A good question.

[MadHound]

Is it even Constitutional to mandate that one has to purchase a product or service, any product or service, as a condition of being a citizen of the US? Is it Constitutional to mandate that we purchase insurance or suffer the consequences.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing that a citizen of this country is mandated by law to purchase. If you don't want to purchase auto insurance, then you don't have to, however you can't operate a motor vehicle.

Yet just because you are a citizen of these United States it looks like you will be mandated to purchase private, corporate insurance. No option, no way out.

Is this even Constitutional? It would make an interesting court case, and I hope somebody takes it all the way up to the Supreme Court if this travesty of health care "reform" passes with this mandated monopoly for the insurance industry.

[rurallib]

1. I am wondering what happens if you refuse to buy?

Will you be turned away at the hospital?
Jail?

[MadHound]

6. You will get fined,

That fine will come attached to your tax bill, it will be labeled as some sort of special tax, but in reality it will be a fine, a fairly hefty one, somewhere between 3,500 and 5,000, perhaps more.

[rurallib]

16. Then do they give you insurance? Or are you still uninsured?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. Ya have to buy food. Not mandated but....the next best thing.

[MadHound]

4. Well, first of all you don't have to buy food

In fact much, if not most of the food that I eat I raise myself:shrug:

Second, it isn't mandated by law that you have to buy your food, unlike this health care "reform", which will mandate that you buy insurance.

I see your point, but it misses my point, we are looking at being forced to buy a service just because we are a citizen of this country. I don't think this is Constitutional.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. So you're a 100% off the grid?

Your internet connection belies that fact.

What's the last thing you're willing to give up? That's where the mandates start.

[MadHound]

9. You're talking of different types of mandates

I am not mandated by law to buy food from a grocery store, provide myself with internet service, purchase electric service, or anything else for that matter. You can, if you want, live life on the streets, not buying a thing. Granted, it isn't much of a life, but hey, you always have that option.

You will not have that option under this health care "reform". You will be mandated, by law, to purchase a product from a corporation. This is unique in our history, and frankly I think that it is unconstitutional.

Do you get what I'm saying now, or are you going to continue to dance around the topic using food and internet hook ups?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. What percentage of the populace could scratch out an existence living off the land?

The other side of that percentage are people with mandates.

It's not just you. It's a community.

If you want to throw people to the wolves, just say so.

[MadHound]

13. This question isn't about scratching out existences, so please, drop this strawman now

You're going down a path, intentionally, that is becoming more and more bizarre.

Do I need to put it in one syllable words for you?

A citizen is not currently forced, BY LAW, to buy anything. They aren't forced to buy auto insurance, or houses, or what have you. There is no law mandating that people have to buy any damn thing. Yes, most people choose to buy certain things, housing, food, auto insurance, cars, etc. because the consequences of not doing so are uncomfortable enough that people will lay out the cash. BUT THEY ARE NOT LEGALLY FORCED TO. If I don't buy a house, I'm not going to have to pay a fine or go to jail. Same thing goes for other modern conveniences, electricity, internet hook up, heat, whatever. Yes, I will be cold, lonely and bored, but I will not have to face any legal consequences.

However under health care "reform" I will be mandated, by law, to purchase a product, health insurance. I will not be able to opt out of it, it isn't an option. If I don't purchase this product, I will suffer LEGAL consequences. It won't be like auto insurance, where I simply will be unable to legally drive a car, since I really can't be unable to live (well, I can, but let's not go there). I will be forced by law to purchase something. This is unprecedented in this country, and frankly unconstitutional in my opinion.

So are you now willing to actually discuss the point head on, or are you going to continue to use sophistry and strawmen to try and obfuscate the point?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

18. OK, so metaphors are too advanced.

/outlandish slam

Simplest I can make it: The majority of people will need "something" they can't produce themselves. That "something" is a mandate. So, yes, there are required mandates to be a citizen.

[Eric J in MN]

3. The bill doesn't say: Buy insurance or go to jail.

It says that people who don't buy health insurance get taxed more.

Congress has the power to set tax policy.

I disliked it when the Obama Administration convinced the Senate not to pass the tax on bonuses passed by the House during the AIG bonus scandal, claiming the tax was unconstitutional.

[MadHound]

5. That is one reason why I think that they are wording these fines as "taxes"

I think that they realize that they're on shaky Constitutional ground and looking to cover their asses as best that they can. But the reality of the matter is that if you don't buy insurance you're going to suffer the consequences, get fined, no matter what they try to call it or how they try to disguise it.

[BeHereNow]

8. Look Madhound, we've got WARS to pay for!

Access or quality of health care is NOT the issue!
Finding new and creative ROBUST ways to gnaw the
remaining flesh off citizen bones is the issue.

It's a win-win for the insurance companies AND the WAR machine.

So stop complaining and FOCUS on Tiger Woods.

BHN

[MadHound]

10. Oh how foolish of me,

Do I really have to focus on Tiger, I'm really not a big golf fan:shrug:

[BeHereNow]

12. Hmmm...let me see what I can find on MSNBC, CNN or Fox for you-

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/12/16/people.25.most.intriguing/index.html

Is that better?
I'd say it is a really good story to distract you from the
fact that you have been totally fucked.

I'm here to help.

BHN

[MadHound]

14. AAAAHHHHHH!!!!!

OK, OK, I get it now, I'm supposed to be a good citizen and let my brain turn into gray goo that leaks out of my ears.

But I don't want to do that, I like my brain in all of its spongy firmness. Can I just fake it then?

[BeHereNow]

15. Well I suppose you can fake it, just be sure to stay on top of the info-tainment

so they won't suspect you of being an informed citizen, or ELSE-
off to the re education camp with you!

BHN

[leftstreet]

17. This is how they're going to do it: (Taxing and Commerce Clause)

In recent months, several commentators have suggested that a major element of the health care legislation before Congress is unconstitutional. Under the House and Senate bills, access to health care would be increased by imposing a mandate on individuals to purchase health care coverage. But, say some experts, the federal government does not have the power to require people to buy an insurance policy.

While there may be a germ of truth to this argument, there are no constitutional barriers to the kind of insurance mandate contemplated by Congress. To be sure, if Congress passed a law whose only provision entailed a mandate for individuals to purchase a product, and violators of the law were automatically subject to incarceration, constitutional concerns would arise. Imagine a criminal law that required people to buy an American-made automobile to bolster the domestic car industry. But that is not the kind of mandate Congress is contemplating. Rather, the House and Senate approach will readily fall within their taxing and commerce clause authority.

Critics of a mandate correctly observe that the federal government is a government of limited powers. While state governments have broad powers to regulate on behalf of the general welfare, the federal government can only act under a power enumerated in the Constitution. Thus, even though states can require people to purchase automobile insurance, it is not necessarily the case that Congress can require people to purchase health care insurance.

Nevertheless, a mandate to purchase insurance can be justified by the Constitution's grant to Congress of a taxing power and a commerce clause power. The taxing power is a well-established basis for enacting an individual mandate. Indeed, this country has had a tax-based mandate to purchase health care insurance for nearly 45 years. The Medicare program imposes a payroll tax on Americans as a way to fund coverage of their hospital costs once they reach age 65. People cannot opt out of Medicare; it is an obligatory system of health care insurance for one's senior years. Similarly, Congress can use a payroll tax to implement a mandate for individuals to purchase health insurance before they reach age 65. Under the House bill, for example, people will pay a 2.5 percent tax on their income unless they have health care coverage.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-orentlicher/an-individual-mandate-to_b_391810.html