Former individual mandate champion Gingrich now cheerleads efforts to declare it unconstitutional
In recent days, Newt Gingrich has approvingly cited efforts by Republican attorneys general in several states to challenge the constitutionality of the health care reform legislation's provision requiring individuals to purchase health insurance or pay a fine. But as recently as 2008, Gingrich proposed such an individual mandate on some Americans as part of his own health care reform plan.
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Gingrich approvingly cites efforts to challenge constitutionality of the individual mandate
From the March 23 broadcast of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: Do you think any of these constitutional challenges that are out there about the employer mandate, individual mandate, or any of the other challenges -- do you think as they work their way through the courts, that any of that will be effective?
[...]
GINGRICH: Then you have to appeal the president's ruling and they'd probably lose that fight. But what my sense is -- first of all, I'm glad to see that some 13 attorneys general around the country --
HANNITY: Are going to sue.
GINGRICH: Have sued. Based on a 1992 Supreme Court decision which said that the federal government cannot punish you for failure to do something, I think that there's an outside chance the suit will hold up. And that that will stop the individual mandate at the federal level.
But I don't think people have fully read the final version of this bill, not to mention the final version of reconciliation. And there may be a number of places where this legislation is open.
Plus, you know the left is going to sue on the executive order on abortion.
From Gingrich's March 24 HumanEvents.com column:
No one should be confused about the outcome of Sunday's vote in the House on the healthcare bill.
This is not the end of the fight. It is the beginning.
[...]
The fight will continue in the states where 38 of them have filed or are planning to file legislation that rebukes Obamacare's "individual mandate" that requires you to purchase insurance even if you would rather pay directly for medical care. In addition, Attorneys General from several states plan to file lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the healthcare bill's individual mandate.
But Gingrich included an individual mandate in his health care proposals as recently as 2008
June 2008 Associated Press article: "Gingrich suggests insurance mandate for those who can afford." According
to a June 11, 2008 Associated Press article (accessed from the Nexis database), which ran under the headline,
"Gingrich
suggests insurance mandate for those who can afford," Gingrich reportedly
"outlined his strategy to combat rising health care costs a plan of attack
that includes insurance mandates for people who earn more than $75,000 a year" at a visit to a Nebraska health system.
The article went on to report that "Gingrich called it 'fundamentally
immoral' for a person who can afford insurance to save money by going without,
then show up at an emergency room and demand free care. He said those who can
afford insurance and choose not to buy it should be required to post bonds to
pay for care they may someday need... Gingrich said everyone should have
insurance, but not provided by the federal government."
Gingrich's 2008 book Real
Change: "[W]e should insist that everyone above a certain level
buy coverage" or "post a
bond." Discussing how to "achieve health
insurance coverage for all Americans" in his 2008 book, Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World
That Works, Gingrich wrote:
Finally, we should insist that everyone above a certain level buy coverage (or, if they are opposed to insurance, post a bond). Meanwhile, we should provide tax credits or subsidize private insurance for the poor. [Page 276]
Gingrich's 2005 book Winning the Future: "[W]e should make it clear that a 21st Century Intelligent System requires everyone to participate in the insurance system." In his 2005 book, Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract with America, under a section titled, "Your 21st Century Health Rights," Gingrich wrote:
4. You have the right to be part of the lowest-cost insurance pool and you have a responsibility to buy insurance. We need some significant changes to ensure that every American is insured, but we should make it clear that a 21st Century Intelligent System requires everyone to participate in the insurance system.
[...]
People who for libertarian reasons do not want to be insured should be required to post a bond so their health care costs will be covered if they have an accident or an expensive illness.
[Page 116]
Conservative legal scholars and other experts says mandate is constitutional
Many legal scholars -- including conservatives Jonathan Adler and Orin Kerr, who oppose Democratic health care reform efforts -- have disputed the claim that the health care reform legislation is unconstitutional because it requires people to have health insurance.
Interesting history of this provision to address the "free rider effect". {With coverage guaranteed regardless of pre-existing conditions etc., just wait until ill, THEN buy insurance.}
The mandate was a conservative construct of the early 1990's founded on the concept of individual responsibility.
It was introduced by Rs to counter "Hillary Care." Among those Rs still in the Senate: Hatch(UT), Grassley(IA), Bennett(UT) and Bond(MO).
Obviously, an unaddressed "free rider effect" is a killer for any scheme that allows entry with pre-existing conditions.
Awesome! A repug at work just argued that exactly! He said, "why should I pay insurance when I am healthy just so some LAZY a@#$#s can get gubmint run health care? I should be free to buy insurance when I want, even if it IS after I'm sick!"
So he only wants insurance when it only benefits him!
But get the advantage of never paying insurance until he needs big medical bills paid off for nothing! I just laughed at him.
Its socialist to spread the insurance pool around, you know!
We need a new liberal media.
On the second point, Gingrich is wrong. Everyone should have to pay for their health irrespective of income. Only if the person has no income at all should he or she be relieved of the responsibility of paying. Health should come before iPods, cable tv, new or even reasonably new cars, owned houses and all the other luxuries we are paying for when we give health care away for free.
With the Medicare and Social Security entitlements bills staring us in the face ($57T in the next 20 years), I cannot understand how anyone could have voted for increasing entitlements. The only thing I can think of is all the D's and Obama who voted for it simply have their head in the sand. What other explanation is there? We will all be paying 50% or higher in taxes to pay for those entitlements -- just like Europe. Or we'll simply go bankrupt.
BTW, what happens if a Republican House refuses to fund any part of Obama care. How will Obama explain to all those people he promised health care to, that he can't deliver? Did any of the democrats think about that when they excluded all Republicans and even some of their own from creating this monstrosity? Do you think they'll blame it on George Bush? He can't blame it on R's because he passed the bill without any participation from R's and some D's and he knew the D's wouldn't control the House forever. Is Obama really smart? I want to see him think his way out of this one.
The Bill signed by Obama is the stupidest and most corrupt piece of legislation this nation has ever seen. It far exceeds anything in the 19-th or 20-th centry. It's like