walter russell mead peter berger lilia shevtsova adam garfinkle andrew a. michta
Feed
Features
Reviews
Podcast
Poll: 72 Percent Think SCOTUS Should Kill The Individual Mandate

This week Gallup released its latest polling on the Obama health care law and contrary to the rosy expectations of the law’s proponents, Americans have not warmed to the plan and remained deeply divided as to its merits. But perhaps most striking is this finding:

Americans overwhelmingly believe the “individual mandate,” as it is often called, is unconstitutional, by a margin of 72% to 20%.

Even a majority of Democrats, and a majority of those who think the healthcare law is a good thing, believe that provision is unconstitutional.

See the numbers here.

Via Meadia at some level can’t hate the concept of an individual mandate; surely we should all take some responsibility for our own health care. People who don’t buy health insurance and then expect the rest of us to foot the bill when they break their legs on a ski slope are not high on VM’s list of responsible citizens.

But that’s about principle, not about constitutional law or the details of the bloated and unmanageable bill that the Dems drafted to please the special interests who support them. The individual mandate and the complex bureaucratic structures around it look more and more like a mistake. It’s a fact which even staunch progressive health care reform advocates are beginning to acknowledge.

As the Supremes reflect on the merits of the law, they can’t help but know that declaring the mandate unconstitutional will be a popular move. In a perfect world that wouldn’t shift any votes on a closely divided court, but that isn’t the kind of world we live in.

Anything could happen when the court rules on this law.  A question worth pondering: if President Obama’s proudest accomplishment is struck down for violating the Constitution, and most of the public applauds that decision, what does that do to his re-election campaign?

 

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Brett

    A question worth pondering: if President Obama’s proudest accomplishment is struck down for violating the Constitution, and most of the public applauds that decision, what does that do to his re-election campaign?

    If the Supreme Court rules that it’s inseparable from the rest of the legislation, then the public cheers . . . until their young adult offspring lose their health insurance, and the medicare doughnut hole re-opens. At which point they become angry, and the Democrats become particularly angry and willing to turn out to punish the Republicans.

  • Corlyss

    Well, if he does it before SCOTUS hears arguments, it would be a clever way to moot the issue without getting a definitve statement from the court on Commerce Clause overreach and leaving Republicans in worse shambles than they already are.. But is he up for looking like he’s caving on the thing that allegedly makes the whole scheme sustainable? Whenever confronted by opposition, this president doesn’t think “Gee! Maybe I should compromise and accommodate my opponents.” Nope. He doubles down. That’w what Alinsky taught him; and besides, Valarie won’t let him do otherwise.

  • http://pubsecrets.wordpress.com Phineas

    “People who don’t buy health insurance and then expect the rest of us to foot the bill when they break their legs on a ski slope are not high on VM’s list of responsible citizens.”

    Right, I agree. Which is why the emergency room should send the skier the bill. Not only is there no need for us to pay for his careless behavior, there’s no need for government to get involved.

  • Jim.

    @Brett:

    At that point, Congress addresses each point on its own instead of omnibus, which is how it should have been done in the first place.

  • elisa

    10 bucks says if it gets struck down and everyone is happy about it, he will strike a pose of self pity and talk about it as something that has happened only to him.

  • Mark Michael

    The thought expressed by ViaMeadia that “the Supreme Court reads the election returns [replace with: “opinion polls” for modern times] suddenly is comforting to me, since the swing vote will be Anthony Kennedy! He’s an unpredictable, at times illogical member of the Court IMO, sometimes being accused of letting ego get in the way of his better judgment. I suspect he’s the most susceptible to being swayed by polls. That gives me great encouragement that it will be struck down.

    The question then becomes, “Will he try to figure some compromise to avoid the ‘all or nothing’ decision?” Nix the mandate but keep the rest of the bill. Except that judge in Florida very cogently pointed out that the whole thing falls apart without the mandate. In fact, the government’s defense of it in the Florida case made that argument as I recall.

  • Jack Burden

    Obamacare was always a solution in search of a problem. Every state developed its own way of coping with the uninsured, who by an large recieve the separate but unequal healthcare they have decided not to pay for. Few will mourn its passing if it is struck down this summer, perhaps least of all the President, with the Republicans deprived of their most potent (per the polls) weapon.

  • EvilBuzzard

    Killing the Individual Mandate will save private property and the sanctity of the contract. Just what exactly would you call it if the government were to issue you an individaul mandate wrt your employment options?

    Int erms of health care, this kicks off the real fight that RombamaCare was designed to paper over. Market Driven Vs. Single Payer.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2014 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service