Does the constitution authorize congress to force Americans to buy something? If you voted for the Health Care bill, then the answer is yes. If you are a proponent of limited government then the answer is unequivocally a no.
Ruth Marcus, in her Washington Post OpEd, “Constitution no bar to health reform,” explains that Congress has the constitutional authority to mandate or force everyone to purchase health care. The Constitutional basis she uses comes from Article One Section Eight, which states that Congress shall have power “To regulate commerce . . . among the several States.” Legal precedent states that if an activity, commercial or not, exerts a substantial economic affect on interstate commerce then it can be regulated under that clause. Because health care insurance is such a large expenditure it affects interstate commerce and can be regulated by the federal government.
For this reason we have some complicated federal laws with regard to health care. But in extending the logic to the individual mandate, Ms. Marcus misses the mark. Regulating commerce, even if it is detrimental, is something that most democratic governments are supposed to do. This regulation even extends so far as to prohibit certain actions from occurring, such as murder, thievery and extortion. But neither the principle of regulation nor any of these regulations mandates that someone enter into any activity, especially commerce.
Buying health care insurance is a completely voluntary act, just like the purchase of Christmas presents and apple pie. This ability to choose what to purchase is the most basic of freedoms guaranteed mankind by the Constitution: the freedom of choice. This is aided by the right to gain, keep and dispose of property, referred to in the Declaration of Independence as “pursuit of happiness.” These two fundamental rights exist previous to the formation of any government. They are God given, natural rights that exist everywhere, even when tyrants suppress and usurp them. These rights ensure the greatest freedom and liberty to people. The people need these rights so as to provide sustenance, comfort, personal protection, and growth, i.e. the blessings of liberty (and a better future) to themselves and their posterity. Hence, entering into or staying out of, commerce is entirely voluntary. The government has no more the right to force everyone to buy apple pie than it does to force everyone to buy insurance.
Forcing someone into commerce is one of two things: 1. Eminent domain–taking of property for some government project for the public good or 2. Extortion and blackmail. In both cases the private party is damaged, but at least when eminent domain is used it is as a last resort and the private citizen is still compensated for his loss. In the other case, extortion and blackmail, it is illegal under US law, unconstitutional, and the tool of every totalitarian from Marx to Kim Jung Il.
If requiring people to buy health care insurance simply because their abstinence causes prices to go up is fair and constitutionally required to protect “everyone” then why shouldn’t congress make people purchase other goods and services. After all, when someone doesn’t buy a good, then the industry price must go up (eventually) to cover the cost of not selling as many of the good.
The answer to the problem is not 2000 pages complex, nor does it cost trillions of dollars to enact. It’s simple: more freedom, less government. We need lower priced health care and insurance. We can get it from letting insurance companies compete across state lines and making one national standard for their regulation. And since there is already a government body somewhere regulating these agencies, it will not be a tremendous increase to shift their focus. State governments will no longer have the budgetary burden of ensuring compliance and can focus on other, more important budget issues.
The choice is up to us. Will we work for real reform or will we yield the individual liberty of 300 million people to a dictator?
-Matthew Maddox