The United States Constitution is the foundation that makes this country so unique and powerful. It is the underlying reason why immigrants flock to the nation of the free. The document was created by some of the most intelligent people the world has ever known and continues to be the one of the most profound influences on this great nation.

This document is at the forefront of debate with Barack Obama’s proposed health care bill.

Is it constitutional to force every Americans to purchase health care? Many people believe congress is overreaching its powers with this bill.

Obama and his supporters justify the mandate by claiming that it falls under the Congressional Commerce Clause in the constitution.

“Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among several states and with the Indian tribes” reads Art. I, § 8, cl. 3.

In an august 22nd article featured in the Washington Post called Illegal Health Reform, authors David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey take on the issue by claiming that overreaching is an understatement.

“The federal government does not have the power to regulate Americans simply because they are there. The Constitution assigns only limited, enumerated powers to Congress and none,
including the power to regulate interstate commerce or to impose taxes, would support a federal mandate requiring anyone who is otherwise without health insurance to buy it.” the article read.

Not everyone finds the argument valid based on the Commerce Clause. Thomas Arado, Staff attorney with the states attorney’s appellate prosecutor in the 3rd district at Ottawa and instructor of Political Science 415 Criminal Law gave his opinion on the subject.

“They [congress] have an overarching regulatory scheme” Arado goes on to justify the mandate constitutionally.

“Do I think it’s a compelling reason? What is the crisis? Health care costs are increasing, people are not covered by health insurance and that is putting a strain on government budgets.
Is that a sufficient basis? I think it will pass constitutional muster.” Arado says.

Although Arado is not buying Rivkin and Casey’s argument, he goes on to discuss this opinion on the subject.

“I don’t like the government telling somebody to purchase insurance. If you want to forego health insurance, that’s your choice.” He says.

The resistance based on the premise of the commerce clause is not the only debate to be had with “Obamacare”. Further issues based on liberty have been brewing in the media as well.

A poll conducted by the opinion dynamic corporation from September 29th through September 30th shows a decline in support for the bill. Fox news poll analyst Tami Buhr gives her interpretation on the results.

“Americans’ beliefs about what would happen if health care reform legislation were to pass sheds light on why opposition may be growing. Majorities agree the plans being considered cost too much money (62 percent), give too much power to Washington (60 percent) and take decision-making away from them and their doctor (54 percent).” She says.

It is clear that Americans are afraid of bill and may be taking desperate measures by using the commerce clause as a weapon. However, a more concerning issue lies within the context of government’s expanding powers. How much can the government chip away at our liberties before there is nothing left?

All comments are moderated before being published. We will not edit your comments, but we also will not approve those that are abusive, off-topic, attack another poster or contain information we know to be libelous or false.

During peak weekday viewing times, most comments will be reviewed within six hours. For more detailed information, click here.

After submitting your comment, check below for a confirmation message.

• Your name:
• Enter text from image:
  

• Your comment:

* 300-character count. HTML formatting will not display.