The Heritage Foundation was behind the insurance mandate when they first proposed it.
From Heritage Lecture 218:
"This mandate is based on two important principles. First, that health care protection is a responsibility of individuals, not businesses. Thus to the extent that anybody should be required to provide coverage to a family, the household mandate assumes that it is the family that carries the first responsibility. Second, it assumes that there is an implicit contract between households and society, based on the notion that health insurance is not like other forms of insurance protection."
Faux conservatives were not screaming SOCIALISM then.
What Wojo fails to mention that this was not the opinion of The Heritage Foundation but of the writer. Next, Wojor cherry picks bites that he thinks support Obamacare. The article is NINE pages long!!!
Sooo, what's your point? A 65 year old women needs prenatal care? How about a Catholic Nun or a lesbian? Obamacare is bloated with all kinds of junk.<quoted text>
Rouge seems to believe that the length of Butler's lecture somehow negates that it supports an individual mandate, that the Heritage Plan was pitched to Congress, that Heritage lauded the individual insurance mandate in Massachusetts and that NOBODY CALLED AN INSURANCE MANDATE 'SOCIALISM' until Democrats got on-board with the plan and actually did something rather than talking about it.
Again, Romneycare was amended in 2009 and again in 2010 and they are still trying to amend it because it costs the state to much.
I say let Obamacare stand the way it was written, no exemption for anyone and no special treatment for government works.
Obamacare will collapse all on it's own.