Mythos Greek & Italian
Our Local Columnists
~ READ MORE ~
Read The Guest Columns
~ READ MORE ~
Thursday, October 23, 2014 - 04:34 AM
INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE PALMETTO STATE
South Carolina Bill Would Nullify ‘Obamacare’ PDF Print E-mail
Written by Bob Dill, Publisher   
Wednesday, 21 November 2012 00:00

South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act Declares ‘Obamacare’ Unconstitutional and invalid in South Carolina

A proposed bill sponsored by Rep. William Chumley of Spartanburg County, and designed to block ‘Obamacare’ in South Carolina, will be pre-filed in Columbia before the end of the year.

The South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act declares the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” passed by a “lame duck’ Democrat Congress and signed into law by President Obama, to be “unconstitutional,” “invalid” and “shall be considered null and void in this state.”

The description of the act reads as follows:

An Act to render null and void certain unconstitutional laws enacted by the Congress of the United States taking control over the health insurance industry and mandating that individuals purchase health insurance under threat of penalty.

Rep. Chumley discussed the proposed new law at the November meeting of RINO Hunt. During the discussion, it was noted that there are examples of “Nullification” being used by various states going back for more than a century. The most recent are states legalizing marijuana and homosexual marriage prohibited by federal law. Sanctuary Cities for illegal aliens is another example.

Rep. Chumley said he plans to pre-file the bill before the end of the year. He is currently seeking co-sponsors of the bill. The bill is also being introduced in the Senate.

The bill quotes the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution that reserves all power not delegated to the United States Government in the Constitution to the states or to the people.

The proposed law states that:

The assumption of power that the federal government has made by enacting the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” interferes with the right of the people of South Carolina to regulate health care as they see fit, and makes a mockery of James Madison’s assurance in Federalist #45 that the “powers delegated” to the Federal Government are “few and defined,” while those of the States are “numerous and indefinite.”

The specific requirements of the proposed new law are contained in five paragraphs:

A.  The Legislature of the State of  South Carolina declares that the federal law known as the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” signed by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010, is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States and violates its true meaning and intent as given by the Founders and Ratifiers, and is hereby declared to be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, is specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

B.  It shall be the duty of the legislature of this state to adopt and enact any and all measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement of the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” within the limits of this state.

C.  Any official, agent, or employee of the United States government or any employee of a corporation providing services to the United States Government that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statue, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction must be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), or a term of imprisonment not exceeding five (5) years, or both.

D.  Any public officer or employee of the State of South Carolina that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding two (2) years or a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) or both such fine and imprisonment.

E.  Any aggrieved party shall also have a private action against any person violating the provisions of subsections (C) or (D) and shall be entitled to the recovery of reasonable attorney fees incurred in prosecution of said action.

During the discussion of the bill at the RINO Hunt meeting, it was agreed that for the bill to overcome fierce opposition, propaganda and lobbying by the Obama Administration, it will be necessary to have many co-sponsors in both houses of the legislature and very active, persistent, grass roots support.

 

Public visitors can view the comments made by registered members but cannot post or reply to them. Only online registered members can post/reply comments.

 


Site Developed & Designed by James Spurck & Maintained by The Times Examiner
© 2014 Copyright • Greenville, SC
pay for essay writing