Constitutionality of universal health care?

Question

i am writing a paper for my government class suggesting a way to create universal health care in the US. and there is a section where i have to write about how my proposal would be constitutional. is there anything in the constitution that is for or against universal health care or anything that could relate to health care in general?

Answer 1

Two words: Fourteenth Amendment

I would attempt to make the Constitutional argument using this amendment to the Constitution. More specifically, the "equal protection of the law" clause. How can there be "equal protection" if poor people can be priced out of medical care. Personally, I think the Fourteenth Amendment can be great justification for most Constitutional arguments having to do with equality for all Americans.

Answer 2

yes

Answer 3

no.

Answer 4

Is your professor a Communist, socializing America is what is wrong with the economy, why work when the government can take care of you and then make someone who is trying to make a good life for himself pay $17,000 in income tax, almost a $1 a gallon in gas tax, then 6% sales tax, tax my car, tax my water, cell phone, cable, internet, pretty soon they will be taxing air!

Answer 5

Probably you will have a typical, liberal professor who believes in the "living Constitution" instead of respecting the work and philosophy of the Founding Fathers.

All the "entitlement programs" ARE unconstitutional. That activist judges and demagogue Congressmen disagree doesn't change the fact.

James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:

“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

-James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)

“…[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”

-James Madison

“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.” James Madison, “Letter to Edmund Pendleton,”

-James Madison, January 21, 1792, in The Papers of James Madison, vol. 14, Robert A Rutland et. al., ed (Charlottesvile: University Press of Virginia,1984).

“An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”

-James Madison, Federalist No. 58, February 20, 1788

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

-James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 16, 1788

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”

-Thomas Jefferson

“When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”

-Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors, ME 15:332

“The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.”

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to E. Carrington, May 27, 1788

The above are the 1-2 punch to TRUE Constitutional studies. James Madison was known as the Father of the Constitution--so his opinion SHOULD count for a lot. Jefferson was the author of the Bill of Rights AND the Founders had all agreed on most of the Bill of Rights when they passed the Constitution.

Prior to FDR, the typical American saw the federal government in its PROPER role: to protect and defend the US--they had a federal government of a legislative (much less staff than now and not many "departments"), executive (not so much pretending it was a kingship), and a judicial branch (judicial activism was largely unknown--judges up to then were able to read. They understood the difference between legislating and rendering an opinion on whether legislation were Constitutional or not.) The military existed. The IRS was in its infancy and left the vast majority of the public alone.

So no, UHC is inherently unconstitutional (see Amendments IX and X). HOWEVER, as the Founders would have noted, there is NOTHING in the Constitution that prohibits STATES from offering insurance--unless their state Constitutions prohibit it.

Commerce clauses, etc. are also lame--it's an excuse designed to try to come up with a way to justify the foregone conclusion.

Answer 6

You are going to get  some kooks answering this, most likely.  For what its worth,I've studied constitutional law (graduate level), although its not my field.  I'll give you my take on it--and a suggestion on how do get a reliable answer.

First, the constitutionality of providing "social services"--from Social Security to health care in genral to disability pensions and welfare--is firmly established.  There are some USSC decisions that go way back (see below) on this.

Second, part oft he constitutionality question would depend on the way the program was  put together.  For example, a universal health care package that effectively excluded a private sector alternative would definitely run into trouble in the courts.  by contrast, any system that focused on guaranteeing universal access by  providing a "safety net" for those whocan't pay without otherwise interfering in the private sector provison of health care would get a green light from the courts.

There's a gray area here--and one that I'm not sure of.  That is the mandated purchase of health insurance by private citizeens.  There is precedent--mandatry purchase of auto insurance, for example.  But at the same time, some of the rationale for that does not apply to health care. Mainly, you can opt out of auto insruance if you don't own a car. But you pretty much can't dispose of your own body!  Also, much of the legal basis rests on the concept of "overriding public interest." Specifically, it's easy to show that serious hardship and financial loss can be borne by OTHER drivers if you don't have auto insurance. It would be much harder to establish that forhealth care.

A point implcit in what I've written is that universal health care does NOT imply socialized medicine (contrary to some of the rhetoric you hear).  It meas universal access--regardless of whether its public, private, or a mixture of the two.

How to get more information:  I suggest you call/email the political science department of a local college and ask to speak to a professor versed in constitutional law.  Have any questions you have ready and clearly spelled out.  Most faculty are happy to answer questions.  The best question to ask, BTW,is if the professor wills uggest  a reading or tdwo tha twill answer the questions.

Good luck.

Answer 7

I don't believe there is a direct (or semi-direct) constitutional link.

Answer 8

To promote the general welfare.

Answer 9

Preamble gives government the responsibility of promoting general welfare, securing the blessings of liberty and prosperity. Sickness kills prosperity and general health coverage certainly promotes our welfare. I believe our constitution demands it.

Answer 10

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How can you have justice, tranquility, defence, and general welfare if you don't look after the health of your citizens.  Cancer is a much greater threat to the lives of Americans then any army or terrorist.