A Discussion of Obamacare Essay

Over the course of my paper I shall discuss the piece of mandate known as the Patient testimonial and Affordable main(prenominal)tenance Act, more than informally known as Obamac atomic number 18. The issue currently debated with this piece of legislative body focuses on its constitutionality, its purpose as a value hike, and whether or non it should be passed. Is the Patient Protection and Affordable C be Act unconstitutional? From what I have studied in the obligate Is Obamacare unconstitutional? , at debatetopics. net, and from what I know of the deed of conveyance, I would say that it is sure as shooting unconstitutional. Does the act serve as a tax hike? consort to Voters consider ObamaCare a tax hike, poll shows at fox refresheds. com, it does. Should the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act be passed? From everything I have in condition(p) of the act and from what knowledge I have gained from Patterson State leaders should stand to throw overboard Obamacare to localize at masnbc. com, I individualizedly would not allow the act to pass. The act is unconstitutional as it was passed under a fancied premise. It was upheld as constitutional by justifying the individual mandate as a tax. However, it would never have been passed if it had been upfront in regards to creating a new personal tax.The means used to justify the act as constitutional are inconsistent with the original wording of the bill and therefore unconstitutional. The act is excessively passed under a false premise as it creates a new tax and is therefore a tax bill. Those living in the solid ground illegally are exempt from buying health redress and countenance it for free. Those individuals who are currently considered entitled and receive governing aid are excessively exempt. These illegal immigrants and entitled persons will receive free health care and the rest of the country will have to pay for it.The act is overly unconstitutional in regards to the individual mandate itself. It is not up to the political sympathies to make its citizens purchase health insurance, nor should they pay for the health insurance of others. It is up to no other person to give a effrontery individual anything. There should never a case in which wholeness group of people is forced to care for others because those others fend to do anything with themselves and their lives. The act is clearly unconstitutional as it forces the average United States citizen to purchase a service from a private firm or be penalized for not doing so.The fine attached to not purchasing health insurance is also only considered constitutional under Congress power to tax. A main way of denying Obamacare is to refuse to establish state-level health exchanges. Exchanges are basically regimen sanctioned cartels where only a few government approved insurers weed sell government approved health insurance, including all subsidies, exemptions and mandates that they apply. When agreeing to e stablish an exchange, a given state agrees to operate a massive government plan which would be run according to federal rules and mandates.The federal government would incorporate the doctors and providers allowed, the health insurance plans and benefits, the subsidies and exemptions. The state would do the work of the federal government and bear the cost of the program and would also act as an IRS enforcer as it would be required to give the names and taxpayer identification come of people who have changed employers and lost coverage as well as those who have terminated their coverage or simply choose not to purchase insurance.On top of all of this, the state would be answerable for enforcing the individual mandate. Overall, the Patient Protection and affordable care act is unconstitutional, serves a tax hike and should not be passed under any circumstance. Bibliography Is Obamacare unconstitutional? ,2012, Voters consider ObamaCare a tax hike, poll shows,2012, Patterson Stat e leaders should refuse to allow Obamacare to localize,2012,