By Selwyn Duke
Man’s power to rationalize truly seems to know no bounds. And a good example of sideshow-quality intellectual contortions is brought to us by U.S. District Judge Norman K. Moon, who on Tuesday dismissed a Liberty University lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare. In a 54-page opinion, Clinton appointee Moon used the following rationale to claim that the health-scare bill was allowable under the Commerce Clause:
The conduct regulated by the individual coverage provision — individuals’ decisions to forego purchasing health insurance coverage — is economic in nature… Nearly everyone will require health care services at some point in their lifetimes, and it is not always possible to predict when one will be afflicted by illness or injury and require care. The “fundamental need for health care and the necessity of paying for such services received” creates a market in health care services, of which nearly everyone is a participant…Regardless of whether one relies on an insurance policy, one’s savings, or the backstop of free or reduced-cost emergency room services, one has made a choice regarding the method of payment for the health care services one expects to receive. Far from “inactivity,” by choosing to forgo insurance, Plaintiffs are making an economic decision to try to pay for health care services later, out of pocket, rather than now, through the purchase of insurance. As Congress found, the total incidence of these economic decisions has a substantial impact on the national market for health care by collectively shifting billions of dollars on to other market participants and driving up the prices of insurance policies.
Next up in the Norman Moon Show: The judge tries to fit a two-pound salami in a one-pound bag while simultaneously talking chicken off the bone.
Read the rest here.
