Why Wasn’t Single Payer Enacted?

As you’ve probably already heard the 11th Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down the PPACA AKA “ObamaCare” as unconstitutional:

A three-judge panel of the federal appeals court based in Atlanta on Friday ruled the health-care overhaul law’s individual mandate is unconstitutional, in one of the largest legal challenges to the Obama administration’s signature achievement.

This is the second federal appellate court to rule on the law; the first decision, by a Cincinnati-based court, upheld the measure. It is also the most high profile ruling, responding to a challenge to the law brought by 26 states. The law’s constitutionality is likely to be ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Is the “individual mandate” constitutional? I suppose it depends on what you mean by “constitutional”. If you mean is it in the Constitution and consistent with it, I think the answer is almost undoubtedly “No”. I don’t believe the welfare clause of the preamble means what the proponents of that as a mandate for pretty much anything the Congress wants to do think it does. I think it’s referring to “the general welfare”, i.e. public goods not private goods.

If, on the other hand, by “constitutional” you mean will it survive review by the Supreme Court of the U. S., I think the answer is most likely “Yes”. I think the Supreme Court as presently constituted will most likely uphold the individual mandate and the entire PPACA.

I’m beginning to hear people claim that even if the individual mandate is struck down it will only clear the path to a single payer system. I find this line of thinking incomprehensible. The PPACA was enacted into law solely with Democratic votes and in the House there were 34 defections who voted against. Would a single payer system have passed the Congress? I think that if it would have the Congressional leadership would have done so. Consequently, no single payer no matter who’s holding the reins in the House.