The Galen Institute, Pacific Research Institute, Benjamin Rush Society, and Docs 4 Patient Care today issued the following statements after filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the 11th Circuit’s decision that the individual mandate under ObamaCare is unconstitutional.
Grace-Marie Turner, President and Founder of the Galen Institute said: “Our brief exposes the fallacy behind a key issue that Congress and the Obama administration used to justify passage of their health overhaul law – namely, the attempt to avoid cost shifting from ‘free-riders.’ Our brief explains in detail how the individual mandate will not solve the problem but will actually make it worse. That demolishes the government’s case that the individual mandate is justified as a means of regulating commerce under the Constitution.”
John Hoff, Counsel for amici curiae and Trustee of the Galen Institute said: “The brief demonstrates the fallacy of the Government’s claim that the individual mandate cures any problem of shifting costs of uncompensated care to private insurance and explains why Congress lacked authority under the Constitution to impose the mandate. Congress has taken a step too far in invoking its authority to regulate interstate commerce.”
Sally C. Pipes, President and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute and John R. Graham, Executive Director of the Benjamin Rush Society, in a joint statement said: “In essence our brief makes clear that the mandate has no connection to solving any problem that substantially affects interstate commerce. Neither is it a necessary and proper means for carrying into execution the commerce power. The Obama administration’s claim that the individual mandate is needed to avoid cost-shifting by the uninsured is contrary to the government’s own facts and analysis. Rather than reducing $43 billion in uncompensated care, the mandate would actually increase uncompensated care by between $.5 billion to $3 billion. Thus, the cure is worse than the disease.”
Hal Scherz, MD, FACS, FAAP, President and Founder of Docs 4 Patient Care said: “Next month the United States Supreme Court will hear arguments regarding the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. As one of the few physician organizations filing a brief with the court, Docs 4 Patient Care hopes to bring credibility to the case and raise points regarding the new law in a way that none of the other amici can. It is our hope that our involvement in this case will play a role in influencing the Supreme Court to conclude as we have, that this law is wrong for America, wrong for patients, wrong for doctors and has been forced upon us as a result of arguments and logic that are specious. This decision will determine not just the fate of a ruinous healthcare policy, but the behavior of the federal government from this point forward. If it can force individuals to purchase a product, then there is no limit to what the government can force its citizens to do.”
To interview Erik S. Jaffe, the Counsel of Record, please contact Rowena Itchon at the Pacific Research Institute. To interview Grace-Marie Turner or John Hoff, please contact Tara Persico at the Galen Institute.
The Galen Institute is a non-profit, 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.
For 33 years, the Pacific Research Institute (PRI) has championed freedom, opportunity, and individual responsibility through free-market policy solutions. Founded in 1979 and based in San Francisco, PRI is a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) educational institution.
The Benjamin Rush Society aims to unite those across the political spectrum who believe that the profession of medicine calls its practitioners to serve their patients, rather than the government.
Docs 4 Patient Care is an organization of concerned physicians committed to the establishment of a health care system that preserves the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship, promotes quality of care, supports affordable access to all Americans, and protects patients’ freedom of choice.
Angel McClary Raich
Ms. Raich was the lead respondent in one of the U.S. Supreme Court’s important recent Commerce Clause cases, Gonzales v. Raich. Battling cancer, she brings to this case the perspective of both a patient and a litigant with a personal understanding of the implications of an expansive construction of the Commerce Clause on individual freedom.