# Republicans don't give a CHIP about children's health care **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 27, 2017, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986 "2017-10-27T12:29:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/41 "2017-10-27T17:02:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s great to hear. > > Yep, very Christ-like. I can almost hear Jesus adding them to the Beatitudes. Christ never criticized the pharisees? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/42 "2017-10-27T17:05:26Z")
Very well said, **k9bfriender**. **Luke 18:** 10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. 11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. 12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. 13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. 15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/43 "2017-10-27T17:09:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Articles I-VII and Amendments 1-27. Ain’t there? Federal government can’t do it. > > The federal government is one of limited, enumerated powers, as distinct from state governments’ plenary legislative authority. Did they not teach you that in Bleeding Heart Spendy Liberal 101? CHIP was a State/Federal program tied to the Social Security act. Since the program was under Social Security wouldn’t the Supreme Court’s view that the Federal government can for the sake of the general welfare participate? ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/44 "2017-10-27T17:10:40Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > Have you actually read the constitution? There’s explicit constitutional authorization for congress to provide for the general welfare of the United States. I don’t mean any kind of paraphrasing, I mean the word “welfare” is literally right there in the text. And, for the pedantic among us, there’s even enacting language to ensure that people don’t complain, centuries later, that there’s no constitutional authorization for welfare. > [@The US Constitution](#): > > The Congress shall have Power To…make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. Seriously, Clothahump, what do you think the Constitution actually says?? ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/45 "2017-10-27T17:12:52Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The federal government is one of limited, enumerated powers, as distinct from state governments’ plenary legislative authority. Did they not teach you that in Bleeding Heart Spendy Liberal 101? Do you agree that providing for the general welfare is one such enumerated power? ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/46 "2017-10-27T17:55:17Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Do you agree that providing for the general welfare is one such enumerated power? Well, there are two possibilities. Possibility #1 is that the answer is “yes”, and Republicans like **Bricker** are self-serving heartless bastards more than willing to have children get sick and die as long as it serves the interests of the plutocracy. And as long, of course, as it somebody else’s children. Like poor people’s children. – OR – Possibility #2 is that the answer is “no” despite what the Constitution actually says, and there is a whole long list of federal legislation from social security to Medicare to CHIP to the ACA that is totally unconstitutional, but no one has been able to do a damn thing about it. I wonder which one is more likely, if one applies Occam’s Razor? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/47 "2017-10-27T17:55:59Z")
Ever since Social Security survived attempts at declaring it unconstitutional, the argument that the federal government should not do things like that just because the constitution does not mention it specifically is an asinine one. > **[Helvering v. Davis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helvering_v._Davis)** > > Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that held that Social Security was constitutionally permissible as an exercise of the federal power to spend for the general welfare and so did not contravene the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. > The Court's 7–2 decision defended the constitutionality of the old-age benefit program of the Social Security Act of 1935 by requiring only welfare spending to be for the common benefit, as distinguished from some... Bricker and Clothy are indeed getting their lessons from the monster shrinking stone heart’s university. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/48 "2017-10-27T18:25:08Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > To you consider things like the TVA and the Interstate system to be unconstitutional? How about FEMA, weather satellites, and the like? Government funded research? Under a strict reading of the Constitution, the US would never have developed. And under an expansive reading, judges run the government. But here’s the thing: you have no standards at all, except outcomes you want. If judges take the power you’ve handed them and rule in ways you don’t like, you declare their judgements illegitimate. So for your method, it really doesn’t matter: you hate the strict reading of the Constitution, except when it comes to the Second Amendment, and then, the stricter the better. I’d prefer it if you just say, “Hey, screw the Constitution, let’s do what I want.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/49 "2017-10-27T18:28:28Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > IOW, you’ve got nothing. Sure, but where is the Federal government’s **spending** power limited? As I asked\*\* Clothahump\*\*, specify article and section. Guess you’re no better than **Clothy**. I learned that calling the other guy names is what you do when both the law and the facts are against you. 😃 The government’s spending power is limited by Art I, Sec 9. > [@](#): > > No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time. There is no appropriation made by law for this expenditure. Don’t like it? Sucks to be you, then. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/50 "2017-10-27T18:33:43Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > You are one cold-hearted son-of-a-bitch. So much for your alleged Catholicism. If only those things were inconsistent. > [@Bricker](#): > > There is no appropriation made by law for this expenditure. > > Don’t like it? Sucks to be you, then. Suck to be a poor kid left to starve, that is. