Federal judge in Pa. rules in favor of suit challenging insurance mandate in health care law:

(Again I have to preface this by saying that in my real life I have 20+ years experience working in the healthcare field.)

The last time I talked about the ‘individual mandate’ was here. The individual mandate is the part of President Obama’s healthcare reform that says everyone in the country must carry some form of health insurance by 2014. In my last post a federal judge in Cincinnati, the pseudo-Queen City, ruled that the individual mandate was constitutional. I argued that forcing anyone to spend money outside of taxes is very unconstitutional and now a different Federal judge agrees with me.

Federal Judge Christopher C. Conner in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has ruled that the individual mandate is unconstitutional.

“The nation undoubtably faces a health care crisis,” Conner said. “Scores of individuals are uninsured and the costs to all citizens are measurable and significant. The federal government, however, is one of limited enumerated powers, and Congress’s efforts to remedy the ailing health care and health insurance markets must fit squarely within the boundaries of those powers.”

I’m sure as long as President Obama is in office this will be an issue that is argued all the way to the Supreme Court.

However, as I have said before the individual mandate would not make health insurance more affordable for families. In fact, it would probably make it more expensive. In most states, there is a monopoly or duopoly of health insurance companies. With current practices, health insurance companies could raise their rates and then say you can’t do anything about it because it’s illegal for you not to carry it. As I’ve also said before these market strangleholds that the insurance companies hold on states need to be broken to make healthcare more affordable.