I am glad I researched this and have come across this site. Let me tell you about what is happening with me right now, and my mandated Health Insurance.
December 2008, I was notified that my current employer Health Insurance was changing from United Health Care to Aetna. This would be more affordable for the employer. Well, My coverages went down across the board, and yet I still paid about 250 dollars a month, totaling about 3,000 dollars a year that would have otherwise been spent into the economy. My Premiums did not go down at all, and the only prescription I had been paying for went from 15 dollars to 60 dollars under the new plan. They sure stuck it to me then.
Now, December 2009, I have just been notified by my company this week, that Mass no longer accepts my companies Health Insurance and that I need to use the Health Connector to establish insurance with my employer. Problem is, I can’t right now, because I was supposed to do it by December 4th. So they have left me without insurance. Either way, the quotes on the health connector for the cheapest insurance can run from 300 to 450. It should be illegal, and I’m sure it is, how this state studys ways to illegally force money out of your pockets and into the hand of these greedy Health Insurance Companies. Now they expect me to pay somewhere between 4000 to 6000 a year of cold hard cash so I can save about 5 bucks a month on a prescription? They want me to fear an injury or death 24/7, just so I can pay on average 5000 a year for the rest of my life? It’s just plain illegal.
I am only 27, but every one has heard that famous quote “Only thing we have to fear is fear itself” Too bad, no one in todays government knows who FDR is, or what he meant by it. Todays motto has become, “You have everything, and every place to fear, so you must pay us and you will be protected against unforseen events, and your fears gone”

Anyways, I call for a major movement against the Massachusetts State Mandate that we are all required to carry health Insurance. Soon this may be a Country wide mandate, and it is up to the citizens of Massachusetts to tell the people how it really is. We need to establish a website, which can be had for free in a lot of places on the web. We need to encourage as many people to join our movement against the mandate, and we all need to submit our own statement. I envision a book with atleast a hundred thousand signatures or more from citizens of this state, and a brief statement for each one of them. I envision this book to be sent to every US Rep and US senator in the country. This book will be sent to all major networks. This will be the truth behing the Mass Health Insurance Mandate! The voice of the people of this state, which is currently buried beneath the trash of our Government elects, and officials. Please feel free to email me at rpn123321@yahoo.com if you would like to join this movement. This is the beginning! I haven’t found anything anywhere of another one, and I can hardly believe that. The residents of this state have lined the pockets of the greedy too long. We need new leadership, not from the democrats, not from the Republicans, not from any current system in the nation. Most of them are corrupt beyond belief. The only thing we have to fear is fear itself….

Money can only be spent once, and once spent it is gone. If the money is spent AGAINST the owners desires then whoever forces you to spend it is basically depriving you off.

Just to be clear,

When I filed this case I specifically asked for a trial y jury as I was contesting the fines. Fines are money, money is property and per the Mass Constitution, “the right to trial by jury in a dispute over property shall be held sacred. This case was a dispute over property, the state fined me and I contested the fine. Mass rules of civil procedure are also clear

Rule 38 The right of trial by jury as declared by Part 1, Article 15 of the Constitution of this Commonwealth or as given by a statute shall be preserved to the parties inviolate.

Rule 39 When trial by jury has been demanded as provided in Rule 38, the action shall be designated upon the docket as a jury action. In the District Court, the action shall be designated upon the docket as a jury action in accordance with the statutory provisions governing trials by jury in the District Court.The trial of all issues so demanded shall be by jury, unless (1) the parties or their attorneys of record, by written stipulation filed with the court or by an oral stipulation made in open court and entered in the record, consent to trial by the court sitting without a jury as to some or all of the issues or (2) the court upon motion or of its own initiative finds that a right of trial by jury of some or all of those issues does not exist under the constitution or statutes of this commonwealth.

The Less then Honorable Judge Kathe Tuttman dismissed my case ignoring my arguments, ignoring mass rules of civil procedure, and VIOLATING my right to trial by jury.

Unlike (everyone?) else I refused to fill out the health pages on the tax forms and wrote 5th Amendment all over them, as well as sending a letter with the return on which I stated I was invoking my right to remain silent as protected BOTH by the 5t Amendment and similar language within the Mass Constitution. MY fine was for a failure to fill out the forms and therefore a fine against the LEGAL exercise of the right to remain silent.

