Author Topic: Rand Paul Proposes Amendment Making Laws Like Obamacare Applicable to Congress  (Read 441 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 250,559
http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx?nodeid=532312


Newsmax
Rand Paul Proposes Amendment Making Laws Like Obamacare Applicable to Congress
Tuesday, October 22, 2013 06:06 AM

By: Elliot Jager

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, has proposed a Constitutional amendment that would apply the same rules to judges, lawmakers and White House officials that apply to the American people. The amendment (S.J.RES.25) says: "Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress."

The wished-for amendment is seen as motivated by Paul's opposition to taxpayers subsidizing individual health care plans for federal workers under Obamacare, according to Politico.

Under GOP pressure members of Congress and their staffs have been required to use Obamacare exchanges in place of their previous health coverage. The Office of Personnel Management ruled that the federal government would help pay these costs. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., then put forth legislation to end the federal contributions.

Paul's innovation would be to modify the Constitution rather than pass a law.

The junior senator's apparent target is Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. In September, Paul told The Daily Caller what inspired him to draft the amendment.

"My amendment says basically that everybody including Justice Roberts – who seems to be such a fan of Obamacare – gets it too. See, right now, Justice Roberts is still continuing to have federal employee health insurance subsidized by the taxpayer. And if he likes Obamacare so much, I'm going to give him an amendment that gives Obamacare to Justice Roberts," Paul said.

Roberts, in July 2012, drew the wrath of conservatives when he voted to uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), joining liberal members of the court in a tiebreaking 5 to 4 decision.

Chances of Paul's proposal becoming the 28th amendment of the U.S. Constitution are remote. It would need both Houses of Congress to support it with a two-thirds vote before going to the states where three-fourths of the State legislatures would need to approve it.

Support the USO

Offline Cincinnatus

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,514
If the amendment says this,
Quote
"Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress."
, how does that affect Roberts? Besides is it really necessary to amend the Constitution in order to get members of Congress to live under the same laws as the rest of we peons? I thought the rub this time was not that they be exempt from ObamaCare but that the we taxpayers, not they, would pay for most of their cost.
We shall never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid ~~ Samuel Adams

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 21,933
  • French entertainment is a waste of mime.
It is effectively an exemption. Someone else paying for - what is it, 73%? - of their premiums.

They are exempt from insider trading laws.
Exempt from libel laws while on the floor.
Exempt from paying taxes - or it seems that way.
Exempt from the perils of day to day life, thanks to their body guards.

I would support Rand Paul in this case. #standwithrand.
Anyone who tells you you can't buy happiness has never been in a book store or an animal shelter.

You are the result of 3 billion years of evolutionary success. Act like it.

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf