Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Spence, I'm really curious to know what, in your opinion, is the good argument for regulation under the commerce clause?
|
My understanding is that the argument
against is that if I opt out of insurance, there's no activity to be regulated and the Federal government can't regulate inactivity...i.e. no commerce.
But we all know that the uninsured place a large burden on the entire health care system nationally.
So there's really no such thing as inactivity.
Perhaps this is simplistic, but I believe is at the core of the Administration's case, at least in respect to the commerce clause. And to me it does make perfect sense.
That's not to say the entire legislation is perfect. I think there are many other measures regarding tort reform and competition that could also help reduce costs.
-spence
Threaded Mode