Obama's Health Care Mandate - A Wolf In Tacky Clothing?

Easily one of the most controversial pieces of legislation ever crafted, President Barack Obama's historic healthcare reform bill was met with resistance on numerous fronts, most notably among the rank and file of the American populace. Many citizens viewed it as an unprecedented power grab on the part of our government, designed to force private insurers out of business and pave the way for a single payer, government run healthcare system.

One of the most polarizing elements of the bill was the individual mandate to either purchase health insurance or pay a steep financial penalty. Almost immediately after passage of the reform bill, over twenty states filed lawsuits challenging the Constitutionality of the mandate. The question: Can Congress force American citizens to purchase health insurance under threat of penalty?

The answer initially would seem to be "yes", because the Constitution does grant government the power "to regulate commerce", and because government has long regulated a number of various economic activities, such as the funding of Social Security and Medicare through taxation, and conducted regulation of other companies or industries as it affects interstate commerce.

Supporters of the mandate will tell you that Congress' authority lies in the Commerce Clause, that because government has the power to regulate commerce between states, that it by rote has the authority to demand it from individuals as well. If allowed to stand, this would be the first case in history of the United States government mandating an activity by all citizens of the Republic.

The unprecedented move here is that Congress has never before mandated individuals must engage in economic transactions with a private company, with tax penalties to enforce it. It is one thing to regulate the automobile industry, but quite another to make law requiring every citizen to buy a Ford Focus. Furthermore, nowhere in the Constitution is government granted the power to do so.

The claim has been made by proponents of the bill that health care is no different from auto insurance, which is also required. This is not entirely accurate. You are only required to purchase auto insurance if you have a license and own a car that you wish to drive on public roads. This is a far cry from being required to purchase a health insurance plan simply because you are alive and breathing. The government overreach here is something from which many Americans will retreat, and ultimately resist.

The precedent that is set by the individual healthcare mandate is simple: from this point forward, there is nothing that the government cannot force you to buy under threat of financial or legal penalty, and the Constitution's limits on congressional power will have been effectively eliminated.

One of the prime examples used to drive this point is the recent government bailout of the auto industry. Theoretically, since government is now the primary shareholder in General Motors, it would not be out of the question for them to introduce a mandate for all Americans to buy at least one General Motors vehicle to boost sales, or be required to pay a tax based on a given GM car's blue book value.

As of this writing, a federal judge has cleared the way for the more than 20 state lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the health care mandate to proceed. Time will tell if the US government will succeed in its efforts, noble or nefarious, to provide healthcare by mandate for all Americans.