Hoyer Claims Constitution’s “General Welfare” Clause Empowers Congress To Force Americans To Buy Into Obamacare

October 21st, 2009 (8) Posted By Erik Wong.

hoyer

CNS News:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said that the individual health insurance mandates included in every health reform bill, which require Americans to have insurance, were “like paying taxes.” He added that Congress has “broad authority” to force Americans to purchase other things as well, so long as it was trying to promote “the general welfare.”

The Congressional Budget Office, however, has stated in the past that a mandate forcing Americans to buy health insurance would be an “unprecedented form of federal action,” and that the “government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

Hoyer, speaking to reporters at his weekly press briefing on Tuesday, was asked by CNSNews.com where in the Constitution was Congress granted the power to mandate that a person must by a health insurance policy. Hoyer said that, in providing for the general welfare, Congress had “broad authority.”

“Well, in promoting the general welfare the Constitution obviously gives broad authority to Congress to effect that end,” Hoyer said. “The end that we’re trying to effect is to make health care affordable, so I think clearly this is within our constitutional responsibility.”

Hoyer compared a health insurance mandate to the government’s power to levy taxes, saying “we mandate other things as well, like paying taxes.”

The section of the Constitution Hoyer was referring to, Article I, Section 8, outlines the powers of Congress, including raising taxes, but not the purchasing any type of product or service. The opening paragraph of Section 8 grants Congress the power to raise taxes to, among other things, “provide for the … general welfare of the United States.”

Section 8 partly reads: “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

The Constitution then details the specific powers of Congress, including raising an Army and Navy, regulating commerce between states, and to “make all laws necessary and proper” for the carrying out of these enumerated powers.

“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof,” concludes Section 8.

CNSNews.com also asked Hoyer if there is a limit to what Congress can mandate that Americans purchase and whether there is anything that specifically could not be mandated to purchase. Hoyer said that eventually the Supreme Court would find a limit to Congress’ power, adding that mandates that unfairly favored one person or company over another would obviously be unconstitutional.

“I’m sure the [Supreme] Court will find a limit,” Hoyer said. “For instance, if we mandated that you buy General Motors’ automobiles, I believe that would be far beyond our constitutional responsibility and indeed would violate the Due Process Clause as well – in terms of equal treatment to automobile manufacturers.”

Hoyer said that the insurance mandate was constitutional because Congress is not forcing Americans to buy one particular policy, just any health insurance policy.

“We don’t mandate that they buy a particular insurance [policy] but what we do mandate is that like driving a car — if you’re going to drive a car, to protect people on the roadway, and yourself, and the public for having to pay your expenses if you get hurt badly – that you need to have insurance,” said Hoyer.

In 1994, the Congressional Budget Office reported the following about health insurance mandates: “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

Under all five of the health care bills currently being considered in Congress, every American adult would have to have a policy that conformed to government standards for coverage and premiums. Each bill creates Bronze, Silver, and Gold health insurance plans and mandates that Americans buy one of them, either through their employer or through government-run exchanges.

David B. Rivkin, a constitutional lawyer with Baker & Hostetler, told CNSNews.com that Hoyer’s argument was “silly,” adding that if the general welfare clause was that elastic, then nothing would be outside of Congress’ powers.

“Congressman Hoyer is wrong,” Rivkin said. “The notion that the general welfare language is a basis for a specific legislative exercise is all silly because if that’s true, because general welfare language is inherently limitless, then the federal government can do anything.

“The arguments are, I believe, feeble,” he said.

Jihadi Killer Radio Hour
Follow Pat on Twitter
  • atilla

    Interpreting the gen wel clause in that manner would negate the 10th amend. Hoyer is full of shit.

    If the gen wel clause was thus inter. why even bother to list the other powers???

  • Bobby E

    This dumbass is forgetting about the bulk of the Constitution that allows the American people to force him, Obama, and all the other blood-suckers out of office … and out of this country, if necessary. These bastards are issuing, on a daily basis now, threats to the people who pay their salaries. Get your bags packed and your passport in order, Mr. Stinky Hoyer.

  • GRIZZ

    You just forced me to buy another 1000 rds.

  • http://none WWTD

    Pluck the chickens and warm the tar.

  • Sully

    That logic is from the Progressive version of The Constitution.
    The Obama Edition.
    It’s red, doesn’t have any of those pesky “negative liberties” that limit the benevolence and largesse of TheOne and best of all it’s small enough to fit in a shirt pocket so it’s always handy and close to heart.

  • steve m (yet Another Infidel!)

    Dumbass…g.d. members of congress utterly lacking in civics common sense… STFU you idiotic fool

    “The arguments are, I believe, feeble,” he said. Comensurate with the intellect of the one advancing the argument….

  • tj

    I guess he forgot the word before general welfare: Promote, not “provide” as used referring to common defense. thus the distinction. it implies that we don’t provide general welfare but encourage people to help others! :idea:

  • Saxon

    Force us? I`d like to sign him up for a shoot with http://www.throatgaggers.com. He`d soon learn what forcing something into anothers mouth is like,perhaps he could become a regular on that web-site. Cocksucking commie`s.