It’s difficult not to compare mandatory health care insurance to the current car insurance requirement. Many have argued that not everyone has a car, so not everyone has to pay auto insurance. The constitutionality of this law is not questioned. People seem to accept that if you have a car, it’s fair to require car insurance.
With that in mind, I would say the following: If you want to receive health care, then you must have health insurance. If you are willing not to go to a doctor, nurse, physician assistant, physical/occupational therapist, clinic, urgent care, emergency department or hospital, and you will not call 911 or receive the care of a paramedic under any circumstances, then yes, I agree you should not have to purchase health insurance. But if you will use these services for any reason, then you must take responsibility and pay for it. This is common sense.
We have a system now that spares no expense to keep people alive who are in their final hours and days, whether or not there is any ability to pay for it. This same system won’t allow certain medicines or care to those who could really benefit from it for months and years because the insurance they do have chooses not to pay.
We would be better served spending time, energy and money creating ethical, quality health-care insurance rather than wasting it questioning whether it’s constitutional to require it.
Do we really question the constitutionality of changes that come from common sense?