Obama Administration Files Brief Defending Health Care Law Individual Mandate With Supreme Court
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is defending the health care overhaul in a new filing with the Supreme Court that calls the law an appropriate response to a "crisis in the national health care market."
The administration filed a written submission to the court Friday, focusing on a core requirement that individuals buy insurance or pay a penalty.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/06/obama-health-care-individual-mandate_n_1190262.html
ixion
(29,528 posts)It does not.
Health insurance is NOT health care. And being forced to by a FOR PROFIT product from a privately held company is not going to do anything but enrich said privately held company.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)It makes no difference to me if a private company is doing it with a 20% administrative overhead, or a government agency or chartered corporation is doing it with a 20% administrative overhead.
dflprincess
(28,071 posts)A government run single payer system does not have overhead expenses like CEO salaries or commissions paid to insurance brokers and agents (to name a couple unneccesary expenses).
Orangepeel
(13,933 posts)Which doesn't change the fact that health insurance is not health care. But in the interest of accuracy, the purchase is not necessarily from a for profit company. Also, it's not important, but the term "privately held company" refers to a business without stockholders, which I think is probably the opposite of what you mean.
alp227
(32,004 posts)"Administration to high court: Congress acted within rights on health-care law" (Robert Barnes, Wash. Post, 1/7/11)
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius; Florida, et al., v. Department of Health and Human Services; and Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida, et al.