Health care “reform” continues to be at the top of the news. Constituents are flooding Congressional phone lines. The debate rages on. Last week, I made a strong case against so-called health care “reform” outlining 14 key points. Today, I want to take a step back and focus on health care “reform” from two critically important vantage points: our Constitution and our Economic Freedom.
Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitition clearly states the process for a Bill to become a Law: “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States …” In other words, both the House and Senate must PASS a Bill. Some have suggested in the health care “reform” debate that it’s OK for the House to “deem” a Bill to have passed. This appears to be clearly unconstitutional under Article 1 Section 7.
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution limits Congress and its abilities to create laws. There is no reasonable way to interpret the Constitution as permitting Congress to dictate that an American join a mandatory health care program. Also, health care “reform” can’t be considered a constitutionally-sanctioned tax either, because it does not uniformly apply to all citizens. Once again, health care “reform” appears to be clearly unconstitutional under Article 1 Section 8.
The “Right to Privacy” Principle. If you believe Roe v. Wade is constitutional based on its application of a “Right to Privacy” principle, certainly all the various medical procedures and therapies covered under a potential government-controlled health care system are also covered under a similar “Right to Privacy.” After all, if the government can’t place an “undue burden” on obtaining an abortion, how can the government place an “under burden” on obtaining a virtual colonoscopy or any other medical procedure.
Indeed, it seems to me that progressive socialists are faced with a real dilemma with health care “reform” and Roe v. Wade. If Roe v. Wade is constitutional, health care “reform” is not constitutional. If health care “reform” could possibly (and remotely) be considered constitutional, then Roe v. Wade must be overturned … a victory for Pro-Life proponents. Hence, health care “reform” is unconstitutional under the “Right to Privacy” principle.
Economic Freedom. From the perspective of Economic Freedom, health care “reform” clearly limits our freedom. Patients will have fewer choices in health care insurance policies, fewer choices in doctors and other health care providers, fewer choices in medical procedures and therapies, fewer choices in available prescriptions. Patients will also have little or no ability to make economic decisions by “shopping” for the most cost-effective health care products and services.
Doctors will have fewer choices in treatment options and pricing models for their patients. Health insurance companies will have fewer choices in the policies and benefits they can offer as well as the pricing models they can employ to meet consumer needs. With $500B in cuts to Medicare, seniors will have fewer health care choices too. All Americans can expect less Economic Freedom, health care shortages, and rationing of health care products and services.
To summarize, the so-called health care “reform” currently being debated across America is likely to be found unconstitutional. It also will likely and substantially reduce each American’s Economic Freedom.
This entry was posted in Economy, Health Care System, News. Bookmark the
permalink. Comments are closed, but you can leave a trackback:
Trackback URL.
The Constitution, Economic Freedom and Health Care "Reform"
Health care “reform” continues to be at the top of the news. Constituents are flooding Congressional phone lines. The debate rages on. Last week, I made a strong case against so-called health care “reform” outlining 14 key points. Today, I want to take a step back and focus on health care “reform” from two critically important vantage points: our Constitution and our Economic Freedom.
Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitition clearly states the process for a Bill to become a Law: “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States …” In other words, both the House and Senate must PASS a Bill. Some have suggested in the health care “reform” debate that it’s OK for the House to “deem” a Bill to have passed. This appears to be clearly unconstitutional under Article 1 Section 7.
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution limits Congress and its abilities to create laws. There is no reasonable way to interpret the Constitution as permitting Congress to dictate that an American join a mandatory health care program. Also, health care “reform” can’t be considered a constitutionally-sanctioned tax either, because it does not uniformly apply to all citizens. Once again, health care “reform” appears to be clearly unconstitutional under Article 1 Section 8.
The “Right to Privacy” Principle. If you believe Roe v. Wade is constitutional based on its application of a “Right to Privacy” principle, certainly all the various medical procedures and therapies covered under a potential government-controlled health care system are also covered under a similar “Right to Privacy.” After all, if the government can’t place an “undue burden” on obtaining an abortion, how can the government place an “under burden” on obtaining a virtual colonoscopy or any other medical procedure.
Indeed, it seems to me that progressive socialists are faced with a real dilemma with health care “reform” and Roe v. Wade. If Roe v. Wade is constitutional, health care “reform” is not constitutional. If health care “reform” could possibly (and remotely) be considered constitutional, then Roe v. Wade must be overturned … a victory for Pro-Life proponents. Hence, health care “reform” is unconstitutional under the “Right to Privacy” principle.
Economic Freedom. From the perspective of Economic Freedom, health care “reform” clearly limits our freedom. Patients will have fewer choices in health care insurance policies, fewer choices in doctors and other health care providers, fewer choices in medical procedures and therapies, fewer choices in available prescriptions. Patients will also have little or no ability to make economic decisions by “shopping” for the most cost-effective health care products and services.
Doctors will have fewer choices in treatment options and pricing models for their patients. Health insurance companies will have fewer choices in the policies and benefits they can offer as well as the pricing models they can employ to meet consumer needs. With $500B in cuts to Medicare, seniors will have fewer health care choices too. All Americans can expect less Economic Freedom, health care shortages, and rationing of health care products and services.
To summarize, the so-called health care “reform” currently being debated across America is likely to be found unconstitutional. It also will likely and substantially reduce each American’s Economic Freedom.