly own' Obamacare catastrophe
    Now 'Hitler' blasts Obamacare failure ...
    Democrat: Ski resorts need Obamacare waivers
    Obamacare wipes out more than 1 million plans
    Is this the case that blows up Obamacare?
    Dick Cheney: Obama 'without a clue'
    Obama's ex-bodyguard losing health coverage
    New strategy to stop Obamacare
    Obamacare programmer's history of failure emerges
    Hundreds of thousands losing health plans
    Doctors in Congress: Obamacare worse than you think
    Obamacare website on life support
    Obamacare troubleshooters faint from exhaustion
    Obama 'crashing health-care site on purpose'
    Cruz slaps down 'fearful' hecklers
    Sticker shock! Americans floored by Obamacare cost
    'Pulling out hair' over Obamacare website 'nightmare'
    Titanic Obamacare hits iceberg of reality
    Ready to hear latest lie about Obamacare?
    Want Obamacare? Brave this insanity first
    Judge rejects Obamacare-lawsuit delay
    Obama sued for 'illegal' Obamacare move
    'It's silence that kills the relationship'
    Breakthrough? Obama 'willing to negotiate'
    Obamacare now live � with big glitches
    What government closure means for you
    Last-ditch efforts to avert shutdown fail
    GOP star: Obama peddling 'crack cocaine' of dependency
    House approves 1-year delay for health-care law
    Sen. Vitter: Strip Congress' Obamacare exemptions
    Cruzin' for a bruisin': GOP folds on Obamacare
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Rebellion: South Carolina to Outlaw Obamacare in Their State

    Just the other day we reported that doctors and hospitals are rejecting Obamacare across the country and it seems the states are beginning to follow suit. South Carolina is poised to pass a bill that bans Obamacare in their state.
    The bill’s original sponsor, State Senator Tom Davis, says “the proposed legislation renders the Affordable Care Act void or inoperable through a handful of provisions,” all which are “legal, effective, and within the state’s power to do.”

    The core of the “South Carolina Freedom of Heath Care Protection Act” (HB3101) outlaws any state employees, officers, or agencies from implementing Obamacare. The federal government can try to subject South Carolinians to the horrors of the ACA – but they would have no personnel or funds in the state to actually carry it out.

    Obamacare would be nothing more than a ghost.

    Davis says this component stems from the Supreme Court case of Printz v. United States:
    What the Supreme Court said … is that states are not merely political subdivisions of the federal government to carry out what the federal government does; they are sovereign entities. Congress can pass laws, but it cannot compel the states to utilize either their treasury or personnel to implement those federal laws.
    The state Senate’s vote on the bill will take place in January; it already soared through the state’s House with a 65-34 vote last April.

    Right Wing News reports:
    The bill now heads to the GOP-controlled Senate with special-order priority, setting up the likelihood that South Carolina will become the first state to exempt citizens and businesses from all participation in the Affordable Care Act.
    The bill would also outlaw the creation of any state exchanges as well as providing tax deductions to offset the penalties from the federal government for not participating in Obamacare. This would effectively render Obamacare null and void in South Carolina.

    If this is successful – and there is plenty of reason to believe it will be – it could very well be a model for other states to follow.

    “I think it is a mistake to try to make what has traditionally been a state issue into a national issue,” Obama said in regards to gay marriage last year;

    however, I expect he will conveniently abandon his shaky support of states’ rights in an effort to combat this. It is his “legacy,” after all.

    That is why it is more important than ever to get the word out about the people’s fight against Obamacare. You can help us by sharing this article with your friends and family.

    Please click here and follow us on Twitter.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts