I need your help (and no, it’s not a request for money).
The attorneys general (AGs) in at least 14 states (Colorado, Louisiana, Florida, South Carolina, Alabama, Nebraska, Texas, Pennsylvania, Washington, Utah, North Dakota, South Dakota,Idaho, and Indiana) have joined together to challenge the constitutionality of the just-passed federal mandate that will require all documented American residents to purchase health insurance beginning in 2014. As a former health insurance actuary, I support this challenge on the basis of my extensive analysis and conclusion that there are voluntary alternatives to mandates that will be even more effective at providing universal health insurance access while preventing the adverse selection (i.e., free-riding) that would otherwise destroy any universally available health insurance exchange like that specified by the federal law.
Thus, my request for your help. If you have any direct or indirect contact or relationship with your state attorney general in any of these states (I don’t), I strongly urge you to urge him/her to read my two articles below on this mandate issue. While I assume the AGs will raise all the relevant legal and constitutional arguments against the mandate, they also need to know that mandates are not even necessary to protect the actuarial soundness of insurance-exchange risk pools.
The federal government has never in the history of the republic required anyone to buy anything—much less anything from a private third party—as a condition of residing in the United States (and, no, mandatory auto accident liability insurance is not an exception, as I have explained in Part 1). The mandate is an important and misunderstood issue. I hope you will help me to cast some much-needed sunlight on it. I would be happy to discuss this further with any interested state attorney general.