One thing has been bothering me about the debate over the new health care bill is that every discussion between lawmakers I’ve heard in the media goes something like this:
Opponent: “Forcing people to buy health insurance is unprecedented and violates the commerce clause of the Constitution.”
Supporter: “It will cover 30 million new people and make health care cheaper and all of my constituents want it.”
Am I missing something? I am really hopeful that the healthcare bill they’ve will result in better and cheaper access to health care, but shouldn’t somebody, y’know, make some sort of cogent argument that it is constitutional? And then tell me what it is?
Here’s the thing: 18 state attorneys general are filing a federal lawsuit challenging the bill. Somebody please tell me the defense in the case has a better argument than “Hooray Obamacare.”