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/51 "2017-10-27T18:35:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And under an expansive reading, judges run the government. > > But here’s the thing: you have no standards at all, except outcomes you want. If judges take the power you’ve handed them and rule in ways you don’t like, you declare their judgements illegitimate. So for your method, it really doesn’t matter: you hate the strict reading of the Constitution, except when it comes to the Second Amendment, and then, the stricter the better. > > I’d prefer it if you just say, “Hey, screw the Constitution, let’s do what I want.” I ultimately think that all judges (and politicians) pretty much do this (whether they realize it or not) to at least some degree, and the main difference aside from preferred outcome is how skilled they are at rationalizing and matching their chosen outcome to some bit of Constitutional text. But then IANAL. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/52 "2017-10-27T18:35:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > There is no appropriation made by law for this expenditure. Only because it expired, you jackass. It was certainly legal, and constitutional, until then. And no non-imaginary person is proposing we keep paying for it extralegally. > [@Bricker](#): > > Don’t like it? Sucks to be you, then. Also sucks to be a poor kid. But who cares about them? Slaughter them all and use their bones for kindling. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/53 "2017-10-27T18:38:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And under an expansive reading, judges run the government. > > But here’s the thing: you have no standards at all, except outcomes you want. If judges take the power you’ve handed them and rule in ways you don’t like, you declare their judgements illegitimate. So for your method, it really doesn’t matter: you hate the strict reading of the Constitution, except when it comes to the Second Amendment, and then, the stricter the better. > > I’d prefer it if you just say, “Hey, screw the Constitution, let’s do what I want.” Did he even mention judges in this post? No. The only reason you bring them up is because you desire to derail the conversation. Probably have plans on bringing up bork again. The op and everyone else has been criticizing the legislature, and you bring up judges. Then you try mind reading. You are really trying here, but you are trying to defend killing children, and that’s a new low, even for you. I don’t think that you are up for it. I’d prefer it if you just say, “Hey, screw anyone who is not me, fuck them and leave them to die.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/54 "2017-10-27T18:43:23Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Did he even mention judges in this post? > > No. The only reason you bring them up is because you desire to derail the conversation. Probably have plans on bringing up bork again. _sigh_ He said, “To you consider things like the TVA and the Interstate system to be unconstitutional? How about FEMA, weather satellites, and the like? Government funded research? Under a strict reading of the Constitution, the US would never have developed.” Now, look carefully. You’re right that the word “judge,” does not appear there. But. . . might there be anything in that paragraph of his that _calls to mind_ judges? Federal court decisions? Anything at all. Look closely. Concentrate. You can do it. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/55 "2017-10-27T18:44:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The government’s spending power is limited by Art I, Sec 9. Uh, no wonder you thought the Dred Scott decision was a good one. (That article also regulates limits on what congress can do with slavery )Thing is that after the 16th amendment your point is silly. > [@](#): > > There is no appropriation made by law for this expenditure. > > Don’t like it? Sucks to be you, then. As one can notice, There was though an item pointing that slavery was the law of the land, sucks that you can not get slaves now, uh? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/56 "2017-10-27T18:54:56Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I ultimately think that all judges (and politicians) pretty much do this (whether they realize it or not) to at least some degree, and the main difference aside from preferred outcome is how skilled they are at rationalizing and matching their chosen outcome to some bit of Constitutional text. If that were true, then we’d expect to be able to confidently align judge’s opinions with their preferred outcomes. But that’s not always the case. I assure you that Nino Scalia was against idiots that burn American flags to show their disagreement with the country. I’m also confident he favored being able to collect DNA from arrestees and log it in a searchable database without needing a warrant. But he recognized that the correct reading of the First and Fourth Amendments, respectively, cut against his personal preferences, and he voted with the liberal justices on each of those issues. Your opinion isn’t based on any kind of careful study of the matter, is it? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/57 "2017-10-27T18:56:50Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Uh, no wonder you thought the Dred Scott decision was a good one. (That article also regulates limits on what congress can do with slavery )Thing is that after the 16th amendment your point is silly. The Sixteenth Amendment allows tax on income. So what? It doesn’t allow the government to spend it without an appropriation, does it? Does the stupid hurt when it’s in your head? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/58 "2017-10-27T18:57:11Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > The only reason you bring them up is because you desire to derail the conversation. Successfully. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/59 "2017-10-27T18:58:05Z")
In this thread, I’m going to respond from now on only to decent argument, so people like Gigobuster will probably be ignored. If anyone else wonders why I’m not talking to you, step up your debate game or shut up. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2017, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986/60 "2017-10-27T19:01:06Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The Sixteenth Amendment allows tax on income. So what? It doesn’t allow the government to spend it without an appropriation, does it? > > Does the stupid hurt when it’s in your head? Tell me when CHIP was declared uncostitutional and then you have an argument that is not monstrous. You are really the one with the republican idiot ball here. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-dont-give-a-chip-about-childrens-health-care/799986.md?page=4)