Friday, October 30, 2009

White House Says No 'Veracity' to Argument That Forcing Individuals to Buy Health Insurance Is Unconstitutional

(CNSNews.com) -- White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs told CNSNews.com on Wednesday that there is no "veracity" to the argument that the U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to force individuals to buy health insurance.

The Congressional Budget Office has said that the federal government has never before in American history forced Americans to purchase any good or service.

When the health-care bill was being debated in the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, raised questions about the constitutionality of forcing Americans to buy health insurance, which all congressional versions of the health care bill would do.

Hatch rejected the notion that the Commerce Clause--which empowers Congress to regulate commerce "among the several states"--justifies forcing Americans to purchase a product they do not want to buy. If Congress can make people buy health insurance, Hatch argued, they can force Americans to buy refrigerators or new cars.

But Gibbs said those who make this kind of argument have no federal court cases to back them up. "I won't be confused as a constitutional scholar, but I don't believe there's a lot of--I don't believe there's a lot of case law that would demonstrate the veracity of what they're commentating on," said Gibbs.

Asked by CNSNews.com last week where specifically the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, "Are you serious? Are you serious?"

A Congressional Research Service report concluded that requiring individuals to purchase or have health insurance could be challenged.

"Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or service," the CRS reportedly says.

In 1994, when the Clinton administration attempted to push a health care reform plan through a Democratic Congress that also mandated every American buy health insurance, the Congressional Budget Office determined that the government had never ordered Americans to buy anything.

"The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States," the CBO analysis said. "An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government."

CNSNews

4 Comments:

Blogger B Will Derd said...

Well, that settles it then. Who needs a SC when you have Roberta Gibbs?

10:30 AM  
Blogger madtom said...

If you ask me it's a violation of the 13th amendment:

"The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime."

4:42 PM  
Blogger B Will Derd said...

If you ask me, 90% of current federal law and regulations are in violation of the Constitution. It's been at least a century long slide into universal involuntary servitude.

4:48 PM  
Blogger madtom said...

Yea but this is kind of a direct violation. says right there, in English involuntary servitude

How many hours do I have to work every week for the insurance company to comply with this mandate from our little tyrants

5:08 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home