Some excerpts from US Supreme Court cases showing that the right was legally exercised

Counselman v Hitchcock

It is an ancient principle of the law of evidence that a witness shall not be compelled, in any proceeding, to make disclosures or to give testimony which will tend to criminate him or
subject him to fines, penalties, or forfeitures.

Boyd v US

It does not require actual entry upon premises and search for and seizure of papers to constitute an unreasonable search and seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment; a compulsory production of a party’s private books and papers to be used against himself or his property in a criminal or penal proceeding, or for a forfeiture, is within the spirit and meaning of the Amendment.

The seizure or compulsory production of a man’s private papers to be used in evidence against him is equivalent to compelling him to be a witness against himself, and, in a prosecution for a crime, penalty or forfeiture, is equally within the prohibition of the Fifth Amendment.

A proceeding to forfeit a person’s goods for an offence against the laws, though civil in form, and whether in rem or in personam, is a “criminal case” within the meaning of that part of the Fifth Amendment which declares that no person “shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness against himself.”

And any compulsory discovery by extorting the party’s oath, or compelling the production of his
private books and papers, to convict him of crime or to forfeit his property, is contrary to the principles of a free government. It is abhorrent to the instincts of an Englishman; it is abhorrent to the instincts of an American. It may suit the purposes of despotic power, but it cannot abide the pure atmosphere of political liberty and personal freedom

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/368/compstudy_52006.pdf

The American colonists where forced to pay to the King, a tax, to have access to tea. A “perceived need” during America’s colonial period. The “Tea,” was sold to the colonist by the King’s “East India Tea Corporation,” which monopolized the tea market? The only thing the King did not do was to force and coerce the colonist to purchase tea. One’s Health is intrinsically tied to one’s life! So lets “tax life” should one fail to be coerced under fear of tax penalty to associate with a health insurance corporation, via contract, mandated by the government? This is not healthcare reform. This is corporate and governmental protectionism at the expense of individual constitutional protections put in place and envisioned with good reason. You see our founder where dealing with a corrupt King and his corporate cohorts in crime, who gutted the colonist many a time with no representation! This is happening with representation? OMG!

I’m coming to this blog later than some of you, but I still want to know what the privilege that can be revoked if I don’t buy health insurance. If I don’t buy auto insurance, the privilege to register and drive a car can be revoked. If the two are truly analogous, there must be a privilege that I will lose if I don’t buy health insurance.

First it converting a fine into a tax liability. That breaches the Massachusetts Constitutional requirement that nobody be forced to pay more then his share of taxes.

It breaches the prohibitions on punishment, deprivation of property, or loss of rights, EXCEPT through a jury of your peers.

By breaching the right to trial, it also breaches every single right included as part of a trial. Little things like being accused, examining and/or disputing evidence, crosschecking witnesses, facing your accuser, you know little stuff

Not to mention breaches against right to remain silent

The right NOT to be compelled to accuse yourself

The right to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law

and especially these piddling litle requirement of the 14th Amendment

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Pardon the sarcasm above.

You have hit the nail on the head all the way. The collusion between gov’t, vested interests and the media has become a major problem in this country, and forces citizens to duck for cover rather than participate in the rebuilding of this failing nation. When government does not act in the best interest of its people, this causes much hatred, divides its citizens and does not make a nation strong.

On a better note, the event last night in Northampton was terrific. It featured Congressman John Conyers, John Nichols from Nation magazine and several other excellent speakers from western MA who are staunch supporters of a single-payer, Medicare for All system which the Congressman’s bill – HR676 – would bring us.

The auditorium was packed solid. Two of Mr. Conyers aides were there as well. The sad truth about the MA plan was revealed while the virtues of a single-payer system were explained, and the audience clapped and cheered loudly in agreement. An economist also spoke, making very clear to all the savings the nation would have with such a system while delivering affordable, quality, EQUITABLE health care to ALL – unlike what the MA plan costs and delivers while it does NOT provide EQUITABLE, affordable, quality CARE for ALL and never will.

U.S. Rep. John Olver was there, and we thank him for co-sponsoring HR676 and will continue to encourage him to bring others in the 111th Congress on board.

So, folks, contact your U.S. Rep. and ask him or her to endorse HR676 – we cannot afford – financially or with regard to our health and well-being – to continue to move the deck chairs around on the Titanic with a MA model for the nation.

