Login  /  Register  | 3 premium articles left before you must register.
TheDay.com - Supreme Court not only one hearing health care arguments | Southeastern Connecticut News, Sports, Weather and Video | The Day newspaper

Supreme Court not only one hearing health care arguments

By Paul Choiniere

Publication: theday.com

Published 03/26/2012 12:00 AM
Updated 03/26/2012 08:42 AM

Not surprisingly, The Day's Sunday editorial on the eve of the Supreme Court arguments, "Individual mandate clearly constitutional," made conservative critics of the Affordable Care Act livid, as manifested in some of the reader comments. I certainly would have been disappointed with anything less.

I can't help myself but react to a few of the comments.

"This thing was passed way too fast for legislation of that magnitude. Time to go back to the drawing board," wrote Percy.

Reaction: Thanks for making our point. Our editorial concludes with this opinion: "Let the fight continue where it properly belongs -- in the political arena." If you want to go back to the drawing board, win an election and repeal or change the law, but don't legislate in the courts.

"The Day has crossed the line. It knows nothing of Constitutional law and even less about health care but what the heck," said Live Here

Reaction: We crossed the line by commenting on a case that could lead to one of the most important Supreme Court decisions in history? That's exactly the kind of thing we should comment on. And if only experts on constitutional law and health care could take part in the debate, that would leave a pretty small group.

"The editorial staff schooled by Pravda strikes again," wrote Ledyard Conservative.

Reaction: What?

"Wow, no spin here (sarcasm)," wrote Scott Aument.

Reaction: Scott, it's an editorial, it is supposed to have a spin.

"The states have the right to enact the mandate. The federal government does not," opined Bobpatten.

Reaction: I guess we will find out.

"So riddle me this. If health insurance policies cannot be be issued across state lines, how on earth can interstate commerce be applicable?" asked Jack Bernhard.

Reaction: Do people with policies from one state get sick and need treatment in another? Interstate commerce.

"The individual mandate, originating from the federal government, is clearly unconstitutional," declared The Wizard (of Oz?)

Reaction: We disagree.

"I love the way you paint those who oppose Obamacare into a corner by offering socialized medicine, or doing nothing, as the alternatives," said a frustrated lindyloo.

Reaction: Thank you.

"Had I not known what website I was on, I could easily have concluded it was the New York Times. Excellent editorial, adequately argued," wrote Bud Bray.

Reaction: Good point, Bud.

Reader Comments

HIDE COMMENTS

MORE FROM THIS BLOGGER

DAY BLOGROLL

News

Day Photo Staff | On Assignment

David Collins | Today, in The Day

Karen Florin | On The Docket

Editors' Blog

Arts & Entertainment

Day staff | Taste Buds (Dining)

Jenna Cho | Salt to Taste

Jill Blanchette | Healthy Cooking

Kristina Dorsey | Reel Life

Marisa Nadolny | Pop Blog

Rick Koster | Aging Rock Dude

Sunday Night TV | Mad Men Monday

Just Listen | The Day's music writers share their playlists

Sports

Steve Fagin | The Great Outdoors

Vickie Fulkerson | High School Sports

Richard Cooke | Yawkey Way

Ned Griffen | High School Football

Gavin Keefe | UConn Men's Hoops

Clint L. Bramlett | The Real Mister Fantasy