Amendment 63: Denver Post vs. liberty & the U.S. Constitution

Rob Natelson, a Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Independence Institute, writes: The legal whizzes on the editorial board of the Denver Post have spoken: Amendment 63, the Right to Health Care Choice Initiative, is bad because Obama Care is constitutional. Today’s editorial reads: [W]e believe [Obama Care] will survive legal challenges and will […]

DC funds opposition to Colorado Amendment 63

The Colorado Secretary of State’s website reports that Colorado Deserves Better, the group opposing Amendment 63 received 90 percent of its $156,000 in funds from groups with addresses in Washington, DC. They include the National Education Association, the Service Employees International Union, the AFL-CIO, and the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center. The three Colorado groups in […]

Colorado Amendment 63, the commerce clause, & the Constitution

In his article in support of Colorado Amendment 63 (health care choice), Wayne Laugesen writes: Congress has no authority to require individuals to buy private insurance, which is the basis of the lawsuit filed by states. It has no such authority because the Constitution does not grant it, not by any twisting of any phrase. […]

Colorado Amendment 63, risk pools, & health care costs

A July 30 statement from a group calling itself “Colorado Deserves Better” said that Colorado Amendment 63 (Health Care Choice) “would isolate Colorado from health care costs savings by shrinking the risk pool in Colorado.”  This is unlikely, and even so, it’s unethical. Even if larger risk pools result in cost savings (for whom?), this […]

Explaining Colorado Amendment 63: Right to Health Care Choice

Barring unforeseen obstacles, The Colorado Right to Health Care Choice Initiative (Colorado Amendment 63) will be among the ballot measures Colorado voters can vote on in this November’s election –  in addition to others in Colorado politics. Some people are bound to misunderstand what the amendment would do, and not do, as Representative Diana DeGette […]

Can Missouri’s Prop. C block Feds from enforcing mandatory insurance?

The St. Louis Business Journal reports:
Voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition C at Tuesday’s election, but it will likely be overturned in court, law and health-care experts say.
Proposition C creates a law banning the government from forcing Missourians to buy health insurance under the federal health-care overhaul [HR 3590] starting in 2014.
“The Constitution clearly states […]

Mass. employers drop coverage, put employees to public dole

Surprise, a tax-funded health insurance program encourages employers to stop offering their employees coverage. More people become dependent on a government program for health insurance, which then results in a constituency that supports the program.  Government dependency grows again, and politicians gain more power over our lives.  The Boston Globe reports:
The relentlessly rising cost of health […]

Kagan: Constitution may authorize feds to mandate what you eat

From Michael Tanner at Cato:

Suppose that the federal government, in its infinite wisdom, decided that it would deal with the obesity crisis and improve the health and welfare of the American people — by mandating that every American eat three helpings of vegetables and three helpings of fruit every day. Anyone […]

Jail time for not having (legal) health insurance?

When the mandatory insurance provisions of the health control legislation (HR 3590) kick in, will not having medical insurance (as defined by politicians) land you in prison?
Short answer: The process is the same as if you don’t pay your taxes. You could end up in prison, but that usually does not happen. The government has […]