During the 2008 campaign, President Obama argued strenuously against the individual mandate. In a debate in South Carolina, he said: "A mandate means that in some fashion, everybody will be forced to buy health insurance. ... But I believe the problem is not that folks are trying to avoid getting health care. The problem is they can't afford it. And that's why my plan emphasizes lowering costs." In February 2008, he said that you could no more solve the issue of the uninsured with an individual mandate than you could cure homelessness by ordering people to buy a home.
In light of Obama's earlier position, I'm wondering if the poor performance by the Solicitor General arguing for the "individual mandate" may have been intentional. Could it be that Obama reluctantly went along with the mandate? After all, the Affordable Health Care act was more of a Pelosi-Reid creation than an Obama creation. Maybe Obama never really wanted the mandate and is secretly hoping the Supreme Court will overturn it. After all, it could hardly be argued that the new health care system is bringing down costs.
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Kennedy has it right!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)