Where ART meets Activism

53 notes

If Health Insurance Mandates Are Unconstitutional, Why Did The Founding Fathers Back Them?

In making the legal case against Obamacare’s individual mandate, challengers have argued that the framers of our Constitution would certainly have found such a measure to be unconstitutional. Nevermind that nothing in the text or history of the Constitution’s Commerce Clause indicates that Congress cannot mandate commercial purchases. The framers, challengers have claimed, thought a constitutional ban on purchase mandates was too “obvious” to mention. Their core basis for this claim is that purchase mandates are unprecedented, which they say would not be the case if it was understood this power existed.

But there’s a major problem with this line of argument: It just isn’t true. The founding fathers, it turns out, passed several mandates of their own. In 1790, the very first Congress—which incidentally included 20 framers—passed a law that included a mandate: namely, a requirement that ship owners buy medical insurance for their seamen. This law was then signed by another framer: President George Washington. That’s right, the father of our country had no difficulty imposing a health insurance mandate.

That’s not all. In 1792, a Congress with 17 framers passed another statute that required all able-bodied men to buy firearms. Yes, we used to have not only a right to bear arms, but a federal duty to buy them. Four framers voted against this bill, but the others did not, and it was also signed by Washington. Some tried to repeal this gun purchase mandate on the grounds it was too onerous, but only one framer voted to repeal it.

Six years later, in 1798, Congress addressed the problem that the employer mandate to buy medical insurance for seamen covered drugs and physician services but not hospital stays. And you know what this Congress, with five framers serving in it, did? It enacted a federal law requiring the seamen to buy hospital insurance for themselves. That’s right, Congress enacted an individual mandate requiring the purchase of health insurance. And this act was signed by another framer, President John Adams.

Not only did most framers support these federal mandates to buy firearms and health insurance, but there is no evidence that any of the few framers who voted against these mandates ever objected on constitutional grounds. Presumably one would have done so if there was some unstated original understanding that such federal mandates were unconstitutional. Moreover, no one thought these past purchase mandates were problematic enough to challenge legally.


(Source: azspot)

  1. resmc reblogged this from azspot
  2. gamingtimeladyfromgallifrey reblogged this from nerdymouse and added:
    I still say if the government expects me to have health insurance they need to do something to lower it. Unfortunately...
  3. pavlovsstepson reblogged this from azspot
  4. defend-brandnew reblogged this from loudmouthradio
  5. lost-priestess reblogged this from loudmouthradio
  6. felixrocketship reblogged this from nerdymouse
  7. hot-diggity-dawg reblogged this from hairtrending
  8. randomactsofchaos reblogged this from azspot
  9. versp00ka-assault reblogged this from azspot
  10. hairtrending reblogged this from azspot
  11. kit-power reblogged this from azspot and added:
    hmm, this is interesting. I never knew this.
  12. chinneths reblogged this from azspot
  13. loudmouthradio reblogged this from azspot and added:
    ……………………………. Pwnd.
  14. kp777 reblogged this from azspot
  15. olehughr reblogged this from azspot
  16. nerdymouse reblogged this from azspot
  17. apophatic reblogged this from azspot
  18. azspot posted this