A Discussion of Obamacare Essay

Over the course of my paper I shall discuss the piece of legislation known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, more informally known as Obamacare. The issue currently debated with this piece of legislature focuses on it’s constitutionality, it’s purpose as a tax hike, and whether or not it should be passed. Is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act unconstitutional? From what I have studied in the article â€Å"Is Obamacare unconstitutional? †, at debatetopics. net, and from what I know of the act, I would say that it is certainly unconstitutional. Does the act serve as a tax hike? According to â€Å"Voters consider ObamaCare a tax hike, poll shows† at foxnews. com, it does. Should the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act be passed? From everything I have learned of the act and from what knowledge I have gained from â€Å"Patterson: State leaders should refuse to allow Obamacare to localize† at masnbc. com, I personally would not allow the act to pass. The act is unconstitutional as it was passed under a false premise. It was upheld as constitutional by justifying the individual mandate as a tax. However, it would never have been passed if it had been upfront in regards to creating a new personal tax. The means used to justify the act as constitutional are inconsistent with the original wording of the bill and therefore unconstitutional. The act is also passed under a false premise as it creates a new tax and is therefore a tax bill. Those living in the country illegally are exempt from buying health insurance and get it for free. Those individuals who are currently considered â€Å"entitled† and receive government aid are also exempt. These illegal immigrants and entitled persons will receive free healthcare and the rest of the country will have to pay for it. The act is also unconstitutional in regards to the individual mandate itself. It is not up to the government to make it’s citizens purchase health insurance, nor should they pay for the health insurance of others. It is up to no other person to give a given individual anything. There should never a case in which one group of people is forced to care for others because those others refuse to do anything with themselves and their lives. The act is clearly unconstitutional as it forces the average United States citizen to purchase a service from a private firm or be penalized for not doing so. The fine attached to not purchasing health insurance is also only considered constitutional under Congress’ power to tax. A main way of denying Obamacare is to refuse to establish state-level health exchanges. Exchanges are basically government sanctioned cartels where only a few government approved insurers can sell government approved health insurance, including all subsidies, exemptions and mandates that they apply. When agreeing to establish an exchange, a given state agrees to operate a massive government program which would be run according to federal rules and mandates. The federal government would control the doctors and providers allowed, the health insurance plans and benefits, the subsidies and exemptions. The state would do the work of the federal government and bear the cost of the program and would also act as an IRS enforcer as it would be required to give the names and taxpayer identification numbers of people who have changed employers and lost coverage as well as those who have terminated their coverage or simply choose not to purchase insurance. On top of all of this, the state would be responsible for enforcing the individual mandate. Overall, the Patient Protection and affordable care act is unconstitutional, serves a tax hike and should not be passed under any circumstance. Bibliography: â€Å"Is Obamacare Unconstitutional? †,2012, â€Å"Voters consider ObamaCare a tax hike, poll shows†,2012, â€Å" Patterson: State leaders should refuse to allow Obamacare to localize†,2012,