The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Obamacare within a week. If it upholds the law, Americans will be in for a dramatic change in their relationship with the federal government. If the government can order people to purchase a service (health insurance), then the floodgates are open when it comes to what else Congress may decide the American people must do.
If, on the other hand - and as we suspect - the court overturns Obamacare, the busybodies are going to go back to work, trying to find ways to incrementally implement a government takeover of health care. The relentlessness of the enemies of freedom is clear.
Minnesotans should be especially upset about national health care initiatives. Most people here have their own insurance, and there are federal-state partnerships, as well as a state system, to cover those who cannot afford care. Setting aside the worries about state mandates and taxation for a moment, the system in Minnesota is working just fine. To have it usurped by a federal takeover doesn't make sense.
Some people will step up to say that if Minnesota has a good system, it should be expanded so all Americans can get coverage. We believe that is the wrong approach. The people of Minnesota have made investments in education, infrastructure and quality of life that make the state more livable than other places. Minnesotans should not be punished by a national health care system they don't want, so they can subsidize the health care of people elsewhere who have not devoted themselves to doing what we have done.
Individual Minnesotans are free to reach out to help others elsewhere. Nothing is stopping them.
Finally, let us note that we do have concerns with the Minnesota system as well. A?question always must be asked about who is responsible for health care: the individual or the state? The only way the state can pay for health care is to take money from some citizens and give it to others. That has proven to be a slippery slope to a loss of freedom and growing state power.