Top court forced to determine fate of health care law

Stephen Anderson, Las Vegas

Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011 | 2:01 a.m.

Obamacare remains polarizing throughout the nation — on editorial pages, in news articles with poll results, and in the courts. The latest court decision by a federal judge in Florida, citing the insurance mandate as unconstitutional, is a victory for those sharing this belief.

One often-cited argument for this mandate is that we are required to purchase auto insurance to drive. Yes, we are, but auto insurance companies are regulated by state insurance commissioners or some other state-level board, not the federal government.

Another analogy against this mandate is the requirement for motorcycle riders to wear helmets. Again, this is left to individual states to legislate and enforce, not the federal government.

One final analogy: Why would our country want to mandate that its citizens purchase health insurance when it does not require compulsory military service? Is it simply to make the health care law meet its financial requirements and obligations without regard for the Constitution?

Congress had two opportunities to prevent this law from moving to the Supreme Court for the final decision.

First, it could have created the law in a truly bipartisan manner while ensuring the final results were constitutional. But the legislation was not debated, created or enacted in this manner.

Second, when brought to the floor of the House and Senate, it could have been repealed. The House was able to pass the repeal while the Senate, where most of the questionable “deals” were made to allow passage in the first place, did not.

So now we all wait for the final answer.