"If the Supreme Court upholds the PPCA, including the individual mandate, it does not mean that Voucher-Care or Social Security privatization are good policies -- [but ...], they would not be prohibited by the Constitution."
How can that be considered "good"?!?
I have yet to hear of a single instance of a surviving federal law that obligates citizens to pay for a unilaterally necessary product or service from private organizations. Some people talk about car insurance, but I can still survive in many places with a car or car insurance. Everyone needs health care - regardless of individual decisions to 'play the odds' when they are 'well.' Neither the Constitution nor history supports mandatory public obligation to private companies.
So I'm just fine with an overturn of the mandate - ESPECIALLY if it means the republican privatization plans are scuttled in the same sweeping motion. I've seen this President go along with bad republican policy and see no reason to believe he wouldn't sell out seniors after the election. And even those who object to that statement should still sleep better knowing that future republican presidents can't outsource vital public services to profit-seeking companies.
With the mandate eliminated, the key cost problems of the health care industry are put back into focus again - perfectly in time for the election. The debate begins anew. Meanwhile, if the health insurance cost-efficiency and preexisting condition acceptance requirements remain in place after the ruling, then the legislation still has value.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment