Fairly stated, this is the conservative constitutional argument: Health care for all is a good cause. But if, in the name of that noble goal, you construe Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce so broadly as to encompass individual choices that have never previously been thought of as commercial, much less interstate, there would be nothing left of the commerce clause’s restraints on Congress’s power. And then, the argument goes, Congress would be free to impose far more intrusive mandates. . . .
---
Of course Conservatives don’t think Congress should be that powerful, neither do progressives. But they are ready to jettison the constitution to achieve their policy aims.
Back in the late 40’s Britain’s labor party asserted the need to assign people to professions in order to regulate the economy and alleviate labor shortages, the proposal failed because Britain decided, at that time, they were still a free country. I wonder if this expanded view of the commerce clause and individual mandates would allow Congress to do that here?
volokh.com |
