When the Supreme Court heard arguments about Obamacare last week, one of the chief issues was whether or not the federal government has the authority to require people to purchase health insurance. The government believes it has this authority under the Commerce Clause.
But it’s one thing to say the government can regulate people already engaged in economic activities. It’s quite another to say that the government can force people on the sidelines to get involved. If the federal government can make people buy health insurance, what else can it make us buy? From the transcript:
JUSTICE KENNEDY: Well, then your question is whether or not there are any limits on the Commerce Clause. Can you identify for us some limits on the Commerce Clause?
Donald Verrilli and the justices argue this point for awhile, talking about why the government can’t also make you buy cars or cell phones or broccoli. The broccoli argument took center stage, showing up again later:
ANTONIN SCALIA: . . . could you define the market — everybody has to buy food sooner or later, so you define the market as food. Therefore, everybody’s in the market. Therefore, you can make people buy broccoli.
The broccoli argument is such a big deal because 87% of Americans think a broccoli mandate would be unconstitutional (8% Constitutional, 5% Don’t Know/Refused).
Let’s ignore the fact that there are apparently millions of Americans, presumably with the right to vote, who believe that forcing Americans to buy broccoli would actually be constitutional. The vast majority of Americans reject such a notion, so proponents of Obamacare have a vested interest in explaining why broccoli is different from health insurance. Meanwhile, opponents of Obamacare (such as myself) have a vested interested in explaining why they are the same, and that the broccoli argument is just a more obvious example of the underlying reasons that make Obamacare wrong, too.
Continue reading What Makes Health Insurance Different From Broccoli?
