Other Contributors

About Us

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Major League Soccer Should Reform Its Copyright Takedown Procedures to Safeguard Fair Use | Main | Accountability and the CFPB »

Thursday, March 29, 2012


Cindy Walsh

I think that the real question with the individual mandate comes with the intentions of the mandate. It is given that the mandate is needed to bring a pool of 'well' individuals into the market to subsidize the costs to insurance companies of insuring pre-existing and other 'less-well' individuals. There have been references to this reform as expanding insurance to tens of millions currently unemployed. This is where the argument for this mandate and reform weaken. The healthcare systems being developed across the nation in response to this 'heathcare reform', whether public or private, have set into play the real intention of this piece of legislation.....consolidation of the healthcare industry into a mega-institution mirroring the entities. That is what healthcare reform is about.

If you look at Massachusetts universal healthcare after a decade, you'll see that the state has gotten near complete adherence to the mandate....everyone insured.....but you'll see that those low and middle class families that would have opted out because they couldn't afford it, are now paying the insurance premium, but losing vital spending for food, gas, childcare while never accessing healthcare because they cannot pay the co-pays. The subsidies offered are not enough to change this dynamic. Insurance company profits are growing as enrollment expands and access falls. This is about what healthcare reform was maximizing. Medical bankruptcy laws and medical malpractice laws are being modified to account for the cursory care that comes with inability to afford access to quality healthcare. The mandate is a Republican proposal deacdes in the making that is meant to take the burden of non-paying patients off private health institutions and taxpayers by eliminating access to healthcare by those not able to afford it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

December 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31