DontBeStupid
Look it up!
It's not the same. The GOP plan to changed Medicare to a voucher system, would not force anyone to get insurance or care or face a penalty. All the Ryan Voucher Plan would do is have the Federal government reimburse less and less for the services.1) If the individual mandate is unconstitutional because it forces all to pay money to a private insurance company then are not all privatization schemes also unconstitutional? (For instance, privatizing Medicare)
Senators do not always perfectly represent the rights of their State.
Yes, which is what the Mandate would effectively do, which makes me wonder why so many "conservatives" are against it. The Mandate would hold people personally responsible for their decisions and not allow them (as much) to dump those costs onto society.
If the GOP were truly for "Repeal and Replace" they would offer a law that penalizes people who use ER services and then never pay for them.
Agreed.I would much rather have seen the public option, btw.
On your first point, it would make us all pay taxes that would eventually go into the private health insurance so I'm not seeing how that is different.
On your second, it doesn't really matter, does it? Senators ARE elected to represent their states.
Okay on your third point.
On the first point, I think there has been a difference established with taxing citizens and then spending that money. That falls within Article 1 Section 8. The Mandate actually just cuts out the middle man. Congress could have just raised taxes and "given" everyone health insurance paid for out of tax payer money. Instead, they took this approach.
Ironically, it seems the Court is going to decide a Public Option is more Constitutional than people just making sure they have coverage.