Galen Institute Applauds Arguments Signaling Unconstitutional Mandate

Share Article

Mandate is an Unprecedented, Unwarranted, and Unconstitutional Imposition of Federal Power

“Through ObamaCare, the federal government has seized control of the United States health care system, Americans’ choice of health coverage, and the delivery of care,”
Grace-Marie Turner

Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, said today she was pleased at the approach taken by several members of the Supreme Court today at the argument on the Constitutionality of the individual mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. She said the questions asked by the Justices indicated they understood the profound implications of the mandate and that she is very optimistic that the Court will find it unconstitutional.

“Through ObamaCare, the federal government has seized control of the United States health care system, Americans’ choice of health coverage, and the delivery of care,” Turner said. “The keystone of this federal government intrusion into personal health care is the requirement that Americans buy the kind and scope of insurance coverage dictated by the federal government. Never before has the federal government tried to command Americans like this.”

According to John Hoff, an attorney who is a trustee of the Galen Institute, “The Obama administration has sought to find Constitutional authority for this power grab on the ground that the mandate will reduce the cost of private insurance. It claims that the uncompensated cost of care provided to Americans without insurance is shifted to private insurance and that this cost shift will largely be eliminated by the mandate.

“Galen, joined by others, filed a brief Amici Curiae pointing out, as the Congressional Budget Office and scholars have found, that there is in fact no significant shift of the cost of uncompensated care to private insurance. Our brief points out that the mandate is an attempt to cure a problem that does not exist.”

Turner added: “Instead it would increase the amount of uncompensated care that would be shifted to private insurance. The mandate is not necessary, nor is it proper, and thus it fails to meet the requirements of the Constitution.    It appears from today’s oral argument that a majority of the Justices recognize that the mandate is an unprecedented, unwarranted, and unconstitutional imposition of federal power.”

The Galen Institute is a non-profit public policy research organization devoted to advancing ideas and policies that promote individual freedom, consumer choice, competition,
and innovation in the health sector. It focuses on individual responsibility and control over healthcare and health insurance, lower costs and greater innovation through competition, and a reliable and sustainable safety net for vulnerable populations.

For photos of the Supreme Court steps with activists please visit http://www.galen.org/newsletters/photo-gallery-scotus-arguments-day-two/
About Galen Institute:
The Galen Institute is a non-profit, Section 501(c)(3) public policy research organization devoted to advancing ideas and policies that would create a vibrant, patient-centered health sector. It promotes public debate and education about proposals that support individual freedom, consumer choice, competition, and innovation in the health sector. It focuses on individual responsibility and control over health care and health insurance, lower costs through competition, and a strong safety net for vulnerable populations. Galen’s policies will promote continued medical innovation, advances in personalized medicine, and expanded access to health care and coverage in a 21st century Information Age economy.

Press Contact:
Susan Lider
Slider & Associates
703-866-3707
Susan(at)sliderassociates(dot)com

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Susan Lider
Slider&Associates
703-866-3707
Email >

Missy Shorey
Shorey PR
202-277-7100
Email >
Visit website