Now It's Time for Real Reform: American Experiment's Reaction to Health Care Ruling

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 28, 2012

CONTACT(s): 

Kim Crockett, COO and General Counsel

cell (612) 388-2820 kim.crockett@americanexperiment.org

Peter Nelson, Director of Public Policy

cell (952) 201-4100 peter.nelson@americanexperiment.org

Minneapolis, MN – Today the Supreme Court ruled that the individual mandate to buy health insurance is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s taxing power.  Importantly, the Court did not accept the Obama administration’s argument that the individual mandate was justified under the Commerce Clause.   For the time being, this leaves most of the federal health care overhaul intact.  However, the Court did reject the provision of the law aimed at forcing states to expand Medicaid.

 “Today’s ruling is a stiff reminder that Americans cannot look to the Supreme Court to rescue us from the errors of Congress,” said Kim Crockett, COO and General Counsel at Center of the American Experiment. “Instead we must educate ourselves and look to the political and legislative process for a solution. The President’s health care law will inevitably collapse under its own weight, creating failure in the private market and a ‘crisis’ requiring a Big Government solution.  The only way to avoid that outcome is to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with a market system based on patient decision-making and real competition among providers.”

“The ruling did reject the Obama administration’s attempt to force states to expand Medicaid,” said Peter Nelson, CAE’s Director of Public Policy.  “While this might be an important check on federal power, it is meaningless in Minnesota because Gov. Dayton already implemented President Obama’s Medicaid expansion.  Thus, Minnesota gets no benefit from the one limit on federal power in today’s opinion.” 

Nelson also noted, “Many more constitutional challenges to the law remain to be litigated, which should not be a surprise.  The partisan and reckless process used to pass the law never properly vetted it for error.”

“Moving forward,” Crockett explains, “the future of this law is in the hands of Congress, but it is also incumbent on the States to continue to protect their sovereignty and for citizens to demand real reform.  Repealing the President’s health care law is a necessary next step.  Instead of expanding the federal reach over health care, future legislation must empower consumers to make their own decisions about their care and coverage.”