Tuesday, March 27, 2012

From the Chicago Tribune: Q&A: Day 2 of the health care arguments

http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-la-pn-healthcare-day-2-supreme-court-argument-turns-to-insurance-mandate-20120326,0,4709066.story


Q&A: Day 2 of the health care arguments




7:35 a.m. CDTMarch 27, 2012


"How can the federal government impose such a requirement?

The Constitution says Congress has the power to "regulate commerce" and to impose taxes to promote the general welfare. In the past, the court has upheld federal laws regulating all manner of business, from agriculture and aviation to who can be served at the corner coffee shop. The administration argues that the new insurance requirements are a regulation of commerce and therefore well within Congress’ power.

Why do the challengers say it is unconstitutional?

The states and other plaintiffs challenging the mandate argue that Americans who do not to get health insurance are not engaging in commerce. Therefore, they should be free from regulation by the federal government.

The plaintiffs warn that if Congress can regulate inactivity, such as a decision not to get health insurance, the federal government might be able to require Americans to get other products, like broccoli or automobiles."

No comments:

Post a Comment