Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Senate Democrats React to Supreme Court Arguments on ACA: The Proponents side of the Individual Mandate
Again the whole argument against the Individual Mandate, is about whether the Federal Government. Has the authority to require people to buy Health Insurance. Force them to buy a product but Government is already forcing its people. To pay for the "Free Healthcare" that people who don't have Health Insurance. And can't afford out of pocket to cover their Healthcare, so there's a precedent for proponents of the Individual Mandate. To go along with what I blogged yesterday and last week. There's already precedent for this, proponents can argue that the Individual Mandate. Is a tax based on what I blogged yesterday and last week, because the penalty acts like a tax. Its just called a penalty, which is one reason why the ACA was badly written. Thats clear, the question is whether its Unconstitutional. Which is a different argument, the Constitutionality of the ACA is different from whether the ACA was well written or not.
Proponents can argue that the Individual Mandate is a tax. They can argue that the Federal Government can force its people to purchase products to pay for other peoples Healthcare at hospitals. And of course there's the Commerce Clause argument that they have to go to as well. Having said all of that, based on how the arguments went at the Supreme Court today. The Individual Mandate is clearly in trouble. Based on the fact that the Solicitor General Donald Verelli was on the defensive the whole day. With the four Liberals on the Court, trying to make the case for him. And with four Conservatives on the Court hammering Solicitor General the whole time. And the Solicitor General not being able to make a compelling case today. What Senate Democrats are arguing is that, there's already the precedent in Federal Law. For the Individual Mandate. But they weren't making the case at the Supreme Court.
If Sen. Chuck Schumer Chairman of the Democratic Policy Committee, and Sen. Pat Leahy Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Two of my favorite Members of Congress and Liberal Democrats. Were making the argument for the Individual Mandate at the Supreme Court today. Then I believe proponents would've had a much better day. Because they were arguing whether people have a Constitutional Right. To pass their Healthcare Costs on to others, even if they can afford to cover their Healthcare. Which is what the Individual Mandate aims to correct. That we all pay for our share of our Healthcare Costs.