Oversight Could Void Healthcare Reform Bill

Posted: May 24, 2010 by thesundowner in Uncategorized

An oversight by Democrats who wrote the healthcare reform legislation could result in the entire bill being declared unconstitutional, according to one analyst.

The problem: The bill lacks a “severability” clause, which stipulates that if any part of a law is stricken down as unconstitutional, the rest of the bill remains.

Greg Scandlen, a senior fellow at the Heartland Institute, said: “Apparently, there was no severability clause written into this law, which shows how amateurish the process was.

“Virtually every bill I’ve ever read includes a provision that if any part of the law is ruled unconstitutional, the rest of the law will remain intact. Not this one. That will likely mean that the entire law will be thrown out if a part of it is found to violate the Constitution.”

The provision in the bill most likely to be challenged on constitutional grounds is the mandate requiring Americans who aren’t previously covered by insurance to buy a plan, according to Investor’s Business Daily (IBD).

Another provision that could be challenged is the expansion of Medicaid that forces states to boost their spending on that program.

“The bill writers and lawmakers who voted for it without reading it were unprofessional,” an IBD editorial states.

“That was obvious in the haste in which the 2,400 pages of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act were passed and signed into law. The Democrats’ rush to get the bill through was a clear act of desperation that looked like the work of novices — or despots.

“It was hurried House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who said that ‘we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.’ Evidently it had to pass for her party to find out what wasn’t in it, namely the shield of a severability clause.”

Hmmm… who would have thought…

Advertisements
Comments
  1. turtlemom3 says:

    Hope this isn’t challenged until AFTER the 2010 interim elections – so the bill won’t be simply rushed through again with the needed clause in it!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s