Can anyone show me where in the Constitution where it reads that everyone is entitled to health care?

[RC]

The part in the Preamble where is says "...promote the general welfare..." .

Is not a country assuring good health for its citizens doing its part for the 'general welfare' of said country? It just stands to reason that this is something that governments needs to do.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.preamble.html

Everyone else is doing it, why can't we? What is the problem here?

[Robb]

1. How else to ensure these blessings of liberty

...to ourselves and our posterity? :D

I like it.

[dipsydoodle]

2. Cuba's got it their constitution

:sarcasm:

Health is a constitutional right in Cuba

http://www.runet.edu/~junnever/law/cuba.htm

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

3. In that case, what *doesn't* fall under promoting the general welfare?

This is not to say that I disagree with you, but promoting the general welfare could be interpreted in many different ways. Certainly giving everyone a free college education would promote the general welfare, wouldn't it?

[Bill McBlueState]

4. it sure would

A free college education to everyone who's qualified is worth pursuing.

[redqueen]

6. Hear hear! (nt)

[Kid Dynamite]

7. Kinda strange idea of "general welfare"

sure you can have it, if you meet my qualifications

[redqueen]

11. How? There are qualifications screenings for nearly every benefit. (nt)

[Kid Dynamite]

15. The general welfare seems to rise above being merely a "benefit"

no?

[redqueen]

18. Um, no. (nt)

[Kid Dynamite]

21. So then those who don't "qualify" for housing

are undeserving?

Haveta tell ya, I can think of more than a few people I'd rather have as a benefactor than you..no offense

[redqueen]

23. *roffle*

Yeah... welcome to DU.

[Kid Dynamite]

24. Its a laugh

but if we were talking about universal housing wouldn't you be singing the same song?

Thanks for the welcome :)

[bobbolink]

47. I wish somebody WOULD talk about universal housing!!!!

[handmade34]

55. I support it!

[joeybee12]

20. Specific benefits enahnce the general welfare...this is deliberately vague

or open--depending on the term you want to use--because the writers knew what they were doing...it was 1776 and society and culture would obviously change as time moved forward and they wanted a living document that would reflect future changes.

[Kid Dynamite]

22. Redqueen is using that "vagueness"

to turn necessities into "benefits" and thereby alter the entire discussion..one has to *earn* benefits, has to qualify to deserve benefits..

If you think about it, we already have that system in place

[geckosfeet]

25. As long as it meets my narrow selective definition of the general welfare,

If it only means the government will not cause harm, what's the point?

I am sure that the framers meant for government to help Americans to improve their lives in general, and did NOT mean for government to set up roadblocks for some Americans in order to enrich others.


When government is bought off by the rich to make laws for the rich, we have to stand back and ask whose general welfare is being taken care of.

[flamin lib]

35. Enjoy your stay. Now that we're on the topic of "the general welfare"

it's recognized by most constitutional scholars that the phrase, at the time of its writing, meant that which is in the best interest of the country and its citizens.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that money should be invested in exploring space but it was in the best interest of the country to do that in the 60's as it forestalled a confrontation with the Soviet Union and spawned an entirely new economy based on the computer.

As for qualifications, I'd take that to mean maintaining passing grades so that the investment made in an education would return dividends in improved income and therefore increased tax revenues. In the case of health care I'd take that to mean drinking a fifth of vodka a day might preclude a liver transplant (like it does now under the private health insurance system).

No right is absolute, all have responsibilities attached. You may shout FIRE! in a crowded theater only if the theater is actually on fire. You may keep and bear arms but only if it doesn't infringe the safety of others. You may be secure in your papers and home unless there is probable cause in which case a warrant will ensue.

So, yes, the preamble gives Congress the power to do what is in the best interest of the country and its citizens. The debate isn't about that, even Republicans agree that universal health care in our best interest. The debate is about how to achieve universal health care.

[Kid Dynamite]

36. Thank you for the welcome

[plcdude]

45. Well said

sir.

[lumberjack_jeff]

49. Interesting point. What enables one to qualify for *general* welfare?

heh.

"Today, I went to the general store. They wouldn't let me buy anything specifically.
- Steven Wright.

[Greyhound]

8. Yes. In today's world education is vital,

To answer your question; Everything beyond food, water, shelter, education, and justice. IOW, stuff, toys, crap.

[BR_Parkway]

19. Especially if you look at the Declaration of Independence which

preceded our Constitution and should be a reflection of the "legislative intent" at the time it was written:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

52. The idea that the Declaration of Independence frames the legislative intent of the constitution...

...is rubbish. And you should know better.

[BR_Parkway]

58. Why would you say it's rubbish? A number of SCOTUS cases

have read it that way, the most recent that I could find was:

In Cotting v. Godard, 183 U.S. 79 (1901), the Court stated:

The first official action of this nation declared the foundation of government in these words: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. "While such declaration of principles may not have the force of organic law, or be made the basis of judicial decision as to the limits of right and duty, and while in all cases reference must be had to the organic law of the nation for such limits, yet the latter is but the body and the letter of which the former is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence. No duty rests more imperatively upon the courts than the enforcement of those constitutional provisions intended to secure that equality of rights which is the foundation of free government."

(emphasis added)

A number of other references here: http://candst.tripod.com/doisussc.htm

[izquierdista]

32. Wars in far away places

That just promotes the welfare of a few merchants of death.

