Health care laws taking our liberty and more letters to the editors

Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor

Health care laws taking our liberty

When I read about Congress's repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, what I do not read about is what gives it the legal standing to pass such a law. Our liberties are already lost when Americans do not care whether our legislators take - as a matter of course! - more than their powers afforded them.

The only place Congress is given the power to "exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever" is over the District of Columbia. Otherwise, it is limited to the "Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States" (article 1, section 8).

Its vested powers over the domestic economy are for minting and printing money, laying and collecting taxes, borrowing funds and paying debts, and regulating interstate commerce. Nowhere does the Constitution give it authority to tell insurance companies what they can and cannot include in health care policies.

Indeed, the health of American freedom depends upon Americans' realizing that Congress's micromanaging of health care is pitting the government's purpose to "promote the general Welfare" squarely against its purpose to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity," and we cannot afford to miss the conflict.

Dr. Brian Hale

Red Bank

Alexander works only for wealthy?

On July 5, the Chattanooga Times-Free Press reported a recent American Medical Association survey showing that six out of 10 Tennessee voters oppose cutting federal money for the Medicaid program that covers an estimated 1.5 million poor mothers, children, disabled and elderly Tennesseans.

I learned recently that Lamar Alexander was among the handful of Republican senators who, in secrecy, drafted a so-called health care bill to replace Obamacare in conjunction with a reduction in taxes for America's wealthiest individuals - including Alexander. I recall that, while governor of Tennessee, Alexander favored legislation that removed the right of persons to sue for damages for injuries or wrongful death against the seller of intoxicating beverages. Granted, the consumer of such beverages bears some responsibility for his conduct, but to immunize the restaurant, bar, etc., from liability for egregious behavior in continuing to provide alcohol to a customer who is becoming inebriated is outrageous. Yet then-Gov. and now Sen. Alexander has in the past been the owner of Ruby Tuesday franchises which benefited from this legislation protecting liable purveyors of liquor for profit from any legal responsibility.

Tom O'Neal

Signal Mountain

Remind us again why Trump targeted

Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Moscow.

Hillary Clinton failed to disclose Russian donors to her foundation before she served as secretary of state.

John Podesta was business partners with the Russian government. His company received $35 million from Russia.

Hillary Clinton approved the sale of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Russian and scored $145 million from shareholders of a uranium company that was sold to the Russians.

Obama gave $150 billion to a terrorist state and a sworn enemy of the United States.

James Comey said it served justice to allow those under investigation to destroy evidence by taking a hammer to cellphones and laptop hard drives.

Hillary Clinton destroyed evidence subpoenaed by Congress and the FBI.

With such a target-rich environment there, remind me again why we are still investigating President Trump, especially after a year of CIA, FBI, NSA and two Congressional investigations that found not a whiff of evidence.

Is something else going on besides "following the evidence?" Apparently, the liberal, biased mainstream media refuses to investigate and report on the corruption of the past eight years of the Obama administration.

Gary Hayes

Ooltewah

Upcoming Events