I am observing the same argument on many comment threads.
R: Requiring people to buy health insurance is unconstitutional.
L: Nonsense, the gov’t has been requiring people to buy auto insurance for years.
R: It’s not the same thing at all. Driving is a privilege regulated by the gov’t. But the Democrats are saying that you will be required to buy health insurance simply as a condition of being alive.
Yes, Right, this is absolutely true. The parallel between liability insurance, required almost everywhere now I think, and mandatory health insurance is false, because you don’t have to drive a car.
However. As a society, we are perfectly ready to do nothing while people who can’t afford cars walk, cycle, or wait for the bus, however inclement the weather. We are even ready to do nothing while those who are uninsured against fire move into a flophouse after their house burns down. But we are not ready, at least I hope most of us are not, to do nothing while those who cannot afford health insurance die in great pain from their untreated medical condition. This is is why we have EMTALA now.
What the socialist left is suggesting is that it is time to begin treating the heart disease before the man shows up at the ER with the heart attack, and time to begin performing mammograms before the woman shows up with, in the immortal phrase of my old boss, “cancer of the everywhere.” This may or may not be cheaper than the current system, but it’s what we’re shooting for.
Since we have decided that we don’t want Medicare for All, one way to pay for this is to insist that everyone, even the young and healthy, “buy insurance,” or more accurately, pay into the cost pool that will be administered by various private insurers and subsidized with tax money. It’s not at all like auto insurance. It’s more like public school. Which we also decided a long time ago was important for everybody to have.
And thank you, Kathy, for making this outlet available so I don’t have to spend the morning hollering at the monitor again.