Will he answer the question? As a reminder, this conservative writer would be perfectly fine with individual state legislatures and the people discussing health care and implementing solutions on their own with absolutely zero interference from Congress or federal bureaucrats.
Rep. Phil Hare (D-Ill.) tried his best to sell his point health care legislation at the federal level was Constitutional. He’s wrong as far as I’m concerned, but here’s his YouTube explanation. Hat tip to Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit, and as a reminder, Jim’s original post from this morning is here.
Hare’s communication director noted…
Rep. Hare’s [original] remark on YouTube was taken out of context. His full statement said “I’m not worried about the Constitution on this.” “On this” meant that he is not worried about this health care law being ruled unconstitutional. Dozens of legal scholars have said it will be held up in court. And Massachusetts has an individual mandate which remains in tact to this day.
Just because Massachusetts has a health care plan with an individual mandate does not mean the federal government can have one too. By the way, how is that Massachusetts plan doing after more than a year? I can find a quite a few legal scholars that would agree with my point of view.
It’s not working in Massachusetts and they are looking to the federal government for help. When it fails at the federal level – and it will – where will the federal government turn to?
All of that said, I ask again, will Rep. Hare answer the question in the headline?