- GOP hopes taking shutdown off the table with budget deal will pay dividends
- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- We are not amused: Queen’s protection officers warned to keep ‘sticky fingers’ off the royal cashews
- Unleash the crossbows: Gov. Scott Walker creates new hunting season
- Bubonic plague kills 20 in Madagascar
- G-20 diplomats fell for hacker attack promising nude photos of former French first lady Carla Bruni
- Minnesota guardsman charged with stealing private soldier data for fake IDs
- Florida appeals court rules universities can’t regulate guns
- Vladimir Putin defends Russian conservative values
LAMBRO: Punishment by any name
Americans to pay more, get less with Obamacare
The Supreme Court’s historic debate over the constitutionality of President Obama’s unpopular health care law is all about economic freedom.
That freedom has been battered, bullied and beaten by the government over many decades in countless laws and restrictions, and it will be further eroded by this ill-advised health care law now before the high court.
At stake in the court’s review is whether an all-powerful federal government can compel Americans to buy a health care plan they neither want, need nor can afford.
That’s what the law’s “mandate” would do, and anyone, outside its religious exemptions, who refuses to purchase health insurance will be punished. The federal attorneys in Monday’s first round of oral arguments alternately called the punishment a penalty or a tax - although whatever they may call it, it’s clearly a punitive fine meant to force Americans to buy a commercial product against their will and to submit to the government’s awesome power.
All of this will be done under the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which gives the feds the authority to regulate interstate commerce. But 26 states and millions of Americans think they’ve gone too far and want the law’s mandate struck down by the highest court in the land.
What’s at stake here from the government’s viewpoint is the financial structure of the health care law that will come crashing down like a house of cards if its central mandate is found to be unconstitutional.
The overhaul was sold to the health care and insurance industries with the promise that just about everyone would be buying into it. Millions of Americans and businesses without health insurance will buy policies, and that will provide the funding to make universal coverage affordable, or so the theory goes.
Take away the forced mandate and you can kiss those potential customers goodbye - and with it the additional business the health care industry needs to pay for the other insurance coverage mandates the Democrats in Congress stuffed into this law.
Mr. Obama and his party rammed this program through the Congress despite opposition from ordinary Americans, struggling small businesses and the states who will bear the brunt of higher Medicaid costs.
The president had expected that the health care law would be a major political winner for him and the Democrats, but it has proved to be a big disappointment. They lost the House and part of the Senate in 2010 and are facing daunting challenges in 2012. If anything, Obamacare has become even more unpopular.
The New York Times reported Monday that five days of polling last week found that only 36 percent of Americans “approve of the health care law, while 47 percent are opposed.”
By nearly 2-to-1, those who strongly disapproved of the law outnumbered those who said they strongly approve of the legislation, the newspaper said.
An earlier poll from the AP-National Constitution Center found that 82 percent did not think the government should be able to force them to buy health insurance or be fined if they didn’t.
Even those who worked to help shape Obamacare now acknowledge that the law’s mandate was a mistake. One of them is Princeton University’s Paul Starr.
“Democrats managed to get themselves the worst possible result: a law that enflames the opposition on the basis of overreaching federal power but may not work in practice because there is no real power behind it,” Mr. Starr wrote in the New Republic.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
By Mangosuthu Buthelezi
Memories of a long brotherhood tempered in common struggle
Get Breaking Alerts
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- Inside China: Ukraine gets nuke umbrella
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- North Korean dictator stuns world with uncle's execution
- CHELLANEY: China's game of chicken
- Obama takes 'selfie' at Mandela's funeral service
- Comma on!: Twitter erupts over Obama-Castro 'marriage'
- 80 people publicly executed across North Korea for films, Bibles
- Inside the Ring: China targets Global Hawk drone
- Chinese man fed up with his girlfriend's shopping jumps to his death