| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Rep. Wasserman Schultz Insists Health Care Law Doesn't Require Individuals to Buy Insurance |
| 2010-04-08 |
| Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.) is insisting that the new health care law she voted for last month does not mandate that individuals buy health insurance, despite language in the law that plainly says otherwise. At an April 5 town hall meeting in Fort Lauderdale (see video below), a constituent asked Wasserman Shultz where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance. She responded that the new health care law did not require individuals to buy health insurance. In a written statement to CNSNews.com on Wednesday, her press secretary, Jonathan Beeton, said it was true that the health care law did not mandate that individuals buy health insurance and that Wasserman Schultz stood by her assertion at the townhall meeting. “We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance,' Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting. “Yes, this is accurate,' Beeton said in his statement to CNSNews.com. “You have a choice of insuring yourself with affordable coverage, or paying an assessment that will offset the burden you place on other insured Americans and taxpayers by not being insured.' Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting that instead of an individual federal mandate, the law merely created new tax categories that would reflect who carries insurance and who does not. “What we did is that--just like when you're treated--that they categorize you differently in terms of your tax return when you're married versus single, just like we categorize you differently when you're a homeowner versus someone who doesn't own a home; just like we've categorized you differently when you have children versus not having children,' she said. Is anyone besides me growing tired of the multi-millionaire Wassermans, Cohens, Wexlers, Franks, Feinsteins, Frankens, Schumers, Boxers, Spectors...etc, telling me what is or isn't good for me? |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #3 Another member of "The Voters Are Idiots Club"... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2010-04-08 18:29 |
| #2 I cannot wait until the SCOTUS asks counsel to explain this provision: "You have a choice of _________________ with affordable _______, or paying an assessment that will offset the burden you place on other Fill in the blanks with any purchase requirement - a car, a toothpick, an umbrella, a bowling ball, a new shirt. If the Rep. wants to start with kids and a house as a comparison, where does the constitution stop? It will be a fun case to watch. |
| Posted by: Halliburton - Mysterious Conspiracy Division 2010-04-08 18:13 |
| #1 Lying, Hasn't read the law, Both of the above. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-08 17:43 |