Thursday, March 29, 2012

That's not the point

For the last three days, President Obama's signature legislation has been argued in front of the nine Supreme Court justices as to the constitutionality of the so-called individual mandate. The mandate essentially requires every American that can fog a mirror to either purchase health insurance or be forced to pay a penalty to the federal government if they don't purchase a policy. Congress has stated that 40 million Americans are without health insurance. Not all 40 million are incapable of purchasing insurance, mind you; some number just choose not to participate and the reasons for not buying it are varied. Some of that number are young, healthy people that are likely not incurring much, if any, medical cost now or in the foreseeable future so...why would they pay for insurance they don't need yet? Because Congress needs more folks to buy insurance who are going to pay in far more than they will consume in the near future.

Congress also expanded the coverage people are afforded. People with pre-existing conditions must be allowed to buy insurance. Young people under age 26 can now remain on their parent's policies (it used to be a lower age in most states.) Someone has to pay for this expanded coverage. So let's make healthy people pay for something they don't want or need now.

We also have laws that state that people cannot be turned away from receiving emergency medical care even if they have no insurance or are otherwise unable to pay the bill. We don't let people just die at the doors of emergency rooms. But, because people can receive "free" medical care, there is a cost shifting that takes place and has to be borne by somebody. Forcing every American to buy health insurance was Congress' solution to this problem.

So for the first time in the country's history, citizens will be forced to buy something just because they are alive. The logic is that just because a person is not a healthcare consumer now, they eventually will be so they need to pay into the system now.

OK, I get it. I understand the logic in the whole insurance/risk/cost sharing, scheme. I can see the financial justification here.

But that's not the point.

Congress decided that every American must be given access to medical treatments, even if they have no way to pay for it.  Congress says that people with pre-existing conditions must not be turned away because of the known financial exposure involved in covering them. Congress has decided to expand coverage people must be afforded. Congress has mandated that young people be allowed to stay on their parents' policies until they are 26. These are all, for the most part, good things. But Congress can't create a  new financial exposure then decide to trample the Constitution in order to pay for it. Either quit writing checks your body can't cash or find another way to get these changes paid.

Liberty is more important than this healthcare funding scheme. Fundamental freedoms are at risk here. Once Congress is allowed to force Americans to participate in something just because they breathe with the reasoning that "but we need the money to pay for this program we decided to start" then there is no limit on the federal government's power. Justice Kennedy said "And here the government is saying that the Federal Government has a duty to tell the individual citizen that it must act, and that is different from what we have in previous cases, and that changes the relationship of the Federal Government to the individual in a fundamental way." He is exactly correct. This power grab is unprecedented...at least not since the New Deal initiatives of the 1930s which saw major changes in the Federal Government's authority over the economy and people's lives. Some programs that were attempted to be implemented by Franklin Roosevelt's administration were deemed unconstitutional. This one should be as well.

Some people try to draw analogies here. There is no analogy of an existing precedent that applies. One of the justices equated medical costs to burial costs. Everyone is going to utilize this service at some point. And if you die without the means to pay for your burial and you don't have burial insurance, the taxpayers are going to foot the bill. So why not make all adults pay for burial insurance regardless of their age?

Some have used Social Security as an example of how everyone participates and pays into the system. That is actually not true. Unless you have wages and salary, you don't pay Social Security taxes. And if you do not earn enough credits over your working career, you are ineligible to receive benefits. So this isn't an accurate analogy.

I am all for Congress solving problems. That's not the point. I have no problem with a state imposing an individual mandate. I believe that states have that right. I see nothing in the Constitution, however, that gives the Federal Government that kind of authority.

Let's hope and pray that the Supreme Court comes to the correct conclusion.

No comments:

Post a Comment