[lumberjack_jeff]

48. Certainly. Provided it didn't impoverish everyone else to make it happen. n/t

[krispos42]

5. IMO, Congress has the power to provide universal health care

They may not have the obligation, but they have they power. And they should use that power.

[inna]

9. not the Constitution, but.... how'bout this?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 25

"Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services..."

www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

[wryter2000]

12. The UN?

That's so French. :evilgrin:

[wryter2000]

10. Well put

And let me add that something doesn't have to literally be in the Constitution for it to be a good thing. I don't think it says anything about national parks in the Constitution. In fact, I'll bet the Constitution is relatively hostile to the idea of a standing army, but we sure have one of those.

[Birthmark]

13. Article I, Section 8

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

Nowhere in the Constitution is general welfare defined. Therefore, it would appear that general welfare is more or less whatever the Congress decides.

[endarkenment]

16. That allows congress to legislate universal healthcare

but it does not enumerate a right to universal healthcare.

[Birthmark]

17. There is no functional difference is there?

[endarkenment]

31. Sure there is.

If the bill of rights, for example, explicitly enumerated an individual right to access to healthcare, any individual could demand care regardless of existing legislation, and seek remedy in court if care was not provided. Congress could attempt to restrict that right, constrain it as they have other enumerated rights, but the people would retain a strong legal position to fight such efforts in the courts.

[Birthmark]

34. Doesn't seem like a very good idea to me.

Besides, the Bill need only say that Congress finds that health care is a Right under the Ninth Amendment and your concerns are alleviated, no?

But making it a Right seems unnecessary.

[endarkenment]

14. It doesn't enumerate that right.

However the constitution and the bill of rights clearly state that the enumerated rights are not to be considered complete, so a lack of explicit mention does not mean that we do not have a right to decent healthcare.

The government can provide us with healthcare as it provides us with roads and bridges and other infrastructure, all under the aegis of 'promoting the general welfare'. It is simply a matter of electing representative who will vote yes instead of no, a matter that while simple in concept has proven exceedingly difficult in practice. The difficulty in getting universal healthcare legislation passed raises the question of who exactly our representatives represent. Clearly they do not represent the will of the people.

[shraby]

26. How about LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness???

It's to the point where people's lives are in danger because of lack of health care due to the insurance companies denying, or the lack of money in their wallets.

[OwnedByFerrets]

27. Thank you, beat me to it.

[endarkenment]

33. wrong document

declaration of independence is not a legal document with respect to constitutional issues.

[theboss]

40. Psssttt....not the Constitution

Just sayin'.

[shraby]

54. I know, but it's right up there at the top, and as venerable

a document.

[endarkenment]

56. no legal standing

it might be venerable and a document but the declaration has no legal standing at all

[jody]

28. SCOTUS says government is not obligated to protect individuals against criminals, then why illness?

SCOTUS said in DESHANEY v. WINNEBAGO “A State's failure to protect an individual against private violence generally does not constitute a violation of the Due Process Clause, because the Clause imposes no duty on the State to provide members of the general public with adequate protective services.”

SCOTUS said in CASTLE ROCK v. GONZALES, “Respondent did not, for Due Process Clause purposes, have a property interest in police enforcement of the restraining order against her husband”

If government is not obligated to protect citizens against criminals, then IMO government is not obligated to protect a citizen’s health.

[Davis_X_Machina]

29. Roosevelt wanted a Second Bill of Rights...

...that would have included this, along with housing, education, and employment.

Cass Sunstein's got a good book on the plan, in which he enumerates the countries that do have this and other rights explicitly written into their organic law.

[Evoman]

30. Americans are obsessed with their constitution.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great document. But countries, people, and society evolve, and keeping up with social changes is part of the job of government. The people who wrote the constitution didn't mean it to be completely static.

It doesn't HAVE to say health care is a right, for Americans to agree that it is a right. Nature does not give us rights. Pieces of paper do not give us rights. We determine what our rights are, and most people will agree that health care is a right.

[tclambert]

37. Also in the Preamble, "provide for the common defense"

against cold and flu germs. Or certainly against plagues and pandemics.

[jody]

38. That's "common defense" not "individual defense". n/t

[theboss]

39. So why have anything else in the constitution?

The "general welfare" is everything. Healthcare...guaranteed employment...free housing....nationalized police force...population control...etc.

[Cid_B]

41. My "General Welfare" requires a 12 pack and some Jeep parts...

See if you can tack that on too...

[endarkenment]

57. And the fed is happy to provide you the roads and bridges

for your car to travel on, using our tax dollars and good credit. So why not healthcare?

[On the Road]

42. That is a Great Reference

and I noticed you avoided using the term " constitutional right," which is jsutifyably contentious.

[EC]

43. Life, as in life, liberty and pursuit of happiness....

I contend that there is no life without health...

[mmonk]

44. I think that was changed to promote the general profits

of corporations.

[Deja Q]

46. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

End of discussion.

[NoPasaran]

50. A phrase not found in the Constitution

[Wednesdays]

51. Let's turn this around...

Are you saying that health care legislation should be struck down as unconstitutional? :shrug:

[tabasco]

53. Who cares if it's in the Constitution?

The authority for Congress to pass laws is in there and that's where the "right" will come from - a statute.

Only idiot repukes squawk that it has to be "a right" enumerated in the Constitution.