On Individual Mandates

David Sirota   -

I agree with with those who note the danger of progressives attacking individual mandates in the health care bill, and how such attacks could be construed to be a criticism of all compulsory policies. That’s the conservative attack on mandates, of course, just like it is the conservative attack on taxes paid into social programs – namely, that anything the government requires individuals to do is unacceptable (tellingly, conservatives rarely ever argue it’s not acceptable to force people to pay taxes that go to fund, say, the Pentagon).

But here’s the difference on health insurance mandates that (as Adam says) progressives should internalize: It’s perfectly OK to be against them if there is zero choice of a public option. if the Lieberman-gutted health care bill becomes law, it will be the first time in history a federal law will mandate that you buy a product from a private corporation as an obligation of being alive.* Social Security, Medicare and other social programs are different – they are public systems.

I think that’s really the key point – and why the public option has to be connected ideologically to the mandate. A mandate without a public option is different than paying taxes to the government for something like Medicare – it is, instead, being compelled to pay taxes, almost literally, to a private corporation.

Full Story On Individual Mandates | The Smirking Chimp.