South Carolina House passes bill making ‘Obamacare’ implementation a crimel

[Cebu_4_2]

South Carolina House passes bill making ‘Obamacare’ implementation a crime
The South Carolina state House passed a bill Wednesday that declares President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to be “null and void,” and criminalizes its implementation.


The state’s Freedom of Health Care Protection Act intends to “prohibit certain individuals from enforcing or attempting to enforce such unconstitutional laws; and to establish criminal penalties and civil liability for violating this article.”


The measure permits the state Attorney General, with reasonable cause, “to restrain by temporary restraining order, temporary injunction, or permanent injunction” any person who is believed to be causing harm to any person or business with the implementation of Obamacare.
Earlier this year in her state of the state address, Gov. Nikki Haley (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/nikki-haley/) said that South Carolina does not want and cannot afford the president’s plan, “not now, not ever.”


“To that end, we will not pursue the type of government-run health exchanges being forced on us by Washington,” she said. “Despite the rose-colored rhetoric coming out of D.C., these exchanges are nothing more than a way to make the state do the federal government’s bidding in spending massive amounts of taxpayer dollars on insurance subsidies that we can’t afford.”


The nullification bill moved on to the state Senate Thursday and referred to the Committee on Finance. As of Oct. 2, the bill is still residing in the Senate (http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess120_2013-2014/bills/3101.htm).



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/2/south-carolina-house-passes-bill-making-obamacare-/#ixzz2hFG9eV1S

[Hatha Sunahara]

I finally got a handle on what Obamacare is and what it does--from watching an interview on The Daily Show of Kathleen Sibelius, Obama's health czarina. It seems that about 85% of people employed in America get health insurance through their employers. The other 15% have jobs that do not come with health care insurance.

Obamacare extends health care coverage to that uncovered 15% by making the insurance companies offer government subsidized insurance, and by making the uncovered people required to buy this insurance, or pay a fine.

This is a hydra headed opportunity for the insurance companies who offer 'affordable' health insurance to a whole new market, because they now have the opportunity to screw all the newly covered people as well as the government for the insurance they provide. The government has the opportunity to screw the people who refuse to buy this overpriced subsidized insurance.

As far as I can see, it's just a different way to redistribute income. Before Obamacare, health care for the uninsured was provided by health providers through emergency room cost increases that eventually were paid for by everyone covered by insurance. Obamacare makes the poor pay through the nose for health care they could once get for free. So, the only people who benefit are the stockholders of the insurance companies. At the expense of everybody--not just those who are covered by insurance.

It's not about health care. It's about health care INSURANCE.

Strange that I never read any account of this in the media. But I think I get it now, and I also get why so many people are opposed to it.


Hatha

[Libertytree]

Yes, but as you said it's a many headed hydra. I believe there are many reasons this was forced down our throats. I wish it were as simple as just a money gig for Ins Co's and the .gov.

[gunDriller]

South Carolina House passes bill making ‘Obamacare’ implementation a crime
The South Carolina state House passed a bill Wednesday that declares President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to be “null and void,” and criminalizes its implementation.

FVCKING A !

it may be that a wise approach to Obamacare is to pay the minimal mandate tax/fee/punishment ($95 the first year ?) - and to see how the states protect their citizens from O'care.

ALSO - those states that DO protect their citizens will offer some good real estate investment opportunities.

[gunny highway]

FVCKING A !

it may be that a wise approach to Obamacare is to pay the minimal mandate tax/fee/punishment ($95 the first year ?) - and to see how the states protect their citizens from O'care.

ALSO - those states that DO protect their citizens will offer some good real estate investment opportunities.

Yeah, we'll see how well South Carolina protects it's citizens from this. I'll bet that it's all for show.

[Twisted Titan]

Yeah, we'll see how well South Carolina protects it's citizens from this. I'll bet that it's all for show.


Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

All they have to do is tie its implementation to Federal dollars (which they will)

They will knuckle under....like they always do.

This is just political cover for the incumbents during the midterms.

[Libertytree]

The good side of this is is that regardless of it passing or not it puts ideas into peoples heads, resistance ideas.

[Hatha Sunahara]

What I wrote above was my initial analysis after hearing the Sibelius interview.

It's about Insurance, and it is also about government control of the population--an NWO incrementalism to implement the 'mark of the beast'. I'm not an expert on it--far from it--I haven't read the legislation, and I doubt that I ever will. I am sure it contains stuff that is highly objectionable to people who love their freedom and their privacy. One day soon they will tell us that we will all have to be 'chipped' or we get no access to healthcare. I'm sure the government has unlimited access to our health records, to our financial records, and that we have no rights at all under this power grab. I just wonder how many of the republicans who are trying to kill this legislation now voted for it. I doubt that this could have passed without a lot of support from republicans, and from stupid democrats. I have some bleeding heart liberal friends who think Obamacare is just wonderful because finally people who can't afford health care will now be able to get health insurance. They are completely blind to the power grab by the government or the money grab by the insurance companies.


Hatha

[Libertytree]

Let's not forget about the fear and intimidation factor! Don't forget that the IRS is the operational arm in all of this. What about the pressures being put to employers? Non compliant people will be dogged and hounded as some type of terrorist. What about the Doctors who don't wish to conform? The fear here is for real and with good reason.

[Serpo]

So if they chip people for insurance reason and you dont want the chip they start taking everything off you ,house ect because you havnt payed.