Under the proposed Baucus-MA-clone-with-a-twist plan, those who cannot afford a private or public plan will be thrown into subsidized insurance with all the caveats and discriminations I refer to in my post above and many more, and will be left hung out to dry. As for the “public” plan, who really knows what that will be? Anything that involves the insurance companies will be more of the same – profit before people.

I think that the findings of the Blendon report should also be widely publicized b/c it shows that 56 percent of the small businesses are being harmed, 51 percent of the uninusred are being harmed, a higher percentage of MA residents find that Chapter 58 has hurt the state’s economy, and much more.

MSM does a great disservice to all Americans by having literally censored the unreported truth about the harmful details of the MA plan in our daily lives, particularly given that it is being touted as a model for the nation, albeit, with a twist. The stress that this law has caused us is extremely unhealthy. I know this for a fact.

However, be it the proposed national plan or a continuation of Chapter 58 here in the Bay State, the subsidized plans will still be there, and this class of people, which includes me, my sister and many others I know, are being jammed by these plans and/or will not enroll because of the Federal regulations and discriminatory features. Multiply the number of MA in these plans times I don’t know how many million. This will be Katrina II, and most definately force people into an unfair game.

The details of subsidized health insurance must be brought to the attention of every American.

If you can go before a Federal court, you would have a better chance. State people have either been bought and paid for or don’t have the courage to stand up to the perpetrators and enablers of this horrific piece of legislature that never should have seen the light of day. Unfortunately, it, too, was bought and paid for as there was a far-reaching agenda which has been evidenced by what is currently being discussed in D.C. as the national faux-health care reform – to the delight of Karen Ignani and company.

I find it very sad, and it also angers me, that Deval Patrick, who campaigned as the people’s governor, continues to market the failed MA plan as a model for the nation, when, in fact, he knows that far too many individuals, families and small to medium businesses have been harmed. He and others in his administration plus many MA vested interests tell the media that 97 percent of MA residents are insured, that the plan is working well and people like it.

The 97 percent part is misleading. It would be more aptly stated as follows: there are about 95 percent of the 86 percent who filed a 2007 tax return AND a COMPLETED Schedule HC claiming that they had coverage, but due to the numerous layoffs in this state and the current deep recession, that percentage is probably lower.

Furthermore, according to a MA survey I read, as of June 2008, 56 percent oppose the individual mandate, 56 percent of small businesses are being hurt, 50 percent of the uninsured are being hurt and the majority say that this law has not helped health care costs, is hurting MA economy, etc. I would imagine, based on the “conservative” (actually, pancake flat to concave) enrollment in the Commonwealth Care and Choice plans since last January, that a new survey would have even higher percentages for the above-mentioned categories. Thus, Deval Patrick et al do a great disservice to all Americans by spinning this as a success in an effort to market it as the way to go with health care reform.

At the Burlington, VT event on Wednesday (regional health care summit), I heard him say (via NPR) that health care reform must be humane (he used these words – I was driving when I heard this and didn’t go forward when the traffic light turned green I was so enraged).

Governor: What is humane about penalizing hundreds of thousands of hard-working taxpayers because they can’t afford the insurance or the penalties for that matter? What is humane about trying to force crappy insurance plans that are too expensive on people who can’t afford to pay for them much less use them? What is humane about forcing people into subsidized insurance plans in which they can’t find doctors who will take them within a 50-mile radius, much less have a choice, and too many can’t afford to use them? And these questions only touch the tip of the iceberg.

Here’s another way to go, George: The contract that MA has with its residents (to purchase health insurance or pay a tax penalty) must be voided because it is unequitable. I would go into further detail on this, but am up too late and need to hit the hay. However, you seem to be an extremely intelligent person and can certainly figure out where I was heading. In fact, there are so many illegal and unconstitutional facets to Chapter 58 that it’s hard to tell where one begins and the other leaves off. It is quite fascinating.

btw, the Connector is indemnified a gazillion times in the law but not against civil rights violations which includes lack of due process. Also, there are some people in this state who have been giving out erroneous information – do their legal papers contain errors and omissions clauses?

Gotta get some sleep. Have fun reading this Kingsdale et al. You, too, George, and keep the faith. It ain’t over ’til the fat lady sings.

Best, Martha