I have read several articles by “experts” (lawyers, professors) making the case that the mandate to enroll in health insurance included in the health reform legislation (PPACA) is unconstitutional. In addition, several state attorneys general are filing lawsuits challenging the law.
I am no constitutional law expert, but I know when I turned age 65 I had no choice but to enroll in Medicare. My employer plan would not cover expenses eligible under Medicare. No private insurance company can sell me coverage primary to Medicare so is that a mandate? If I choose not to enroll in Medicare there is no penalty imposed, I’m just on the hook for all my medical bills. Is that a penalty? Given my wife spent over $15,000 in medical care last year I’m inclined to think so. The point is if you are age 65 in America you have Medicare or you have no health insurance.
For most people Medicare is a good deal, for some it is a significant penalty. In my case the monthly premium for health insurance for me and my wife increased 700% when we had to enroll in Medicare, some deal.
The PPACA depends on the maximum number of people to carry health insurance and frankly Americans with health insurance should be incensed with people who voluntarily don’t carry insurance, law or no law.
All those constitutional experts should include an alternative in their briefs to assure Americans carry health insurance. I don’t want to pay their medical bills any more than I want to help pay their mortgage or buy them a car.
You don’t have a right to be independent unless you never depend on others, going without health insurance does not meet that criteria because even though some on the left may think so, we are not yet at the point where we let people die in the street for lack of payment. If you want to be independent, being responsible goes with it.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 