[Libertytree]

So if they chip people for insurance reason and you dont want the chip they start taking everything off you ,house ect because you havnt payed.

I'm not sure which is more important, paying or playing.

[gunDriller]

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

All they have to do is tie its implementation to Federal dollars (which they will)

They will knuckle under....like they always do.

This is just political cover for the incumbents during the midterms.

i think at least ONE brave state will emerge to challenge Obamacare where it counts - the IRS attempting to implement the "Individual Mandate."

because the US gov is as obnoxious as it is, i wonder if we will see a state national guard stand up to armed IRS agents.

if it was my money, i'd be willing to spend a few $ on a CHEAP home, make that my OFFICIAL address, go off the grid otherwise, and be a guinea pig.

but i don't think it would be wise to do this with a valuable home or one containing PM's, because that REAL estate is likely to be seized by the IRS.

[7th trump]

Problem is the state doesn't have any right to reach into the jurisdiction of the federal governments and dictate federal laws.
All "US citizens" are federal subjects.

This is perfect example of the state legislatures not having a clue. They pass laws and yet are demonstrating they are ignorant of jurisdictional laws.
The feds will squash this like a bug.

If you think about this and realize obamacare is an extension of Social Security. The states can pass all the laws it wishfully chooses, but it doesn't alter or change any laws the federal government passes.
These numbskulls are passing laws that in essence are trying to nullify Social Security where the participants of Social Security volunteer themselves into the federal governments jurisdiction to get benefits.
What a complete set of assholes who just shown everybody, who with their eyes open, that they don't have any clothes on.

[Libertytree]

There's still a positive side to this, disregarding all the legalese. Real people take these things in and are willing to stand up to them.

[Son-of-Liberty]

These numbskulls are passing laws that in essence are trying to nullify Social Security where the participants of Social Security volunteer themselves into the federal governments jurisdiction to get benefits.
What a complete set of assholes who just shown everybody, who with their eyes open, that they don't have any clothes on.

While you technically "volunteer" for SS it is only by being tricked or coerced into it or by being "volunteered " by your parents. Once in their clutches it is very difficult to convince them that you no longer consent.

I Know that you have explained some things on the forum that seem to make sense for the US but being from Canada and in a battle with the CRA myself I am quite convinced that the only way out of income tax here is to not attach any asset to the SIN # in any way. That means that you cannot be an employee, have no bank account or credit, or securities of any kind.

To me this situation is straight up fraud and racketeering but I don't get to decide that because I don't have 1000's of goons with badges on my side.

They have made dropping out of the system almost as bad as paying their damn taxes and honestly is only worth doing out of principle.

[osoab]

Yeah, we'll see how well South Carolina protects it's citizens from this. I'll bet that it's all for show.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Just like Misery trying to ban federal level gun laws. All for show. Once Barry and crew mention pulling fed funds for whatever reason in S.C., they will do the "right thing".

[gunny highway]

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Just like Misery trying to ban federal level gun laws. All for show. Once Barry and crew mention pulling fed funds for whatever reason in S.C., they will do the "right thing".

yep, they've got our state by the fiscal balls, so to speak. we can't "operate" without the infusion of federal funds. they can talk about nullification all they want but, in the end, are beholden to the almighty.

[gunDriller]

yep, they've got our state by the fiscal balls, so to speak. we can't "operate" without the infusion of federal funds. they can talk about nullification all they want but, in the end, are beholden to the almighty.

many states pay more to the US gov. than they get. California is one example - though not the best in this context :)

this raises the possibility of 'opting out' from the Fed. payments. knowing the Jew-S gov., they would make it as complicated as possible.

i thought there was an Amendment (10th ?) related to states' rights, that describes states' well (Duh) rights.


makes me wonder if the whole thing is so messy that literally SECESSION would be necessary.

to just "cut the cord".

it would have to be a powerful state, e.g. Texas or North Dakota.

[gunny highway]

many states pay more to the US gov. than they get. California is one example - though not the best in this context :)

this raises the possibility of 'opting out' from the Fed. payments. knowing the Jew-S gov., they would make it as complicated as possible.

i thought there was an Amendment (10th ?) related to states' rights, that describes states' well (Duh) rights.


makes me wonder if the whole thing is so messy that literally SECESSION would be necessary.

to just "cut the cord".

it would have to be a powerful state, e.g. Texas or North Dakota.

good point. No Child Left Behind requires that all local school taxes be sent to the Fed gov who then takes their cut and sends back only a portion, with strings attached. who was it that thought that was a good idea? i say "cut the cord".

[gunDriller]

good point. No Child Left Behind requires that all local school taxes be sent to the Fed gov who then takes their cut and sends back only a portion, with strings attached. who was it that thought that was a good idea? i say "cut the cord".

to go with the 'cord' metaphor, it's like cutting the umbilical cord to a hyper-abusive sociopathic mother.


because of the economic dislocation that would result, i think that it would need to be accompanied by a "land instead of welfare" policy.

where the state breaking away gives land to those on welfare, while respecting the NIMBY wishes of current wealthy land-owners that don't want the welfare-ites.

it would feel like a wrenching change for many. it would need to be backed up by citizen peacekeepers (like cops used to be).

welfare recipients who weren't ready to turn farmer would be allowed to leave.


anyway, i think the "40 acres and a mule" concept is one of the better programs conceived by organized government. though i admit i'm hazy on the details of where that phrase came from. i thought it was a post-Civil-War thing.