Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

John R. Graham: Obamacare undermines our right to health care
Washington Examiner ^ | 8/30/2010 | John R Graham

Posted on 08/30/2010 2:03:41 PM PDT by markomalley

President Obama has made no secret of his belief that health care should be "a right for every American." This moral argument for reform was no doubt among the strongest offered by Obamacare's proponents.

Unfortunately, Obamacare doesn't guarantee a right to health care. Instead, it undermines that right by subverting Americans' freedom to obtain the health care they prefer.

The Ninth Amendment stipulates that "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." In other words, there's nothing in the Constitution to stop anyone from claiming a "right to health care."

But if the Ninth Amendment provides the basis for a right to health care, the Tenth Amendment makes it clear that the federal government has no power to control how Americans exercise that right.

The 10th Amendment states that the federal government possesses only a small number of "enumerated powers." A quick examination of the rest of the text reveals that requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance – as Obamacare does - isn't among them.

In short, defining health care as a right doesn't mean that the government gets to meddle in it. To see why, consider an explicitly defined constitutional right, the right to free exercise of religion.

If the founders had approached our right to freely worship with the same gusto they've approached the right to health care, we'd likely face a battery of new institutions designed to "protect" our religious rights.

A hypothetical Department of Religious Practice might tax and subsidize church buildings and religious instruction in order to make sure that all Americans had access to an acceptable level of religious inspiration.

To protect adherents, federal officials might stipulate that all faiths offer a bare minimum promise of spiritual healing and salvation. Government scientists might set up a Comparative Religions Institute, to determine which creeds delivered the best outcomes - spiritual and otherwise – for their followers.

Such government actions to "protect" Americans' right to worship would in actuality shred what any rational person would consider a right to freedom of religion. But this is exactly the path outlined by proponents of a government-controlled right to health care.

The latest Rasmussen poll shows that 58 percent of Americans want Obamacare repealed. For many, the law is simply too costly. Others are concerned that Obamacare's multibillion-dollar taxes on pharmaceutical companies and medical-device makers will stifle medical innovation.

But more and more Americans believe that Obamacare will run aground on the shoals of the Constitution. No less than 42 state legislatures have introduced bills that would assert their citizens' right to be free of government coercion when choosing among health-care options.

Further, 21 state attorneys general have launched a suit challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare's mandate that all individuals buy health insurance, and the latest polls might cause more to jump on the bandwagon.

But this litigation is much more than a political stunt by ambitious attorneys general. The National Federation of Independent Business has also joined the plaintiffs.

Many independent constitutional scholars scoff at the notion that the Constitution authorizes Obamacare. Prof. Randy Barnett of Georgetown University, for instance, argues that "requiring individuals to enter into an economic relationship with a private company has never been done before under the commerce clause."

If member of Congress were really committed to effective health reform, they'd brush up on the 10th Amendment and reduce the federal government's interference in Americans' right to health care.

One easy way to do so would be to amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow individuals to purchase health insurance with our pre-tax income, instead of limiting our coverage to policies chosen by our employers.

Not only would such a change save consumers money, it would allow families to choose health insurance that's right for their circumstances and is portable from job to job and state to state.

Obamacare's most strident defenders have long viewed health care as a right. Unfortunately, their signature legislative achievement gives Congress unprecedented license to prevent Americans' ability from exercising that right.


TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 08/30/2010 2:03:43 PM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Obamacare is about the federal government's "right" to our health care dollars, nothing more.
2 posted on 08/30/2010 2:06:27 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The only stable state is one in which all men are equal before the law." -- Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
I hope the new House Republicans will stall funding to ObamaCare until we can take back the presidency and put a stop to it. That assumes we win in November.
3 posted on 08/30/2010 2:14:57 PM PDT by Bronzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Obamacare has already harmed me irrepearably.
My family physian who has treated me for decades, treated both of my parents in their latter years, knows me and my likely health issues better than if I were a specialty in medical school, has decided to abandon family medice for a more free and secure and renumerative position with a large fitness firm.
His action was a direct result of the passage of Obamacare. FUBO!


4 posted on 08/30/2010 2:18:06 PM PDT by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Also a right to our health care information and all of our financials information, with the potential of using that info against us for political means. Call me skeptical.
5 posted on 08/30/2010 2:32:31 PM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Liberals use suddenly discovered interpretations of the Constitution to allow the government to bestow 'goavernment-granted rights', while at the same time using (or trying to use) new views of long-standing texts to deny God-given rights.

The main difference between the two is that the Liberals want to take money away from one group to fund the government-granted rights, while the God-given rights exist on their own merit.

A 'right' is something you enjoy without having to apply for it, and one person exercising their rights should NEVER cost another person a single dime.

6 posted on 08/30/2010 2:50:51 PM PDT by Quiller (When you're fighting to survive, there is no "try" -- there is only do, or do not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quiller

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_OzLHKFN5s


7 posted on 08/30/2010 2:54:17 PM PDT by terjon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

...”The Ninth Amendment stipulates that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” In other words, there’s nothing in the Constitution to stop anyone from claiming a “right to health care.”

Or the right not to purchase health insurance. Which is what we are talking about. The “right to health care” means if it is a legal service, then I have the right to purchase that service.

If you really,really want the Cost of health care to come down, then boycott it. If enough people would boycott, then cost would come down.


8 posted on 08/30/2010 3:26:16 PM PDT by steveab (When was the last time someone tried to sell you a CO2 induced climate control system for your home?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“Obamacare undermines our right to health care”

What right?


9 posted on 08/30/2010 3:40:30 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Over and over in the campaign and in the debates we heard Obama promise that "If you are happy with the Health Care (Insurance ,sic) you have now, you will be able to keep the same coverage after bill passes". I kept waiting for him to say, "But you will be paying a lot more for it!"

Now I know I was right. My personal Blue Cross policy just went up 35%.

10 posted on 08/30/2010 3:42:41 PM PDT by REPANDPROUDOFIT (General, sir, it's ok to call me "ma'am"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

God help us if idiots like this author are actually ‘on our side’.


11 posted on 08/30/2010 4:23:17 PM PDT by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson