immediately after president obama signed the health reform bill into law, the attorneys general of 13 states and counting filed suit against it. they claim that due to the 10th amendment of the constitution the law is unconstitutional. they claim that the government cannot, by constitutional law, compel its citizens to purchase health insurance.
i’m not an attorney nor am i a constitutional scholar. i have no idea how this will play out in court. from everything that i’ve read and heard these few hours later, it will be a long shot to have the law overturned. i hope that does prove to be true.
a reporter asked one attorney general, from virginia i believe, why this was comparable to requires a person to buy auto insurance. this a.g. said that no one is forced to buy a car therefore they have the option to not purchase auto insurance.
in my opinion, this is a poor and possibly dangerous argument. no, a person is not compelled to purchase a vehicle and therefore purchase auto insurance. in that same vein, though, should we say that no one is compelled to purchase health insurance however they will not have the right to be treated in an e.r., hospital or doctor’s office? should that be the penalty for not purchasing insurance? no insurance, no care. no insurance, no car.
i think it would be horrible to turn someone away who needs care. it would be inhumane. however, if a person receives medical care with no insurance and is unable to pay his or her bill that cost is passed on to those who can pay. that could be one reason my box of tissue was $200!
in reality, no one is turned away for inability to pay. or at least that’s what we hear. so if no one is turned away, then everyone needs insurance. it’s that simple. we, as a humane society, must treat those who need it.
i think universal health care should be the eventual outcome but this law is a step in the right direction. in order to have better care overall, everyone needs to be covered. imho
