Why the Stupak Amendment to the Healthcare Reform Bill Is Unconstitutional

by Melanie on 14/11/09 at 2:52 pm

Could this be the tip of the iceberg of unintended consequences of federalized health care? Health insurers have long prevented the infertile from having coverage for their disease, forcing us to pay out of pocket for necessary health care. There is no legitimate reason to do this except bowing to the stigmatization of an “unpopular,” but bona fide disease. Now it looks like particular health issues could go uncovered due to religious or other equally stupid biases of a vociferous lobby. Nonetheless, passing health care reform is a moral imperative, even if fighting against inequities such as the Stupak Amendment will continue long into the future.

Marci Hamilton, writing for FindLaw.com, says:

“At this point, it appears unlikely that the Stupak Amendment will survive the healthcare reform battles in the Senate. President Obama quickly criticized it and Senator Boxer produced a list of 40 Senators who would not vote for healthcare reform with such onerous restrictions on women. But the anti-abortion lobbyists have shown their hand: They fully intend to use the federalization of healthcare to further their religious agenda, this is unlikely to be the last we hear of the Amendment, even if it does not survive the Senate this time around.Although many have attacked the Amendment as a policy matter, the constitutional arguments against have been underplayed.

That is a shame, because under any reasonable reading of the Constitution, the Stupak Amendment is unconstitutional: Indeed, it violates three different constitutional principles.”

via Why the Stupak Amendment to the Healthcare Reform Bill Is Unconstitutional.