Dave Weldon on Obamacare Ruling: 'Betrayal of Our Constitution'
Former U.S. Rep. Dave Weldon, who is now running for the Republican nomination to challenge Democrat incumbent U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, weighed in on the Supreme Court’s upholding of most of the federal health-care law on Thursday. Weldon, a medical doctor, ripped into the decision and called for the repeal of the health-care law.
"Today's Supreme Court decision is a betrayal of our Constitution and the basic tenets our founders created for our republic,” Weldon said. “Now, millions of Americans will have to pay the price for this failed policy which may take years to undo. Now, it is up to the people, through their representatives in the U.S. House and Senate, to do the right thing and repeal this failed law, one injurious element at a time, if necessary, and build a more appropriate and equitable health-care reform package.
“This ill-conceived law erodes individual liberty and fundamentally changes the relationship between citizen and government,” Weldon added. “We need to advance a free market for health care where Americans are informed shoppers, while ensuring that those with pre-existing conditions have access to affordable care. But it must be constitutional, reasoned and effective. Obamacare is none of these.”
Previous
Next
Comments (3)
See, when the Supreme Court says in a ruling that a law is constitutional, it's constitutional by definition and everyone is bound to accept that decision, whether they agree with it or not.
Apparently, Dave Weldon can't and won't accept that legal decision.
Apparently, Dave Weldon doesn't belong in elected office and its oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, including ALL Supreme Court decisions on what is and what is not constitutional.
If I used your originalist legal logic, the federal government shouldn't have the authority to regulate automobiles, airplanes, trains, telecommunications, genetic engineering, the personal possession of nuclear weapons, bombers wishing to get on airplanes, and other such nonsense.
The Act is constitutional and no amount of partisan spin is changing that, now does it, or do you just deny that as well?
Maybe we should just ask Etch-a-Sketch Mitt what he's calling it today - tax, penalty, tax, penalty?
Live with it.
