Reply to a comment  Reply to this comment  kagim416#386795
writes:  in response to jdichiaralaw:  No problem. I've heard
that argument advanced before but believe it misses the mark. If
congress merely regulated the existing market it would probably
not have a constitutional impediment, at least not this one.
It's when they force 30 million people to buy health insurance
(and with very specific "one size fits all" coverages) whether
they want to or not, that they "jump the shark." The basis of
the argument you quote is that sooner or later almost everyone
will see a doctor, and thus engage in health care commerce. It's
this specious reasoning that lead several Justices to question
the limits of this reasoning: i.e., since we all buy food, and
are thus in "food commerce" can we be forced to buy broccoli if
the government deems it in our best interest? Since we all buy
cars at some point, can we be forced to buy a GM car?, etc.
That's the problem. They're not forcing the 30 million without
health insurance to